Re: [Mono-dev] .Net 2.0 Question
If you look at the sources of mcs/class/* you can see that both .NET 1.1 and 2.0 namespaces are placed there. Then, there are two definition files for building the binaries - one for NET_1_1 profile and other for NET_2_0. Both versions are built during standard 'make' procedure. If the difference between 1.1 and 2.0 exists in one class, then preprocessing directives like #if NET_2_0 ... #endif are used to allow both version coexist in single file. 2005/11/5, Martin Hinks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi all, > > How is the construction of the .NET Framework v 2.0.0 planned to > procede in Mono? > > There are many large changes that obviously must be done to reflect > namespace changes (ie addition of System.Net.Security) and was just > curious as to who/if anyone is starting to organise this. > > Thanks, > > -- > Martin Hinks > http://www.m-s-d.net > ___ > Mono-devel-list mailing list > Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list > -- Kamil Skalski http://nazgul.omega.pl ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
Re: [Mono-dev] .Net 2.0 Question
Hello, > How is the construction of the .NET Framework v 2.0.0 planned to > procede in Mono? > > There are many large changes that obviously must be done to reflect > namespace changes (ie addition of System.Net.Security) and was just > curious as to who/if anyone is starting to organise this. As the previous poster said, the framework for building 1.1 and 2.0 assemblies already exists and at least all the low-level complexity of building it has been addressed. Typically we use a define NET_2_0 to handle the different code paths, and we use the class status pages to work in the different areas. Today the status is *roughly* like this: * System.Xml 2.0 is pretty much done, modulo bugs. * ADO.NET 2.0: we have done some small changes, but I would say that we have only done 10% of the work for 2.0 compatibility. ADO.NET 2.0 needs as much help as it can get, as some providers are being updated to 2.0 (Firebird) and no longer build with Mono due to the missing work on this. * ASP.NET 2.0: many of the controls have been implemented, but a large group of the controls depends on the new Configuration framework which Chris Toshok has been working on. He could use some help in this area, as this blocks most of the new 2.0 features. * mscorlib: the 2.0 support is about 50% complete, it needs work on various bits: calendars, globalization, threading and plenty of missing attributes. * System 2.0: this assembly has received some minimal work, in my guestimate its probably at 10% of the way, and could use a lot of help. * System.Drawing 2.0: we have barely touched it To find out what is missing, check our 'corcompare' pages: http://mono.ximian.com/class-status/mono-HEAD-vs-fx-2/index.html ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
Re: [Mono-dev] .Net 2.0 Question
Hello Martin, On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 11:06 +, Martin Hinks wrote: > There are many large changes that obviously must be done to reflect > namespace changes (ie addition of System.Net.Security) Carlos had adapted his SSL code for System.Net.Security - in earlier betas/CTP of 2.0. Now that RTM is available I hope he will find the time to complete this (and backport the bug fixed in Mono.Security.dll since then). BTW have you ever added DH support to SSL/TLS ? That would still be a nice addition ;-) > and was just > curious as to who/if anyone is starting to organise this. Various people. It's safer to send an email here before investing too much time into a specific feature (collisions are infrequent but never fun ;-). -- Sebastien Pouliot email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://pages.infinit.net/ctech/ ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
Re: [Mono-dev] .Net 2.0 Question
Hi Sebastien, I haven't done the DH modification yet because I was on a dial-up connection, and downloading SVN was such a pain! Now I'm on my 2mbit conn and I have quite a bit of time this week, I might well start having a go - what is the best way for me to create a buildable project under Windows for modifying the SslStream class from SVN? On 11/5/05, Sebastien Pouliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Martin, > > On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 11:06 +, Martin Hinks wrote: > > There are many large changes that obviously must be done to reflect > > namespace changes (ie addition of System.Net.Security) > > Carlos had adapted his SSL code for System.Net.Security - in earlier > betas/CTP of 2.0. Now that RTM is available I hope he will find the time > to complete this (and backport the bug fixed in Mono.Security.dll since > then). > > BTW have you ever added DH support to SSL/TLS ? That would still be a > nice addition ;-) > > > and was just > > curious as to who/if anyone is starting to organise this. > > Various people. It's safer to send an email here before investing too > much time into a specific feature (collisions are infrequent but never > fun ;-). > -- > Sebastien Pouliot > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > blog: http://pages.infinit.net/ctech/ > > -- Martin Hinks http://www.m-s-d.net ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
