Will Mono 2.0 (rc) be included in 8.10?

Asked by Paul Lange on 2008-09-09

Will Mono 2.0 wbe included in Intrepid?

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Solved
For:
Ubuntu mono Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Solved by:
Paul Lange
Solved:
2008-09-10
Last query:
2008-09-10
Last reply:
2008-09-10

Id say so in the repo but I dont know if its enabled by default.

Paul Lange (palango) said : #2

Isn't Mono installed by default?
I think there is only one Version ?!

I think 1 is. 2.0 is in its beta stage and is available in the intrepid(8.10) repo I just checked.

Paul Lange (palango) said : #4

Thank you.

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #5

Sorry, but the answer to this one is "no". Intrepid will ship with 1.9.1

Mono has a little bit of a reputation when it comes to slightly... unready... releases. We apply a HUGE number of patches to our Mono packages to make them usable. Our main focus with Ubuntu is to have the best user experience possible, and since Mono is used mainly as a framework for desktop apps (F-Spot and Tomboy are installed by default), we think it's more important to ship a stable, reliable platform for those apps than to update to a new Mono release without having time to test it.

After Intrepid, and more importantly after Debian Lenny, then work will begin on 2.0 packaging, at the pkg-mono HQ in Debian. Once we're happy with those packages, then third party repositories (like my PPA) will start to offer 2.0 packages for older releases.

Paul Lange (palango) said : #6

Thank you for this information.

Is there a way to be notified if third-party repositories offer 2.0 packages?

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #7

On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 20:21 +0000, Paul Lange wrote:
> Question #44628 on mono in ubuntu changed:
> https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mono/+question/44628
>
> Paul Lange posted a new comment:
> Thank you for this information.
>
> Is there a way to be notified if third-party repositories offer 2.0
> packages?

No automated way, no. It's possible I won't be the first to offer it -
and my repositories only cover version 8.04. There's no way to know who
and where will be hosting such things.

Its in the repo for 8.10 I have it installed and mono develop.
Im very sure..

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #9

On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 10:09 +0000, shane fagan wrote:
> Question #44628 on mono in ubuntu changed:
> https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mono/+question/44628
>
> shane fagan posted a new comment:
> Its in the repo for 8.10 I have it installed and mono develop.
> Im very sure..

Given it's my package, I'm more sure.

8.10 is shipping with the current stable releases of Mono and MD - 1.9.1
and 1.0 respectively.

Mono 1.9.x is not a 2.0 beta or release candidate.

2.0 is in the repo I have it installed

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #11

Can you point it out on https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mono/+publishinghistory ?

Care to give the output from "dpkg -l mono-jit" ?

It gave me an error..
| Status=Not/Inst/Cfg-files/Unpacked/Failed-cfg/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-==============-==============-============================================
But I re-checked it and the package is there and installed

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #13

Output from `which mono` ?

"/usr/bin/mono"

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #15

On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 12:47 +0000, shane fagan wrote:
> Question #44628 on mono in ubuntu changed:
> https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mono/+question/44628
>
> shane fagan posted a new comment:
> "/usr/bin/mono"

"dpkg -S usr/bin/mono" ?

mono-2.0-devel: /usr/bin/monop2
mono-2.0-service: /usr/bin/mono-service2
monodoc-base: /usr/bin/monodocer
mono-jit: /usr/bin/mono
monodoc-browser: /usr/bin/monodoc
monodoc-base: /usr/bin/monodocs2html
mono-2.0-devel: /usr/bin/mono-api-info2
monodoc-base: /usr/bin/monodocs2slashdoc
monodevelop: /usr/bin/monodevelop

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #17

On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 13:08 +0000, shane fagan wrote:
> Question #44628 on mono in ubuntu changed:
> https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mono/+question/44628
>
> shane fagan posted a new comment:
> mono-2.0-devel: /usr/bin/monop2
> mono-2.0-service: /usr/bin/mono-service2
> monodoc-base: /usr/bin/monodocer
> mono-jit: /usr/bin/mono
> monodoc-browser: /usr/bin/monodoc
> monodoc-base: /usr/bin/monodocs2html
> mono-2.0-devel: /usr/bin/mono-api-info2
> monodoc-base: /usr/bin/monodocs2slashdoc
> monodevelop: /usr/bin/monodevelop

apt-cache policy mono-jit

  Installed: 1.9.1+dfsg-3ubuntu2
  Candidate: 1.9.1+dfsg-3ubuntu2
  Version table:
 *** 1.9.1+dfsg-3ubuntu2 0
        500 http://ie.archive.ubuntu.com intrepid/main Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
     1.2.4-6ubuntu6.1 0
        500 http://security.ubuntu.com gutsy-security/main Packages

Thats not right..

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #19

On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 14:21 +0000, shane fagan wrote:
> Question #44628 on mono in ubuntu changed:
> https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mono/+question/44628
>
> shane fagan posted a new comment:
> Installed: 1.9.1+dfsg-3ubuntu2
> Candidate: 1.9.1+dfsg-3ubuntu2
> Version table:
> *** 1.9.1+dfsg-3ubuntu2 0
> 500 http://ie.archive.ubuntu.com intrepid/main Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> 1.2.4-6ubuntu6.1 0
> 500 http://security.ubuntu.com gutsy-security/main Packages
>
> Thats not right..

