mono July 2009

mono@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org

3 participants
4 discussions

Re: Mono heads up
by Christian Krause 19 Jul '09

19 Jul '09

Hi Paul, Hi All, Paul wrote: > As of next week, I'll be starting the weekly builds of mono from svn and > putting them into rawhide. It is my intention to push 2.4.2.2 into F11 > in about a months time (it should hit rawhide tomorrow). One question regarding F10: What's your current plan for F10? Do you plan to update F10 to mono 2.4.x, too? The most recent stable version in F10 is 2.0.1, but in CVS mono got already updated to 2.4-RC2... Best regards, Christian

2 1

RFC: change to /usr/lib/rpm/mono-find-provides
by Christian Krause 17 Jul '09

17 Jul '09

Hi, First let me introduce me shortly: My Name is Christian and I've started some months ago to be a Fedora Package maintainer. Especially I'm interested in some of the mono packages, so that's why I'm co-maintaining mono-tools, monodevelop and now I'm also the maintainer of f-spot. I'd like to provide good packages for the users and I'll try my best to be responsive to any bug reports. I've just started to walk through the f-spot bugs and I've found one which reveals a more generic problem: Bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484996 claims, that the f-spot package contains Provides for generic mono packages which are bundled additionally with f-spot. This may or may not be reasonable, but the real problem is, that the f-spot packages claims to provide e.g. rpm -q --provides f-spot [...] mono(Mono.Addins) = 0.3.0.0 mono(Mono.Addins.Gui) = 0.3.0.0 mono(Mono.Addins.Setup) = 0.3.0.0 [...] even though the assemblies are only locally to f-spot (and don't appear in gac): /usr/lib/f-spot/Mono.Addins.Gui.dll /usr/lib/f-spot/Mono.Addins.Setup.dll /usr/lib/f-spot/Mono.Addins.dll /usr/lib/f-spot/Mono.Addins.dll.config . The problem is caused by the script /usr/lib/rpm/mono-find-provides which is used by rpmbuild to extract the provides from the installed files of the package. All *.exe and *.dll files (which are _not_ in a documentation directory) are scanned : [...] filelist=($(grep -Ev '/usr/doc/|/usr/share/doc/')) monolist=($(printf "%s\n" "${filelist[@]}" | egrep "\\.(exe|dll)\$")) [...] But I'm quite sure that this is wrong. The reason for this script is to create the "mono(LIBRARY) = VERSION" provides. But a package should only claim to provide a library, if it's really usable by other mono libraries / programs. In general this should be only the libraries located in %{_libdir}/mono (which are most likely also added to the gac). That's why I'd like to suggest the following patch: --- /usr/lib/rpm/mono-find-provides 2009-05-18 13:26:14.000000000 +0200 +++ mono-find-provides 2009-07-17 11:47:02.000000000 +0200 @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ # Args: builddir buildroot libdir IFS=$'\n' -filelist=($(grep -Ev '/usr/doc/|/usr/share/doc/')) +filelist=($(grep -E '/usr/(lib|lib64)/mono/')) monolist=($(printf "%s\n" "${filelist[@]}" | egrep "\\.(exe|dll)\$")) # If monodis is in the package being installed, use that one This would make sure that only "usable" assemblies are claimed to be provided by a package and problems like that the rpm database still thinks that Mono.Addins are there just because f-spot is installed would be gone. What's your opinion about this? Would it make sense to request this change in the rpm-build package first for rawhide and then later also for F11 and F10? Or should I better use my own version in the f-spot package for testing? Any suggestions and comments are highly appreciated! Best regards, Christian

2 1

Ubuntu classroom session on Mono packaging
by David Nielsen 16 Jul '09

16 Jul '09

Just a little heads up, in about an hour (20.00 UTC), pkg-mono' very own Jo Shields (directhex) will be giving a session on packaging Mono. As Jo is a debian/Ubuntu guy it will be for the dpkg platform but there might be tips and tricks that also apply to Fedora. So for those who are interested, irc.freenode.net / #ubuntu-classroom. I will be there and will capture a log. - David

1 0

Microsoft clarifies patent licensing for ECMA 334 and 335
by David Nielsen 07 Jul '09

07 Jul '09

>From our good buddy Miguel over the Novell way: http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2009/Jul-06.html Finally we can put an end to all this retarded Boycott Novell anti-mono FUD, however to comply properly we on the Fedora side may need to split out the WinForms, ADO.NET and ASP.NET, then ship those in rpmfusion instead as they are not covered by ECMA and thus not by the the community promise. Good news, and thank you to Novell and Microsoft for working this out, erasing doubt and showing good faith. I am very happy today. - David

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

mono July 2009