[Mono-list] Mono builds for Linux

David Curylo curylod at asme.org
Fri Apr 4 19:16:09 UTC 2014

On Apr 4, 2014, at 4:55 AM, Andrés G. Aragoneses <knocte at gmail.com> wrote:

>> This is indicative of the problem that there aren’t any official
>> packages, parallel or otherwise.  Why should people have to dig for mono
>> packages?
> Because if their distro doesn't provide up-to-date versions of mono,
> there's always a reason for it. 

I’m not referring to the distro providing an up-to-date version of mono.  I get why they wouldn’t.  Since the distros include a version of mono that is tied in with other software the distribution includes, they they are responsible for that particular version of the runtime, and that is fine.  

I’m referring to the problem of there no being an official place *anywhere* to find official packages for various distros.  If a software developer wants to target a different version of mono, they should be able to provide installation instructions for using some other repo to get those packages, and it would be greatly preferred if there were official repos for the rest of these.  

If Eberhard’s package is the official one for Ubuntu when you want a mono (or mono-opt) newer than on Ubuntu, then that should be listed as the official package from the mono downloads page, but it’s not.  End users are left to hunt and pick between the various unofficial repos.  Developers are left to either package their own (a wasted effort) or try to find the unofficial one that is kept most up to date and hope that it stays that way for the life of their product.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/mono-list/attachments/20140404/96fbd70f/attachment.html>

More information about the Mono-list mailing list