Looking for a download to MONO Runtime 3.2 but I just can find this for Mac.
See HERE
Are there no releases for Linux/Windows ?
Are there no releases for Linux?
The tarball is all you need to use/install Mono in Linux.
If what you want is that your favourite distro imports this version of Mono into its packaging system (e.g.: apt-get), then you would need to ask in the forums, mailing lists or other online resources about that distro.
Are there no releases for Windows?
First, I will ask you another question, are you sure do you really need Mono for Windows? For most use cases, Windows already bundles .NET into the last versions. Furthermore, Mono for Windows is not a top priority platform for the Mono team and may lack features or have worse performance than on Linux/Mac. Therefore Mono for windows is only really useful for certain uncommon scenarios.
If you're really interested in those uncommon use cases, then keep bugging Mono maintainers in their forums, mailing lists or IRC, to remind them to package it (it's not really a priority anymore since this platform is not something they target with their commercial offerings).
UPDATE: A Xamarin employee stated that the installer would be available when version 3.2.3 is released, and they complied with their promise because 3.2.3 has been released and the windows installer is available in the download page.
Related
In the past we used BZR 2.6b1 on Windows for many of our professional projects.
This turned out to not be a good choice, and some of our projects suffered when we encountered some bugs in BZR 2.6, which might have been specific to the Windows version, or might not. Years passed, the bugs never got fixed, and so we began to migrating to git.
However, some of our older projects are still in Bazaar, and having returned to the Bazaar website for the first time in 2.5 years, I can see there is now a 2.7.0 release, but no Windows version of it.
I can see this message on the Ubuntu mailing-list, in which somebody has mentioned their intention to build 2.7.0 for Windows, but the mailing-list thread ends without a conclusion.
So the question is, short of compiling it myself, has anyone ever created a Windows version of 2.7.0, as an installer or archive of compiled binaries, and is it still available?
There are no Windows installers for Bazaar 2.7 as far as I know. We're likely to build installers for Breezy (a friendly fork of Bazaar that is active) on Windows once it is ready for release, but that may take a couple of months.
Firstly, I saw some topics about these two but weren't my answer.
I'm looking for a good FPC(Free Pascal Compiler) IDE on GNU/Linux.
There are some IDE's like Lazarus and CodeTyphon. I need suggestion to choose one of those.
I've tried Lazarus once but all windows was separated. It looks messy and not interesting.
I would like to know what are the distinguishes between these two ?
I would like to know advantages / disadvantages each of those. Thank you
CodeTyphon is a distro of Lazarus, like Ubuntu and Debian are distros of Linux.
CodeTyphon comes with a large package of components and plugins, that otherwise you would have to google and download and install.
CodeTyphon have their own idea what are stable versions and what are not stable yet for both of FPC (compiler) and Lazarus(IDE). Whether their assessment is better or worse than upstream's Lazarus Team's, I don't know.
What about one-single-window plugin, it is work-in-progress and it doesn't seems to me it is ready for production use, no matter would you get it as part of CT or download and add it to vanilla Lazarus. However maybe it better works on Linux than on Windows, I don't know.
There were however issues with code legality in CT grande bundle. It is widely believed that Orca (if I remember the name) violates copyrights of glScene/vgScene, which also happened in early Delphi FMX releases but was fixed by EMBA later. There also were disputes in FPC forums/wiki about CodeTyphon pirating some open-source components. See answer by Peter Dunne below.
Your question is akin to asking the difference between Linux and Ubuntu. Lazarus is an IDE/component library, based on FreePascal (FPC). And CodeTyphon is a distribution of Lazarus and FPC. So CodeTyphon is just one way to install a functioning installation of Lazarus.
Lazarus uses the same floating window design as older versions of Delphi. Installing from CodeTyphon won't change that.
