Re: [Mono-dev] Compilation issue
Hi, libtest.c: In function `mono_test_empty_struct': libtest.c:957: Internal compiler error in ix86_compute_frame_size, at config/i386/i386.c:1876 Please submit a full bug report. See URL:http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/ for instructions. Which version of gcc are you using to build mono with? I remember having hideous problems with gcc 3.1 and some of the older versions of glibc. TTFN Paul -- Der einzige Weg, Leute zu kontrollieren ist sie anzulügen - L. Ron Ich kann kein Science-Fiction schreiben Hubbard; Lügner, Betrüger, Fixer und Wohltäter zu niemandem signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
[Mono-dev] [PATCH] System.Drawing.RectangleF != Operator Bug
Hello,
I found a small bug in System.Drawing.RectangleF. The inequality
operator (!=) was wrong. Here is the patch that corrects it.
Manuel Alejandro Cerón Estrada
Index: class/System.Drawing/System.Drawing/RectangleF.cs
===
--- class/System.Drawing/System.Drawing/RectangleF.cs (revisión: 67395)
+++ class/System.Drawing/System.Drawing/RectangleF.cs (copia de trabajo)
@@ -201,8 +201,8 @@
public static bool operator != (RectangleF r1, RectangleF r2)
{
- return (r1.X != r2.X) (r1.Y != r2.Y)
-(r1.Width != r2.Width) (r1.Height != r2.Height);
+ return (r1.X != r2.X) || (r1.Y != r2.Y) ||
+(r1.Width != r2.Width) || (r1.Height != r2.Height);
}
/// summary
___
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
Re: [Mono-list] Cleaning shit up (Re: Uncertainty and Doubt about MONO)
I replied to you privately simply because I hit Reply and I didn't bother to check if the CC field was automatically put to mono-list or not. About Microsoft and FUD, this is the article that scared me: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2050848,00.asp?kc=EWEWEMNL103006EP17A You know what .. I retract all I said. Please forgive my folishness, I now see it was wrong to post this message to this list. I see that Miguel answers questions on his blog ... and I should've emailed this directly to him. Sorry again. On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 10:55 +0900, Atsushi Eno wrote: ted leslie wrote: uncool Atsushi you probably want to try and use more tack in your correspondence Alex wasn't deserving of such a tirade, who pissed in your cornflakes this morning anyways? No, you are wrong. There is no other reason than spreading FUD on the subject he dare put. He replied plea to me privately, which made no sense to me: - He misunderstands us; he thinks we push OIN as the best solution rather than denying software patent system. - He thinks that it is Microsoft who spreads the FUD, not himself. - He still has no explanation that I claimed. Of course I'm angry to those who rather do nothing but hitting others' back. He made no effort like me. Atsushi Eno ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Cleaning shit up (Re: Uncertainty and Doubt about MONO)
Ok, I thought you were just offending us by dare putting flaming subject, but after messages it is not a strong intention. So it's just one of a lot room for interpretation (in your words). I accept your apologize thus I also apologize for you for taking the worst possibility on your intention. Atsushi Eno 2006-11-05 (日) の 10:02 +0200 に Alexandru Nedelcu さんは書きました: I replied to you privately simply because I hit Reply and I didn't bother to check if the CC field was automatically put to mono-list or not. About Microsoft and FUD, this is the article that scared me: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2050848,00.asp?kc=EWEWEMNL103006EP17A You know what .. I retract all I said. Please forgive my folishness, I now see it was wrong to post this message to this list. I see that Miguel answers questions on his blog ... and I should've emailed this directly to him. Sorry again. On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 10:55 +0900, Atsushi Eno wrote: ted leslie wrote: uncool Atsushi you probably want to try and use more tack in your correspondence Alex wasn't deserving of such a tirade, who pissed in your cornflakes this morning anyways? No, you are wrong. There is no other reason than spreading FUD on the subject he dare put. He replied plea to me privately, which made no sense to me: - He misunderstands us; he thinks we push OIN as the best solution rather than denying software patent system. - He thinks that it is Microsoft who spreads the FUD, not himself. - He still has no explanation that I claimed. Of course I'm angry to those who rather do nothing but hitting others' back. He made no effort like me. Atsushi Eno ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Uncertainty and Doubt about MONO
