[Mono-list] MonoDevelop 0.7

[peter]

Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

>9.3 is new, as is Monodevelop 0.7;  these things will sort themselves
>out.  I've been using rug/red-carpet since Ximian released it, it is an
>excellent product and solution.
>  
>
Yes.  I appreciate that and I'm certainly prepared to cut them a bit of 
slack.

>>a) What should I uninstall?  Do I have to use rug to do it, as I used 
>>rug to install at least some of the packages in the first place?  Or 
>>should I use apt, or YaST, since I guess some of the packages were in 
>>the original 9.3 upgrade?
>>    
>>
>
>rpm  -qa | grep mono
>
>Remove all those, and the ones that depend on them.
>  
>
How do I know what all the dependencies are?

>You probably want all of them although you may not need all the "gapi"
>ones;  and it you don't do ASP/web stuff you don't need mon_mono/xsp.
>  
>
That's all of them then, as I definitely want ASP.NET.  What order 
should they be installed in, do you know?

>>VS wasn't released last week for a Windows version only about a month
>>old. :)
>>    
>>
No, that's right.  As I said, I'm prepared to cut them a bit of slack.  
It is worth noting, though, that monodevelop's Windows predecessor 
installs very easily.

>Ok, I've never used VS.  You'd have to pay me a great deal of money to
>put up with using a M$ product for my day-to-day work.  Time is saves it
>one area it consumes may fold more futzing with myriad 'mystery'
>problems with useless error messages.
>  
>
I'd like to say that I agree: but actually I've never had any problems 
with VS - although it does take a bit of learning.  And since I work in 
a University, my employers pay next to nothing for it, and I get a legal 
copy free for home use.

My interest in this is that I'm coming up to starting an MSc 
dissertation, which if all goes well will try to ascertain whether it 
can be said that .NET is now truly cross-platform.  As part of the 
dissertation I want to write a demonstration ASP.NET application that 
will run under Windows/IIS and under Linux/Apache.  If I'm really lucky, 
it will also have business logic and data access components running 
remotely (i.e. not on the web server - or at least, for demonstration 
purposes, not in the presentation layer (code behind page) process on 
the web server).

It's going to be inevitable that I have to compare development on 
Windows and Linux.  I really would like to be able to say that there is 
an easy transition path for Windows developers to Linux (or at least 
present evidence that such a path is being prepared).

My ultimate goal is to try to get my employers to see that they would be 
better of with Linux, but I have to be realistic and say that there's no 
chance of that in the near future.  However, the things I discover might 
help to sway the argument if the debate ever actually takes place.  They 
might also get me a masters degree :)

>Same,  monodevelop is the bugger of the mix.
>
>  
>
Yes.  It seems that way.

>>I know this isn't a 
>>view shared by everyone, but I much prefer to use a good IDE over a text 
>>editor, however sophisticated.  
>>    
>>
>
>Same, an monodevelop is quite nice; certainly worth the wrestling match
>to get it to run.
>  
>
I hope I'll be able to agree with you one day - if I can just get it to 
run! :)

>I never upgrade.  Make /home a separate partition and just reinstall the
>new distribution.  I belong to a largish LUG and just about everyone has
>given up on upgrading;  for a workstation the convenience of upgrading
>is rarely worth the potential flakiness (especially if you've used third
>party packages or ever once done an rpm --force).
>  
>
Too late :(

Thanks for your help and interest, Adam

Cheers

Peter