Myself and several friends highlighted several licensing issues with codetyphon
most of which could have been corrected by sourcing the included files from known good source and ensuring the correct license headers were included
PirateLogic refused to correct the issues which means they are using code in direct violation of the original license terms
The fact its open source code does not change the fact they are pirating the code by not including the correct license even after the issue was highlighted
I also found several instances of copyright code included which appears to be proprietary and not FOSS at all
They also changed the path & file names on some libraries so that source is no longer compatible with standard lazarus/component installs
This in my view is totally illogical
These 2 factors heavily undermine what was potentially the best FPC/Lazarus distro
Hardly professional
Lazarus can be a daunting installation process due to it's nature as a cross compiling environment. You don't just download an installer and click ok. A typical "installation" is actually a bootstrap FPC compiler doing a three-pass compilation of an "install". There are plenty of good installation scripts/methods from the official Lazarus/FPC team and in the community for a . But, understandably, the installation process is a skill in itself.
CodeTyphon is a a different/separate branch of an installer system, which is more of a utility suite/tools/third party code compilation library. If you want the simplest installation experience go with CodeTyphon. It has the nice graphical front end for managing the compiler. You can conveniently do the fancy stuff like build "cross-compilers" for almost every "target" operating system out there. It also is jam packed with hundreds of the best components/libraries pre-installed. It is a very actively maintained project and very professional. A whole lot of work is done for you.
Even if you want to be learn the low level compiler capabilities, CodeTyphon is a good place to start. It is written in FCP/Lazarus and is open source. Simply study it as "working demo app" and the other info on the compiler details. If you crash it, at least you don't have to learn to climb the hill. You get to get to start from the top and lose control on the way down. Start from scratch (and a three hour reinstallation) Hahaha
Lazarus also has a package "AnchorDock" which allows you to dock all the windows into one. Either install the anchor dock design package after installing Lazarus, or install Lazarus using the script at getlazarus.org which will do it for you.
Some questions about Simple.Data and Mono:
Can I safely choose Simple.Data for a new project using Mono today?
There is the intention to maintain Mono compatibility in future versions?
The features are the same as the version for Windows?
Some testimony from someone who has already used in Mono?
Many thanks!
There will be a new official Mono build soon as part of the RC process. For now you should be able to clone the GitHub repo (http://github.com/markrendle/Simple.Data) and build the latest version.
Mono support is a requirement of the project, and will continue in all future versions.
Everything that works on Windows and MS.NET should work on Mono on OSX and Linux. If you find that something does not work, that is a bug and should be reported at http://github.com/markrendle/Simple.Data/Issues .
I have not personally got any projects using Simple.Data on Mono, so I can't offer a real testimony, but there are ~700 tests which all pass using Mono 2.10 on Mac OSX against a SQL Server DB.
The mono installation provided at mono-project.com comes packed with several libraries, such as gkt, making the installation quite large (~280MB or so).
Is there any way to provide users with an installation of "just" the mono environment? I am targeting Windows, MacOSX and Linux.
You might be looking for mkbundle which merges your application, the libraries it uses and the Mono runtime into a single executable image. See under "Bundles" in that page.
If you do this though, it may mean that you are distributing LGPL code with all that this implies.
If you are distributing your app for Mac OS X, there is also MonoMacPackager which offers more advanced support for this. I think they have done a bunch of work in the linker to really minimize the amount of Mono that you have to include. It will actually remove unused code from assemblies that you reference.
I have a friend who is was a serious Linux developer but now he's working with C# on Windows and is really loving it. I'm attracted to C# because, like Java, I should be able to compile on one system and run anywhere.
If you are developing on Windows with C#, you're using dot-Net. On Linux and MacOS, you're using Mono.
Other people have posted that Mono is pretty good, no longer a science project, and that most of the core Microsoft functionality is present. But that's not really getting at the questions that I have. I'm wondering:
How does performance of Mono on Linux/MacOS rate against Java? If I want to run fast on all three platforms with the same object code, what's my best choice?