Hello, You have some valid questions, and I have followed up to some of the concerns similar to this one on my blog: http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2006/Nov-04.html In addition, Jonathan Pryor has a good entry that explores the issue in more detail than I have done, and also is a good primer for anyone that might be confused: http://www.jprl.com/Blog/archive/development/mono/2006/Nov-04.html That being said, a few corrections: Didn't Miguel de Icaza assured us that Mono was safe, that there are no known patents that Mono infringes, that .NET is an ECMA standard, that even if Mono infringes on some patents then the Open Inventions Network will protect it ? I said the first part; I also said that Mono was one of the technologies protected by the OIN. Didn't Miguel said that Novell conducted a whole investigation on Microsoft owned patents and no infringed patents where found ? I did not say that, and I have no idea where this comes from. It is not practical to review every patent out there (owned by everyone out there) and match every claim against every piece of code written in the source code. Many patents will likely be invalid, many will have prior art, many will be unenforceable, many claims are too broad to be valid in court; So the only way of testing a patent is to go to court. This likely means that a patent holder will need to determine which parts might infringe, and might have to evaluate what is the cost of going to court, what are the possible benefits to himself (if you sue someone that never made any money, what exactly will you win?), and also what are the risks of a counter-lawsuit? The patent holder must ask himself whether the trouble of going to court is worth the price of a potential counter suit. Another alternative is to come up with some kind of agreement, we believe we own this much IP, we believe you own that much IP combined with we believe we are making this much money, you are making that much money. There might be others, and the deals will greatly vary depending on the cases and usually they cover more than patents (like Novell/MS covers technical collaborations). Miguel ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Uncertainty and Doubt about MONO
My brain still hurts on this whole thing. Here is what I'd _like_ to think : Microsoft isn't saying it will sue anyone over infringement, but its not saying (to everyone) its not. The possibility is enough for corporate suits to consider keeping Linux out of the server room (in some businesses) just because of that. So this deal definitely allows some IT VP's to say - Put in Linux now, I feel totally safe with it. Having said that - what happens in 5 years? [big question mark here] What happens in 5 years? Who the heck knows. And here is the reality Try and find Corel Linux. You won't. Now find out why and you'll see something very unpleasant. Getting into bed with the devil is a sure way to get the wobbly dangly bits of your anatomy well and truly burned. Or because it was a crappy product that was poorly managed. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Uncertainty and Doubt about MONO
Hello, And here is the reality Try and find Corel Linux. You won't. Now find out why and you'll see something very unpleasant. Getting into bed with the devil is a sure way to get the wobbly dangly bits of your anatomy well and truly burned. The story of Corel Linux is much more complicated than this. But the MS/Corel agreement actually did not even *touch* Corel Linux. The agreement between Microsoft and Corel was not around Corel Linux as many believe. It was a resolution of their patent disputes, and also a contractual agreement to have Corel port parts of .NET to Unix. Corel did provide the development components to port Rotor to Unix, which is how Rotor ended up running on BSD. It had nothing to do with Corel Linux, see: http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=19509DisplayTab=Article Corel Linux had its own share of issues at the time; It was a Debian fork, with a number of proprietary components (some desktop components, I cant remember which, I believe the file manager). The problem with having a proprietary distro is that it severely limited the testers, and the natural grass-roots adoption. Eventually Corel sold off that business to a venture capital fund and it became Xandros. Miguel. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Uncertainty and Doubt about MONO
Hello, VP's to say - Put in Linux now, I feel totally safe with it. Having said that - what happens in 5 years? [big question mark here] What happens in 5 years? Who the heck knows. This is a common practice, it basically means that the companies renegotiate the terms at that point. And it is done because changing market conditions might alter any balance used today for whatever the agreement terms were. Miguel ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] 1.2 Release Candidate Sources / Call for Testing
Hello, Can I just ask, how the hell did you manage to get mono-basic to build? The zip file currently up won't compile under Linux! If you have a src.rpm that would certainly help! mono-basic (which contains the VB Runtime) is compiled on Windows using the .NET VB compiler. Hopefully that will change when we make vbnc run on Linux. Miguel. ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] known problems with multi-processor Sparc platform?
