Hi,
I've begun to use a Mono application and I was surprised on how outdated the Mono framework is in Fedora. I see there is a change [1] proposed for F22 to update to Mono 3.4, but it seems a bit abandoned and the current version is 3.10.
With the liberation of .NET by Microsoft, the interest is Mono will probably grow.
Is this effort still going on? I'm not a Mono expert, but I can help packaging.
Kind regards.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mono_3.4
On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 22:25 +0100, Juan Orti wrote:
Hi,
I've begun to use a Mono application and I was surprised on how outdated the Mono framework is in Fedora. I see there is a change [1] proposed for F22 to update to Mono 3.4, but it seems a bit abandoned and the current version is 3.10.
With the liberation of .NET by Microsoft, the interest is Mono will probably grow.
Is this effort still going on? I'm not a Mono expert, but I can help packaging.
Kind regards.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mono_3.4
mono mailing list mono@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mono
I would like to see Fedora keep up with the Mono upstream as well.
The Mono 3.4 packaged as a test for F21 months ago worked well for me on my test OpenSimulators.
Hello,
I would like to see Fedora keep up with the Mono upstream as well.
The Mono 3.4 packaged as a test for F21 months ago worked well for me on my test OpenSimulators.
Yes, I would also like to help with bringing Mono uptodate in Fedora.
What worries me is how we want to test all the software that depends on Mono: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mono_3.4#Dependencies
What is the definition of "tested"?
@Claudio: are you up for building a new package for Mono 3.10? Actually, I see at https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/elsupergomez/mono/fedora-raw... that there are packages for Mono 3.10 already. Thank you!
So we should test that with all the software that depends on it?
On the other hand, Mono 3.12 is just around the corner I think, and major work goes into Mono 4.0. I don't know how long it takes for a package to get into Fedora, is it worth the effort for Mono 3.10? Perhaps it is more reasonable to wait for Mono 4.0? That will definitely change a lot of things, because it will not support .Net Framework 2.0 anymore. This might need small changes in the software that depends on Mono.
I don't know enough about the process at Fedora at all.
All the best, Timotheus
El 2014-12-19 07:25, Timotheus Pokorra escribió:
Hello,
I would like to see Fedora keep up with the Mono upstream as well.
The Mono 3.4 packaged as a test for F21 months ago worked well for me on my test OpenSimulators.
Yes, I would also like to help with bringing Mono uptodate in Fedora.
What worries me is how we want to test all the software that depends on Mono: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mono_3.4#Dependencies [1]
What is the definition of "tested"?
Well, I think this is a good moment to send a heads up to the devel list, with a system wide change request for F22 [1]. I think that every package owner should test their own packages against the newer version.
Are the main packagers still active? laxathom? chkr? I think the newer versions should be pushed to rawhide as soon as possible.
@Claudio: are you up for building a new package for Mono 3.10? Actually, I see at https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/elsupergomez/mono/fedora-raw... [2] that there are packages for Mono 3.10 already. Thank you!
So we should test that with all the software that depends on it?
On the other hand, Mono 3.12 is just around the corner I think, and major work goes into Mono 4.0.
I don't know how long it takes for a package to get into Fedora, is it worth the effort for Mono 3.10? Perhaps it is more reasonable to wait for Mono 4.0? That will definitely change a lot of things, because it will not support .Net Framework 2.0 anymore. This might need small changes in the software that depends on Mono.
We have a version from 2011. I will definitely go for what we have now 3.10 or 3.12 if it is released soon.
I don't know enough about the process at Fedora at all.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy#Complex_system_wide_changes
Hello all.
Change proposal of Mono 3.4 to F22 is important, because mono > 3.4 don't build from mono < 3.4. For that, we first need update to 3.4 on the fedora repos, then when we have 3.4 on fedora, is very easy to jump to 3.10.
Copr https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/elsupergomez/mono has 3.10 already to use if someone want to try. I use it into 5 machines (F20, F21) and work fine.
I found that problem when package 3.10. I was retired 3.4 from copr, and then fail the build. I upload again 3.4 build from 2.8.10, build fine, then having 3.4 build 3.10 work again. Many other packages are updated in the copr repo, libgdigplus, gtksharp3, mono-addins, monodevelop (not last upstream release for problems with the tarball with NUnit, mono-basic, nuget. And in free time, try (work in progress) to package gstremmer-sharp and banshee 2.99
I found that banshee 2 don't work with mono-addin 1.1.
I want to see mono up to date on F21 but I try to became a packages, but still wait for sponsor.
