No, it means "run on Mono". Mono supports Win32 quite well, as you've already reported in this thread. It doesn't mean "support every part of .NET on Windows", though, as well it should not. The COM interop stuff is poorly specified, and chasing it would be a WINE-like endeavour into many ratholes and non-portable architectural decisions.
Thanks for the explanations; I think this is what I was needing to hear. I can see that COM is a very complex (and probably stillborn) technology, and in fact even Microsoft's COM interop has many known bugs. But I think trying to reimplement the entire canon of Microsoft DLL's may also be a "WINE-like" endeavor, especially if people are already giving up on Windows Forms in favor of Gtk#. I guess my conclusion is that non-trivial Visual Studio projects will not run on Mono for a long time, unless they are specifically engineered from for that, and doing so means giving up many nice things like Office automation, 3rd party libraries, obscure Microsoft assemblies, etc.
Maybe this is why Microsoft is so unconcerned about Mono/DotGNU as a threat? Maybe their reliance on COM was a conscious business strategy? :-)
Cheers, -Pete _______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
