Wine-Mono: Marrying Mono With WINE

[directhex]

[DllImport ("libc.so")]


The day this happens in kernel, Linux is officially sabotaged. I promise I be nice, I promise I be good, I promise I be fair. ProMiS, proMiS, proMiS. And a story of anti-linux and anti-opensource emails.

You know why it's so hard to take anti-Mono fundamentalists seriously? It's because of batshit fucking crazy stuff like this. I mean really, wat?

There are three kinds of people in this thread:
1) Microsoft junkies
2) FOSS fighters
3) Senseless mercenaries.

If your mind cannot conceive of why anyone might not hate on Mono without being a "Microsoft junkie" then your mind is defective. I suggest you obtain a new one, the old one doesn't work.

[ciplogic]

Mono = .Net for the poor.

You are planning to build a house on the slimy ground, educate! You are no good architect.

And GCC is Visual C++/Clang for the poor, right, right? GCC does not have a proper Java implementation (I think it is still stuck with Java 1.4!).
At the end what does it have the qualifiation of your architect skills having to do with "slimy ground"?
Architects do design, and how on earth a design is defined by the language you're using? And if it would matter, is more likely that C++ is a poor candidate for OOP than C# or Ruby.
And what it makes it so bad to run Mono? Does your Mono application runs faster than the Android/Java runtime? Then is a better alternative than Java. Using C# as a good architect can make you run your application on more platforms than you may do it with C++ (for example on WinPhone).

I don't doubt C# have more extensive tooling in .Net/Windows environment, but the Mono/C# implementation in Mono is really mature and up-to-date. You have C# 5.0 right now in Mono, just a Git merge. You have more deploy options than .Net. SecondLife proves that you can use Mono where you couldn't you .Net.

[russofris]

Mono isn't "encumbered"; RMS merely made a post a long time ago about maybe something sorta could happen and that's been enough to scare people ever since.

In 5 years when MS sues its first .net customer for using mono, I'm going to reopen this necro thread, and drop a great big "I Told You So!". It will be Java all over again, as if we hadn't learned a thing from our prior and current mistakes.

I'll probably be retired by then, and have a nicer looking lawn.

F

[directhex]

In 5 years when MS sues its first .net customer for using mono, I'm going to reopen this necro thread, and drop a great big "I Told You So!".

People were saying that from day one. Here we are, a decade later, with things safer for Mono than they ever have been. What's the statute of limitations on telling people to chill out?

[curaga]

Ya, and Java was invented in 1994. Your point?

[crazycheese]

It's already GPL/BSD.

No, its not. Review the list yourself again.

It's already got this, see entries 990ish on http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/...def_table3.php

Why do we need microsoft community promise then and why do we rely on changes in microsoft code, instead of microsoft taking part in development?

Wait, what?

Do not use terms such as "*DLL*","*exe*","*win*" etc in the source as well as in generated binary code.
It is not x-platform, it is wine-like but reversed.

Make it have *less* functionality? Stop it from working well on any OS, by removing the UNIX enhancements? Wat?

No and no.

[crazycheese]

You know why it's so hard to take anti-Mono fundamentalists seriously? It's because of batshit fucking crazy stuff like this. I mean really, wat?

I have hard time taking to YOU, microsoft junkie, seriously. I really try!
"anti-Mono fundamentalists" be sure to submit that to your host for patenting.

If your mind cannot conceive of why anyone might not hate on Mono without being a "Microsoft junkie" then your mind is defective. I suggest you obtain a new one, the old one doesn't work.

Defragment your mind already and make sure to visit Dr.Web on your way out, then we will talk.

[directhex]

Ya, and Java was invented in 1994. Your point?

Every prediction about Mono's legal status has been wrong. Usually "opposite of reality" wrong.

Proclamations about the core ISO/ECMA API being dangerous? The API is explicitly covered by a legally binding covenant not to sue for patent infringements in implementing it, as of 2009.

