[Mono-list] Mono 2.6 for Ubuntu

[Chorn Sokun]

Is it all that easy as Peter mention why not some kind mono Guru provide
packaging for some weak heart like me :D

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chorn Sokun
+855 12 222718

http://chornsokun.wordpress.com
http://twitter.com/csokun




On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Peter Hagen <peter at wingsofdeath.nu> wrote:

>  Hi
>
> I don't understand the problem, I compiled 2.6.1 and MD 2.2 on Ubuntu 32
> and 64 without a problem. No breaking anything. It works like a ... ehm..
> [think of something good yourself].
>
> Cheers
>
> Peter
>
>
> On Wed, 2010-01-13 at 08:52 -0800, Chorn Sokun wrote:
>
> In short wait or abandon Debian/Ubuntu and try OpenSuse.
> Long story build it yourself get ready to break Debian/Ubuntu stability
> doable be brave :)
> However at the end of the day you build base on the trunk and what if you
> need to redistribute your app will the end user need to build the framework
> the way we did? I better wait until Ubuntu ship the version that easy enough
> (2.6 with MonoDevelop 2.2) but I will keep an eye on the mono dev progress
> however I stick with .NET for the time being.
>
>
> Just a thought !
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Chorn Sokun
> +855 12 222718
>
> http://chornsokun.wordpress.com
> http://twitter.com/csokun
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Robert Jordan <robertj at gmx.net> wrote:
>
> On 12.01.2010 21:03, James Mansion wrote:
> > B.R. wrote:
> >> Universal binaries were provided at one point, in the form of an
> >> "Universal Linux Installer." These were discontinued around Mono
> >> 1.9.1, because they didn't work properly on most distros: components
> >> that were relied on were not ABI-stable, installed binaries would stop
> >> working because libs would change on the system, libs would be in the
> >> wrong places without LD_LIBRARY_PATH being set, etc. In short, it was
> >> one giant cockup for the most part, and was hence discontinued in
> >> favor of letting distro packagers handle it themselves, seeing as in
> >> almost every case, they know better.
>
> > You have to make the installation effectively self-contained. Everything
> > you say would apply to Java too - but there's just two files for that -
> > a .bin and a .rpm.
>
>
> Mono depends upon these libs:
>
> libexif.so
> libexpat.so
> libfontconfig.so
> libfreetype.so
> libglib-2.0.so
> libgmodule-2.0.so
> libgthread-2.0.so
> libjpeg.so
> libpng12.so
> libpthread.so
> libtiff.so
> libungif.so
> libz.so
>
> You don't really want to redistribute them, do you? If yes, who
> will take care of patching them if (security) bugs become
> apparent?
>
> How would linux look like if every large app would be
> distributed like this?
>
> Robert
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.comhttp://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/mono-list/attachments/20100113/8a49535b/attachment.html