[Mono-dev] [PATCH] Remove UnmanagedType_80

[Kornél Pál]

Hi,

Mono 1.1.9 was released so we don't have to worry about branching. Can I
commit the patch?

Kornél

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kornél Pál" <kornelpal at hotmail.com>
To: "Ben Maurer" <bmaurer at ximian.com>
Cc: <mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 2:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] [PATCH] Remove UnmanagedType_80


> Hi,
>
> There should not be problem about this as we don't use methods that use
> ArraySubType in our bootstrap assemblies. This means that if you use old
> mcs
> it will compile it without errors or warnings but will emit bugous (I4
> instead of 80) metadata. This is not a problem as the assembiles that are
> installed and used to build class status pages are built using the latest
> mcs so they will have correct metadata.
>
> Kornél
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ben Maurer" <bmaurer at ximian.com>
> To: "Kornél Pál" <kornelpal at hotmail.com>
> Cc: <mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com>
> Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 10:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] [PATCH] Remove UnmanagedType_80
>
>
>> On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 20:01 +0200, Kornél Pál wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Using (UnmanagedType) 80 was required because there was a bug in mcs; it
>>> used I4 as the default ArraySubType instead of 80.
>>>
>>> This bug was fixed so we no more require Consts.UnmanagedType_80.
>>>
>>> Is it OK to commit the patch?
>>
>>
>> How new of a mcs do you need to compile?
>>
>> Many people (buildbot and the rpm build machines being one example)
>> always compile mono by using an rpm install of mono-core for 1.1.n-1.
>> For example, right now, the buildbot/rpm build machines have mono
>> 1.1.8.3 installed. After we release 1.1.9, we will rug up to that
>> version.
>>
>> This means that mono from svn must be buildable with a mono-core install
>> from the latest released version.
>>
>> Our build setup would get alot more tricky if we need to depend on
>> getting monolites in the build system, so I don't think we would want to
>> break this policy.
>>
>> Btw, there are a few other hacks like this that could potentially be
>> removed under the BOOTSTRAP_WITH_OLDLIB name.
>>
>> -- Ben
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mono-devel-list mailing list
>> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>