Fears over implementing non-core features like ASP.NET? Microsoft released *their* source under Free Software licenses (with patent grant, for luck), thereby allowing implementations like Mono to use them. Despite having Windows-only licenses like Ms-LRL they've either used the more liberal Ms-PL, or more recently, the GPLv3-compatible Apache 2.0

Silverlight? The "Download now" link on Microsoft.com redirects to the Free Software replacement Moonlight ( http://www.microsoft.com/getsilverli...l/default.aspx )

Microsoft has invited senior Mono folk to speak at its .NET conference MIX, for several years running, e.g. http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/MIX/MIX10/EX02

Microsoft has deployed apps built with Mono, on platforms without Microsoft.NET (e.g. iPhone)

Unlike Dalvik (or more to the point, Apache Harmony, which is what Oracle are suing over), Mono is covered by OIN.

At what point has Mono's risk gone up, not down, over the past decade? Right now there's pretty much nothing on the Linux desktop with *lower* documented risk.

[crazycheese]

And GCC is Visual C++/Clang for the poor, right, right?

Since Visual C does only very small subset of what GCC is capable for, Visual C is for the ppor.
LLVM does not touch here, because it has same set of functionality as GCC, yet different approaches. It does not limit, nor bind itself.

GCC does not have a proper Java implementation (I think it is still stuck with Java 1.4!).

Right, what Java version does Visual CC have?

At the end what does it have the qualifiation of your architect skills having to do with "slimy ground"?

Inability to check the ground your are building anything has something to do with architect skills.
Build the house. Watch it submerge into lawsuit underground. Priceless!

And what it makes it so bad to run Mono? Does your Mono application runs faster than the Android/Java runtime?

Lack of technological freedom,
lack of trust to the upstream,
lack of cooperation from upstream,
lack of support from upstream,
lack respect from upstream,
lack of protection should upstream go frenzy,
lack of non-biased design.
I have already supplemented 1+2+3. All fail.

The time between I purge mono from my system, Banshee is definitely slower than QuodLibet in everything. This is not Android discussion, >> Google for that.

I don't doubt C# have more extensive tooling in .Net/Windows environment, but the Mono/C# implementation in Mono is really mature and up-to-date. You have C# 5.0 right now in Mono, just a Git merge. You have more deploy options than .Net. SecondLife proves that you can use Mono where you couldn't you .Net.

One of many signs of its defects. Cmmon, bring DirectX to other OSes and then wonder why its better on Windows.

.NET/CLR is NOT and was not designed as a cross-platform dialect, but rather as opposite - as a way to enslave everyone to goals of MS.It was started by definition as a project to either kill or overtake crossplatform and free java.
Because you clone .net, does not make you correct all these issues. It started much later than java, so it does not have mistakes that java still have.

[directhex]

No, its not. Review the list yourself again.

The runtime is LGPL2. The class library is MIT. Other libraries bundled with Mono for convenience use their choice of Free Software licenses, usually the GPLv3-compatible Apache 2.0

Why do we need microsoft community promise then and why do we rely on changes in microsoft code, instead of microsoft taking part in development?

So if there was lots of code which was (c) Microsoft, you'd feel happier? Really? Really?

Do not use terms such as "*DLL*","*exe*","*win*" etc in the source as well as in generated binary code.
It is not x-platform, it is wine-like but reversed.

The ISO spec specifies the file extensions and usage of a PE header stub - and it's utterly irrelervant. UNIX doesn't use file extensions.

directhex@dream:/tmp$ mv hello.exe hello.rantingidiot
directhex@dream:/tmp$ mono hello.rantingidiot 
Hello, World!

No and no.

If you want to fork off your own version of Mono with different file extensions because you have some strange allergic reaction to specific combinations of 3 characters, then, well, go ahead. It removes compatibility with other implementations of the spec (and would stop being an implementation of the spec) but whatever.