hello, We have a mono application which works fine for us on Solaris Sparc in house, but is causing a core dump from mono in the field. Our system is a Sparc 5, single processor system. Our customer has a huge 8-processor Sparc with 16G of RAM. Before I file a bug or anything, I’m wondering if there are any know limitations with such a configuration. RAM 4G comes to mind, but I don’t really know enough about the internals of how mono interfaces to the OS (Solaris in this case) to know whether or not I should expect it to work. The best thing to do would be to file a bug report, with as much information about the problem as you can. A small test case would probably be the ideal solution, or stack traces. Running your application with gdb would probably help, see: http://www.mono-project.com/Debugging ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Uncertainty and Doubt about MONO
Yes, thanks.This announcement generated a lot of negative feelings towards Novell.It has everything to do with Microsoft still being the main threat to our ecosystem.Anyway, time will tell if this partnership was good or bad for the open-source landscape. I am sorry I posted this topic here ... many developers don't want to hear such rants,so can you guys initiate a new mailing list where such issues can be discussed ? On 11/5/06, Miguel de Icaza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello,You have some valid questions, and I have followed up to some of theconcerns similar to this one on my blog:http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2006/Nov-04.html In addition, Jonathan Pryor has a good entry that explores the issue inmore detail than I have done, and also is a good primer for anyone thatmight be confused: http://www.jprl.com/Blog/archive/development/mono/2006/Nov-04.htmlThat being said, a few corrections: Didn't Miguel de Icaza assured us that Mono was safe, that there are no known patents that Mono infringes, that .NET is an ECMA standard, that even if Mono infringes on some patents then the Open Inventions Network will protect it ?I said the first part;I also said that Mono was one of the technologies protected by the OIN. Didn't Miguel said that Novell conducted a whole investigation on Microsoft owned patents and no infringed patents where found ?I did not say that, and I have no idea where this comes from. It is not practical to review every patent out there (owned by everyoneout there) and match every claim against every piece of code written inthe source code.Many patents will likely be invalid, many will have prior art, many will be unenforceable, many claims are too broad to be valid in court;Sothe only way of testing a patent is to go to court.Thislikely means that a patent holder will need to determine whichparts might infringe, and might have to evaluate what is the cost of going to court, what are the possible benefits to himself (if you suesomeone that never made any money, what exactly will you win?), and alsowhat are the risks of a counter-lawsuit?The patent holder must ask himself whether the trouble of going to court is worth the price of apotential counter suit.Another alternative is to come up with some kind of agreement, webelieve we own this much IP, we believe you own that much IP combined with we believe we are making this much money, you are making that muchmoney.There might be others, and the deals will greatly vary depending on thecases and usually they cover more than patents (like Novell/MS covers technical collaborations).Miguel ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] Uncertainty and Doubt about MONO
To answer my own question ... on second thought ... such a list would not be recommended. Not to mention the number of trolls it would attract (like me). Sorry ... stupid idea. ... I'll get back to hacking now :) Alex Nedelcu wrote: I am sorry I posted this topic here ... many developers don't want to hear such rants, so can you guys initiate a new mailing list where such issues can be discussed ? ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
[Mono-list] Deploying ASP.NET 2.0 to Apache
Hey, I'm trying to deploy an ASP.NET 2.0 Application to an Apache server on OpenSUSE 10.1 and i'm getting the error: System.ArgumentException: Invalid data source source type. The data source must be of type IListSource, IEnumerable or IDataSource. at System.Web.UI.WebControls.DataBoundControl.ValidateDataSource (System.Object dataSource) [0x0] at System.Web.UI.WebControls.BaseDataBoundControl.set_DataSource (System.Object value) [0x0] But i'm binding to an array and I don't get this error running in XSP or IIS 6. I'm running Mono 1.1.18 and apache is launching mod-mono-server2.I installed mod_mono/mono/etc through rug with the source from the mono-project.com site and here is the config: MonoServerPath default /usr/bin/mod-mono-server2 Alias /sontek /home/sontek/public_html AddMonoApplications default /sontek:/home/sontek/public_html Location /sontek SetHandler mono /Location Thanks for any help! ___ Mono-list maillist - Mono-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