"mono --version"

Mono JIT compiler version 1.9.1 (tarball)
Copyright (C) 2002-2007 Novell, Inc and Contributors. www.mono-project.com
 TLS: __thread
 GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC)
 SIGSEGV: altstack
 Notifications: epoll
 Architecture: x86
 Disabled: none

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #21

On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 20:12 +0000, shane fagan wrote:
> Question #44628 on mono in ubuntu changed:
> https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mono/+question/44628
>
> shane fagan posted a new comment:
> Mono JIT compiler version 1.9.1 (tarball)
> Copyright (C) 2002-2007 Novell, Inc and Contributors. www.mono-project.com
> TLS: __thread
> GC: Included Boehm (with typed GC)
> SIGSEGV: altstack
> Notifications: epoll
> Architecture: x86
> Disabled: none

So, 15 replies after I said Intrepid would come with Mono 1.9.1, and 12
after you insisted I was wrong and that it was 2.0, what conclusion have
we reached?

But still I have to say its installed
mono-2.0-devel: /usr/bin/monop2
mono-2.0-service: /usr/bin/mono-service2
monodoc-base: /usr/bin/monodocer
mono-jit: /usr/bin/mono
monodoc-browser: /usr/bin/monodoc
monodoc-base: /usr/bin/monodocs2html
mono-2.0-devel: /usr/bin/mono-api-info2
monodoc-base: /usr/bin/monodocs2slashdoc
monodevelop: /usr/bin/monodevelop

mono-jit is 1.9.1
The rest is 2.0

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #23

Nice theory, only stopped by little details like the inability of mono core components to be mixed and matched, and the package Depends lines explicitly preventing it:

Package: libmono-corlib2.0-cil
Depends: mono-jit (>= 1.9.1), mono-jit (<< 1.9.2)

The 2.0 in the package *names* (not in package versions) refers to the version of .NET those packages are compatible with. mono-1.0-devel is for working on .NET 1.1 apps, mono-2.0-devel is for .NET 2.0 apps. It is *NOT*, in *ANY* way, related to the mono version. The first Debian packages with (basic) support for 2.0 applications was 1.1.8.1-1, in 2005/07/03 (the first version to ship with a mono-classlib-2.0 package) - Ubuntu has never shipped a mono version older than 1.1.8.3-1 (2005/09/06), and has therefore NEVER shipped without limited support for .NET 2.0

Try it. "dpkg -l \*mono\* | grep ^ii" will return ONLY 1.9.1 packages, with the exception of monodoc which is still 1.2.6 in Intrepid (despite my best efforts to have a more recent package uploaded swiftly).

You're arguing, with one of the guys from the Debian Mono Packaging team, one of the main people working on updating Mono in Intrepid, and one of the people with his name in the changelog for the package you're talking about, that not only is he wrong, but so is launchpad.net's publication history, packages.ubuntu.com, and even archive.ubuntu.com.

I repeat, from 11 hours ago: "Given it's my package, I'm more sure."

DoDoENT (dodoentertainment) said : #24

See here: http://www.mono-project.com/Release_Notes_Mono_2.0

Looks like 2.0 is out. Will it then be in Intrepid? Will it come into hardy's repositories?

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #25

No and No, in that order. Not in any official repository for either.

DoDoENT (dodoentertainment) said : #26

Well, I don't understand why you don't want to introduce mono 2.0 in intrepid. It's not RC anymore, it's not beta anymore. It's final and it's STABLE. Why not offering people a full .NET experience that mono 2.0 offers? Is it so complicated?

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #27

On Tue, 2008-10-07 at 19:05 +0000, DoDoENT wrote:
> Question #44628 on mono in ubuntu changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mono/+question/44628
>
> DoDoENT posted a new comment:
> Well, I don't understand why you don't want to introduce mono 2.0 in
> intrepid. It's not RC anymore, it's not beta anymore. It's final and
> it's STABLE. Why not offering people a full .NET experience that mono
> 2.0 offers? Is it so complicated?

Complicated? Yes, it is.

1.9.1 is "STABLE", and also needs 19 patches applied against it in order
to work right. How many patches does 2.0 need? Do YOU know the answer?
Because we don't - and that's why we haven't finished preparing even
remotely pre-alpha test packages for Debian yet. There's definitely at
least one major licensing problem we need to resolve so far revealed by
analysis.

Feature Freeze exists for a reason - and so close to release, sticking
in major (untested) packages into Main is madness

DoDoENT (dodoentertainment) said : #28

Well, you're right.

Then I'll have to wait until someone puts mono 2.0 in their PPA soon.

deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/firerabbit/ubuntu intrepid main

this one own mono 2.0 but not monodevelop

Jo Shields (directhex) said : #30

On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 09:05 +0000, popi31 wrote:
> Question #44628 on mono in ubuntu changed:
> https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mono/+question/44628
>
> popi31 posted a new comment:
> deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/firerabbit/ubuntu intrepid main
>
> this one own mono 2.0 but not monodevelop
>

be extremely wary of the above packages - they contain myriad packaging
errors, and you won't get any support if they cause problems when
upgrading to Jaunty.

Kai (ilya.skorik) said : #31

In Ubunti it is necessary to make the unstable repo. What not to wait year or two while anybody will buid mono2.0.