Is it easy/possible/reasonable to use Mono with makefiles and do my development with emacs?
Is there support for code factoring in MacOS and Linux, or am I better off just biting the bullet and doing all of my development in Windows?
How well does Mono work with Subversion and the rest of the open source development stack? How about autoconf? Or is this a completely different way of doing things?
Thanks
I have been using Mono on Linux for about three years and lately have been using it on OS X. Some of the Linux stuff was pretty extensive but the OS X stuff has just been some simple ASP.NET MVC2 apps so far.
1) Performance of Mono has never been an issue for me. That is not to say that performance has not been important, it is just that the performance of Mono itself has never been an issue. A lot of what I have done is web based so I/O and database memory use have hit me before Mono has.
Historically, the biggest deficiency with Mono has been the Garbage Collector (GC). I would say that Java is better tuned in this regard. The most recent versions of Mono have made huge strides in this area but I do not have any hard numbers for you in terms of comparisons.
I am sure Mono is faster sometimes and Java sometimes but I would say that Java is faster overall.
2) You can certainly do Mono development with makefiles. Certainly the Mono team itself does. Also you can certainly use Emacs and there is a C# mode for it.
I tend to use MonoDevelop and xbuild (Mono version of msbuild) myself and do not have any experience doing C# work in Emacs. MonoDevelop is great because it is exactly the same on all platforms. Also, although I rarely use it anymore, it is nice that the project format is the same as Visual Studio and SharpDevelop.
3) MonoDevelop has pretty decent code factoring support. It is the same on Windows, Linux, and Mac. You do not need to use Windows for development (though you certainly can) but I believe you will be happier using an IDE like MonoDevelop. Even things like Intellisense become hard to live without once you are used to them. But integrated debugging, being able to drill-down into the framework, database integration, unit testing, SCM integration, and other nice tooling support all in one place is just the way to go (for me at least).
4) Mono itself does not care about version control of course. Your source files are just text and you could use anything to manage them.
That said, MonoDevelop has fantastic Subversion support built right into the IDE. I have used it extensively and it is one of the reasons I have trouble moving off MonoDevelop even on Windows. The latest version of MonoDevelop (2.6 beta) includes Git support as well.
You did not mention unit testing but MonoDevelop also has NUnit support built into the IDE. I use that on every project as well and it works excellently. The version in MonoDevelop is 2.4.8 (if memory serves) so it is not quite current but it works great.
In a nutshell, Mono works really well with Open Source tooling in general. It has always played really well for me.
Autoconf is of course used by the Mono project itself but, as a Mono developer, I have never seen a need for it. I strive to only use managed code in my projects. As such, all I need on the target platform is Mono (or .NET). Not having to worry about all that stuff is one of the primary benefits of a managed environment like Mono or Java. The runtime itself (the CLR) ensures that my app has everything it needs to function properly.
I know that MonoDevelop will build autoconf/autorun files for C/C++ projects (non-Mono) but I have not done much with it myself.
As to a previous comment, the Mono JIT is obviously tuned to the target platform. That is where platform specific performance tuning happens.
Just as a comment, I find that Mono is best viewed as a development environment in it's own right rather than a compatibility layer for Microsoft stuff. The Mono team has extended .NET in many interesting ways. Anything you develop for Mono will run on .NET but there are some .NET features not available for Mono. For example, Mono does not support Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF). You have to use Windows Forms or GTK# for cross-platform GUI work. You can also use something like Cocoa# or MonoMac on the Mac, MonoTouch on iPhone, or MonoDroid for Android. You can use Moonlight instead of Silverlight as well although I have not played with it much.
One more thing since you asked about Java. I have found a few times that the Java world had libraries that I could not find equivalents for in the .NET world. In these cases, I have had amazing luck using IKVM.NET to integrate this into my Mono apps. IKVM.NET also works on .NET but Mono and IKVM.NET are very cozy and even share some code.
So there you go, one real answer for you at least.