Olea create a copr to test rawhide packages that depend to mono https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/olea/Mono_3-Fedora_Feature is a great idea, but no build from since time ago. Maybe I recreate the idea to testing
if any help me to be packager, or, any of are or become co maintainer of mono, I glad to help to see mono >= 3.10 in F22
2014-12-19 8:03 GMT-03:00 Raphael Groner projects.rg@smart.ms:
Hi there, Am Fr, 19. Dez, 2014 um 7:25 schrieb Timotheus Pokorra < timotheus.pokorra@solidcharity.com>: …
So we should test that with all the software that depends on it?
For instance, I am trying to package OpenRA and unbundle all those 3rdparty stuff, therefore see also:
https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/issues/7140
…
I don't know enough about the process at Fedora at all.
What is the state of the Mono SIG? I see there a lot of people at the wiki page. But the real investigated effort seems to be very low. :(
R.
mono mailing list mono@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mono
Really? It is your own prackaging, so I assume you know that on a machine which has not have mono installed previously, you need to change the spec file slightly as below. (I had to do that on a fresh machine recently, and I did not want any older mono to go on first).
I assume 3.8 and 3.10 can build themselves.
============= # diff -u mono.3.4.0.spec.noboot mono.3.4.0.spec --- mono.3.4.0.spec.noboot 2014-04-30 10:11:49.680278378 +0100 +++ mono.3.4.0.spec 2014-09-15 09:37:28.120911606 +0100 @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ Name: mono Version: 3.4.0 -Release: 1%{?dist}p +Release: 2%{?dist}p Summary: A .NET runtime environment
Group: Development/Languages @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ # need to bootstrap mono, comment out this BuildRequires # and don't delete the binaries in %%prep.
-BuildRequires: mono-core +#BuildRequires: mono-core
# JIT only availible on these: ExclusiveArch: %ix86 x86_64 ia64 %{arm} sparcv9 alpha s390x ppc ppc64 @@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ sed -i "61a #define ARG_MAX _POSIX_ARG_MAX" mono/io-layer/wapi_glob.h
# Remove prebuilt binaries -rm -rf mcs/class/lib/monolite/* +#rm -rf mcs/class/lib/monolite/*
%build %ifarch ia64 =====================
-------------------------------------------- On Fri, 19/12/14, Claudio Rodrigo elsupergomez@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all.
Change proposal of Mono 3.4 to F22 is important, because mono > 3.4 don't build from mono < 3.4. For that, we first need update to 3.4 on the fedora repos, then when we have 3.4 on fedora, is very easy to jump to 3.10.
Copr https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/elsupergomez/mono has 3.10 already to use if someone want to try. I use it into 5 machines (F20, F21) and work fine.
I found that problem when package 3.10. I was retired 3.4 from copr, and then fail the build. I upload again 3.4 build from 2.8.10, build fine, then having 3.4 build 3.10 work again. Many other packages are updated in the copr repo, libgdigplus, gtksharp3, mono-addins, monodevelop (not last upstream release for problems with the tarball with NUnit, mono-basic, nuget. And in free time, try (work in progress) to package gstremmer-sharp and banshee 2.99
I found that banshee 2 don't work with mono-addin 1.1.
I want to see mono up to date on F21 but I try to became a packages, but still wait for sponsor.
Olea create a copr to test rawhide packages that depend to mono https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/olea/Mono_3-Fedora_Feature is a great idea, but no build from since time ago. Maybe I recreate the idea to testing
if any help me to be packager, or, any of are or become co maintainer of mono, I glad to help to see mono >= 3.10 in F22
2014-12-19 8:03 GMT-03:00 Raphael Groner projects.rg@smart.ms:Hi there,
Am Fr, 19. Dez, 2014 um 7:25 schrieb Timotheus Pokorra timotheus.pokorra@solidcharity.com:
…
So we should test that with all the software that
depends on it?
For instance, I am trying to package OpenRA and unbundle all those 3rdparty stuff, therefore see also:
https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/issues/7140
…
I don't know enough about the process at Fedora at
all.
What is the state of the Mono SIG? I see there a lot of people at the wiki page. But the real investigated effort seems to be very low. :(
R.
_______________________________________________
mono mailing list
mono@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mono
-- -- Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra Diaz Ingeniero en Informática
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________ mono mailing list mono@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mono
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Claudio Rodrigo elsupergomez@gmail.com wrote:
Olea create a copr to test rawhide packages that depend to mono https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/olea/Mono_3-Fedora_Feature is a great idea, but no build from since time ago. Maybe I recreate the idea to testing
I recruited two mates to help test, but I wasn't very productive lately.