Re: [Mono-dev] .Net 2.0 Question
Hello Martin, On Sun, 2005-11-06 at 12:21 +, Martin Hinks wrote: > Hi Sebastien, > > I haven't done the DH modification yet because I was on a dial-up > connection, and downloading SVN was such a pain! oh :( > Now I'm on my 2mbit conn and I have quite a bit of time this week, I > might well start having a go ah :) > - what is the best way for me to create a > buildable project under Windows for modifying the SslStream class from > SVN? Mono.Security.dll doesn't depend on any mono specific features (i.e. another Mono assembly to runtime specific stuff) so you can simply create a project and include all the files in the "Mono.Security.dll.sources" (which should be all of the .cs files except the unit tests). This should allow you to modify the Ssl* classes to add support for DH (which is also inside Mono.Security.dll). Don't hesitate to ask question about the SSL/DH code if you get bugged down somewhere. Thanks :) > > On 11/5/05, Sebastien Pouliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello Martin, > > > > On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 11:06 +, Martin Hinks wrote: > > > There are many large changes that obviously must be done to reflect > > > namespace changes (ie addition of System.Net.Security) > > > > Carlos had adapted his SSL code for System.Net.Security - in earlier > > betas/CTP of 2.0. Now that RTM is available I hope he will find the time > > to complete this (and backport the bug fixed in Mono.Security.dll since > > then). > > > > BTW have you ever added DH support to SSL/TLS ? That would still be a > > nice addition ;-) > > > > > and was just > > > curious as to who/if anyone is starting to organise this. > > > > Various people. It's safer to send an email here before investing too > > much time into a specific feature (collisions are infrequent but never > > fun ;-). > > -- > > Sebastien Pouliot > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > blog: http://pages.infinit.net/ctech/ > > > > > > > -- > Martin Hinks > http://www.m-s-d.net ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
Re: [Mono-dev] .Net 2.0 Question
Hi Seb, I'm gonna start some work on that now (I have thankfully got myself a copy of VS2005 and .NET 2.0 as well now - so that is the spec I will work to) First task I think is to standardise between the two classes (.NET and Mono) so that (for example) handshake is intiated on the command, rather than just when data is attempted to be sent (as it is atm)... Anyway, I'll start looking and send another email in a bit. Martin On 11/6/05, Sebastien Pouliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Martin, > > On Sun, 2005-11-06 at 12:21 +, Martin Hinks wrote: > > Hi Sebastien, > > > > I haven't done the DH modification yet because I was on a dial-up > > connection, and downloading SVN was such a pain! > > oh :( > > > Now I'm on my 2mbit conn and I have quite a bit of time this week, I > > might well start having a go > > ah :) > > > - what is the best way for me to create a > > buildable project under Windows for modifying the SslStream class from > > SVN? > > Mono.Security.dll doesn't depend on any mono specific features (i.e. > another Mono assembly to runtime specific stuff) so you can simply > create a project and include all the files in the > "Mono.Security.dll.sources" (which should be all of the .cs files except > the unit tests). > > This should allow you to modify the Ssl* classes to add support for DH > (which is also inside Mono.Security.dll). Don't hesitate to ask question > about the SSL/DH code if you get bugged down somewhere. > > Thanks :) > > > > > On 11/5/05, Sebastien Pouliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello Martin, > > > > > > On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 11:06 +, Martin Hinks wrote: > > > > There are many large changes that obviously must be done to reflect > > > > namespace changes (ie addition of System.Net.Security) > > > > > > Carlos had adapted his SSL code for System.Net.Security - in earlier > > > betas/CTP of 2.0. Now that RTM is available I hope he will find the time > > > to complete this (and backport the bug fixed in Mono.Security.dll since > > > then). > > > > > > BTW have you ever added DH support to SSL/TLS ? That would still be a > > > nice addition ;-) > > > > > > > and was just > > > > curious as to who/if anyone is starting to organise this. > > > > > > Various people. It's safer to send an email here before investing too > > > much time into a specific feature (collisions are infrequent but never > > > fun ;-). > > > -- > > > Sebastien Pouliot > > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > blog: http://pages.infinit.net/ctech/ > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Martin Hinks > > http://www.m-s-d.net > > -- Martin Hinks http://www.m-s-d.net ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
Re: [Mono-dev] .Net 2.0 Question
