Hello,
I am just getting started with Mono on Windows XP. I built a very simple
HelloWorld.exe using Visual Studio, then I clicked on the "Mono-1.1.6
Command Prompt" and typed "mono HelloWorld". When my form appeared, the
GUI did not look quite right, which is a little surprising since it's ju
El dl 25 de 04 del 2005 a les 15:17 -0400, en/na Pete Gonzalez va
escriure:
> Hello,
>
> I am just getting started with Mono on Windows XP. I built a very simple
> HelloWorld.exe using Visual Studio, then I clicked on the "Mono-1.1.6
> Command Prompt" and typed "mono HelloWorld". When my form
Hello,
> My hope is to use kick-ass Mono features (such as the SSA optimizations,
> "--aot", "mkbundle", etc.) with standard Visual Studio projects, which
> you'd think would be very attractive. More importantly, Win32 offers a
> vast array of libraries that may be unsupported by Mono for a lo
Miguel de Icaza wrote:
You wont be able to assemblies that come from the .NET framework with
Mono.
Many of these assemblies use internal calls to the virtual machine, and
are hence non-portable or use COM which is not supported by Mono.
Third party libraries will work, but you need to look at its
d
Hello,
> Is it reasonable to assume that cases of "internal calls" and "using COM"
> are always accompanied by the text string "MethodImplOptions.InternalCall"
> in the MSIL? If so, then I did a quick search for "InternalCall" in my
> application's DLL's, and other than a couple COM interfaces
Miguel de Icaza wrote:
My list was not exhaustive, you should also look for P/Invoke and IJW
stubs.
But even if you did not look into that, Windows.Forms exposes and
consumes COM extensively so it will not work on Mono (in our
implementation we just throw).
Hmm... I didn't see COM interop listed an
Hey,
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 06:14 -0400, Pete Gonzalez wrote:
> Anyway, my point is that Mono can successfully execute quite a lot of
> Microsoft code before crashing. :-)
Out of curiosity, I have just one concern about the legal side. Does the
license of Microsoft .NET Framework allow users to
Their more recent EULAs forbid to run outside Windows/WindowsCE. But I
don't think it states anything about using anothr (Mono) runtime in
Windows to run them.
HIH,
On 4/26/05, Enver ALTIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 06:14 -0400, Pete Gonzalez wrote:
> > Anyway, m
Rafael Teixeira wrote:
Their more recent EULAs forbid to run outside Windows/WindowsCE. But I
don't think it states anything about using anothr (Mono) runtime in
Windows to run them.
Is this referring to .NET's code (dlls and exe's) or .exe and .dll
generated by Visual Studio from your own sour
Alex Chudnovsky wrote:
Is this referring to .NET's code (dlls and exe's) or .exe and .dll
generated by Visual Studio from your own source code?
Either way I can't see this standing in court and therefore not
enforcible: EULAs state many things, but it does not mean they all legit.
Intuitively, I
Hello,
> Hmm... I didn't see COM interop listed anywhere on your roadmap page. Is
> this a priority? It seems that the ability to execute Microsoft DLL's
It is listed somewhere as a feature that we are not likely going to
support. It is just not useful at all in Unix, so either someone
autho
Miguel de Icaza wrote:
Apps that use COM or ActiveX controls will never run on Mono.
Even if COM was there, the existing code that depends on the control
would require the control to be ported to some form of COM on Unix
(which to begin with is not available in a reusable form) and binaries
for e
On Die, 2005-04-26 at 14:39 -0400, Pete Gonzalez wrote:
> Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> > Apps that use COM or ActiveX controls will never run on Mono.
> > Even if COM was there, the existing code that depends on the control
> > would require the control to be ported to some form of COM on Unix
> > (w
On 4/26/05, Pete Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> > Apps that use COM or ActiveX controls will never run on Mono.
> > Even if COM was there, the existing code that depends on the control
> > would require the control to be ported to some form of COM on Unix
> > (which
Hello,
> > Apps that use COM or ActiveX controls will never run on Mono.
> > Even if COM was there, the existing code that depends on the control
> > would require the control to be ported to some form of COM on Unix
> > (which to begin with is not available in a reusable form) and binaries
> >
Mike Shaver wrote:
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
endeavo
16 matches
Mail list logo