OTOH I recreated with repoquery the list of packages depending on Mono. There are some minor diferences with your original one since some of then are now abandoned (ex: gnome-do-plugins or taoframework) plus other you skipped.
I've just recreated the repo you mentioned and launched a new massive build against your mono repo: https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/olea/Mono_3-Fedora_Feature/monitor/.
FWIW, I used the 3.8 src rpm from copr with a small local customization and rebuilt for years. Just tried to upgrade to the latest (since I upgraded to f21 a few days ago, it is due for a rebuild anyway), and found that there seems to be a packaging mistake with libgdiplus - fedora f21's ligdgiplus 's 2.10.9 would do '--rebuild --target=i686' to build 32bit on 64-bit host, while the 3.8 from copr won't.
AFAIK, libgdiplus 3.8 is more or less a rebranding, and largely functionally the same as 2.10.9, just with the bundled cairo (and possibly other dependent libraries?) striped out and now uses the platform's. As a result, build for sub-arch's might be harder, but it is still not an excuse to do it wrong...
I think the mono SIG is basiically this list though, and the traffic is pretty low :-(. I do file bugs at xamarin, etc and do my part from time to time...
-------------------------------------------- On Fri, 19/12/14, Raphael Groner projects.rg@smart.ms wrote:
Hi there,
Am Fr, 19. Dez, 2014 um 7:25 schrieb Timotheus Pokorra timotheus.pokorra@solidcharity.com:
…
So we should test that with all the software that
depends on it?
For instance, I am trying to package OpenRA and unbundle all those 3rdparty stuff, therefore see also:
https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/issues/7140
…
I don't know enough about the process at Fedora at
all.
What is the state of the Mono SIG? I see there a lot of people at the wiki page. But the real investigated effort seems to be very low. :(
R. -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________ mono mailing list mono@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mono
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Hin-Tak Leung htl10@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
I think the mono SIG is basiically this list though, and the traffic is pretty low :-(.
Sadly you are 100% right :-)
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Timotheus Pokorra < timotheus.pokorra@solidcharity.com> wrote:
What is the definition of "tested"?
Good question. Some of us agreed a mono based package should build in the three Fedora primary architectures[1] and should be able to run. As we don't know a better procedure I just figured out for libraries to build the apps depending of them and for user apps to improvise a kind of test case. The testbed would be Fedora Rawhide (devel) from which the future F22 would be derived.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures#Primary_Architectures
On the other hand, Mono 3.12 is just around the corner I think, and major work goes into Mono 4.0.
IMHO we can close succesfully the Mono update feature with some advanced 3.*. Probably most of the problems we'll find would be related to 2.*->3.* application incompatibilities. After that, upgradig to new 3.* releases probably would be straitghforward.
I don't know how long it takes for a package to get into Fedora,
For a new package it may take even weeks. OTOH updating an existing package only requires the maintainer to push the changes into the SCM.
is it worth the effort for Mono 3.10? Perhaps it is more reasonable to wait for Mono 4.0? That will definitely change a lot of things, because it will not support .Net Framework 2.0 anymore.
AFAIK the .Net Core model is almost completely different and would need upstream work for migrating from .Net Framework, if development owners really want it, Anyhow I think .Net Core model (from MS or the Mono version) would take months if not more than a year for the first stable releases. So I'm not care about it yet.
is it worth the effort for Mono 3.10? Perhaps it is more reasonable to wait for Mono 4.0? That will definitely change a lot of things, because it will not support .Net Framework 2.0 anymore.
AFAIK the .Net Core model is almost completely different and would need upstream work for migrating from .Net Framework, if development owners really want it, Anyhow I think .Net Core model (from MS or the Mono version) would take months if not more than a year for the first stable releases. So I'm not care about it yet.
I think that Mono 4.0 will not be related to .Net core. It is a cleaned up version, removing .Net 2.0 code, and just supporting .Net 4.0/4.5 framework. Some modules are replaced with the code that Microsoft has open sourced. But this is not related to .Net Core at all.
Announcing Cycle4: http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/mono-devel-list/2014-November/042401.html Thread about what should be removed in Mono4: http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/mono-devel-list/2014-November/042424.html
I understand now that it makes sense to focus on Mono 3.10, to get a stable and recent version of Mono into Fedora at all.
Timotheus
mono@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org
-
Claudio Rodrigo -
Exile In Paradise -
Hin-Tak Leung -
Ismael Olea -
Juan Orti Alcaine -
Raphael Groner -
Timotheus Pokorra