Hello Martin, On Sun, 2005-11-06 at 15:44 +, Martin Hinks wrote: > First task I think is to standardise between the two classes (.NET and > Mono) so that (for example) handshake is intiated on the command, > rather than just when data is attempted to be sent (as it is atm)... Ok but remember that Mono.Security.dll API must stays binary compatible with existing code. This limits the number of changes that can be made to it. GotDotNet's WinChurn can help you detect "breaking changes" and, when some changes are just "potentially" breaking, you'll have to dig more information (there are some good docs on MSDN). I think it will be easier to break the (a) add DH support and (b) move to the newer API as two different tasks. -- Sebastien Pouliot email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://pages.infinit.net/ctech/ ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
Re: [Mono-dev] .Net 2.0 Question
When you say it must remain binary compatible this should not be a problem surely for the new api? For example, the System.Net.Security namespace is in it's entirety composed of stubs atm - so, *copying* code into there from the existing tls class will neither break existing applications but will start to work towards support of proper v2.0 api. I'd consider the moving to the new APIs to be the most important aspect, then DH implementation can be made far easier by comparing the .NET Framework's response to various DH servers with the Mono one as I implement it. With this in mind, I think I am going to start working on migrating the API as my first priority. It isn't that much fun, but it has got to be done! Martin On 11/6/05, Sebastien Pouliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Martin, > > On Sun, 2005-11-06 at 15:44 +, Martin Hinks wrote: > > First task I think is to standardise between the two classes (.NET and > > Mono) so that (for example) handshake is intiated on the command, > > rather than just when data is attempted to be sent (as it is atm)... > > Ok but remember that Mono.Security.dll API must stays binary compatible > with existing code. This limits the number of changes that can be made > to it. GotDotNet's WinChurn can help you detect "breaking changes" and, > when some changes are just "potentially" breaking, you'll have to dig > more information (there are some good docs on MSDN). > > I think it will be easier to break the (a) add DH support and (b) move > to the newer API as two different tasks. > > -- > Sebastien Pouliot > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > blog: http://pages.infinit.net/ctech/ > > -- Martin Hinks http://www.m-s-d.net ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
Re: [Mono-dev] .Net 2.0 Question
Hello Martin, On Sun, 2005-11-06 at 16:59 +, Martin Hinks wrote: > When you say it must remain binary compatible this should not be a > problem surely for the new api? That was about modifying Mono.Security.dll and not about adding support for System.Net,Security. > For example, the System.Net.Security namespace is in it's entirety > composed of stubs atm - so, *copying* code into there from the > existing tls class will neither break existing applications but will > start to work towards support of proper v2.0 api. > > I'd consider the moving to the new APIs to be the most important > aspect, then DH implementation can be made far easier by comparing the > .NET Framework's response to various DH servers with the Mono one as I > implement it. I'm not sure it's the best course of action (feel free to disagree ;-). You'll get DH working a lot faster by adding it to Mono.Security.dll than porting the SSL/TLS code in System.dll - and has the added benefit of providing SSL/DH support for users of the 1.x frameworks. > With this in mind, I think I am going to start working on migrating > the API as my first priority. It isn't that much fun, but it has got > to be done! As I said earlier, Carlos was working on porting his code to System.dll (not in SVN). You should get in touch with him before starting any port of your own or you'll likely lose a lot of time (which would be sad considering there are a lot of interesting stuff to do in Mono ;-). > On 11/6/05, Sebastien Pouliot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello Martin, > > > > On Sun, 2005-11-06 at 15:44 +, Martin Hinks wrote: > > > First task I think is to standardise between the two classes (.NET and > > > Mono) so that (for example) handshake is intiated on the command, > > > rather than just when data is attempted to be sent (as it is atm)... > > > > Ok but remember that Mono.Security.dll API must stays binary compatible > > with existing code. This limits the number of changes that can be made > > to it. GotDotNet's WinChurn can help you detect "breaking changes" and, > > when some changes are just "potentially" breaking, you'll have to dig > > more information (there are some good docs on MSDN). > > > > I think it will be easier to break the (a) add DH support and (b) move > > to the newer API as two different tasks. -- Sebastien Pouliot email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://pages.infinit.net/ctech/ ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
