Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Shared Source .NET Ported to Linux

Posted by timothy on from the everything-has-conditions dept.

bjepson writes: "Shaun Bangay of the Rhodes University Computer Science Department has released a port of Rotor for Linux. You can find more details, including a download, at the O'Reilly Network."

52 comments

  1. I really don't care - I can't use it. by zulux · · Score: 5, Interesting


    From the licence attached with Rotor:

    "You may not use or distribute this Software or any derivative works in any form for commercial purposes."

    Rotor on Linux is as about as usefull, to me, as a Corvette is on Mt. Everest.

    Except that the Corvette is cool, and Microsoft .NET is a spasdic mess of Windows APIs, p-code, neutered languages and FUD against Sun all wrapped in a license that sucks.

    --

    Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    1. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is it with the anti-commercial license freaks? Not even GNU is anti-commercial.

    2. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by SteveX · · Score: 2

      A spasdic mess of Windows APIs?

      Maybe you should try using it before you try to say something about it. Using the .NET framework you never see the Windows API - you see all new stuff. Pretty nice stuff too.

      Just as example implementations of a whole ton of core CS concepts and an example implementation of a working VM the Rotor source is useful. Go read some of it.

      - Steve

    3. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by borgboy · · Score: 1

      Its funny you mention FUD. Its bad enough that companies like MS and Oracle and (*gasp!*) even Sun employ those tactics, but I suppose they do it out of some twisted duty to their stockholders. Whats your reasoning?

      .Net is no more spastic mess than Java 2/J2EE

      --
      meh.
    4. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >"You may not use or distribute this Software or any derivative works in any form for commercial purposes."
      >Rotor on Linux is as about as usefull, to me, as a Corvette is on Mt. Everest.

      I assume you are an open source kind of guy. If yes, this license IS for you! You won't be able to do anything commercial. Only free stuff. Isn't that part of what you want anyway?

    5. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Steelgrave · · Score: 1

      I have to agree, .NET is simply the best tool out there for development (course it's also the newest to be fair). And from what I've seen, Java(a.k.a. Write once, debug everywhere) is more of a spastic mess than Visual Studio 6 ever was.

    6. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by zulux · · Score: 2

      I have to agree, .NET is simply the best tool out there for development

      Possibly - if you don't mind that any large .NET app is locked into a single operating system family running on a single hardware platform with a single language vendor.

      You say .NET is the best. Sure that may be true for limited values of best.

      In fact .NET is soooooo goooood that there are:

      No operating systems written with .NET
      No comercial games written with .NET
      No office suites written with .NET
      No drivers written with .NET
      No large apps at all with .NET except .NET itself

      (perhaps I'm wrong and someones cobbeled somthing together in these catagories, I don't keep active track)

      Come back later when you've actually written somthing non trvial with .NET and we can discuss it.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    7. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given the content of this story, .NET sounds like it's become "Write once, Debug everywhere (that you care about)" just like Java.

    8. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by zulux · · Score: 2

      Net is no more spastic mess than Java 2/J2EE

      You said it yourself. Not me.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    9. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Steelgrave · · Score: 1

      hmmmmmm Yeah.... Nevermind the fact it's been out for a couple months now... Oh and by the way, the IDE for VS.net was written in 100% C#, the compiler is not. If VS.net isn't a "large" app, I don't know what is (6 CD's) Maybe you should come back when you can show me a better tool for development instead of boo hoo-ing...

    10. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by zulux · · Score: 2

      Maybe you should come back when you can show me a better tool for development instead of boo hoo-ing...

      Come back when you get a few years experience. You will then realise that...

      1) Any language that is only, as you state, "a couple months" old has bugs...
      2) Now one developemnt enviroument can be the best at everything.
      3) Good programmers know mutiple tools and can pick and choose amung them.
      4) Your favorite tool for your favorite type of app can quite often be the worst tool for a diferent type of app.
      5) Non-crossplatform tools hurt you in the long run.

      I'm not imppressed at all the the IDE for the new Visual Studio is done in C#; C#, and more specifically, it's libraries were designed from the ground up to make 32-bit Windows GUI apps.

      Get back to me when someone writes a device driver in C#, then I'll be impressed.

      There's nothing wrong with C# if you're making quick and dirty 32-bit Windows apps, but to say is the 'best' at everything, especially when it won't even work for embedded applications, betrayes a lack of experience.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    11. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by thwart · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My answer to all of this nonsense is the following: Every programmer has his or her own preferences. In the end, does it really matter? Code written in assembly or binary might impress us, but otherwise, who cares? Freedom to choose is grand. Let's face the facts, and see that the only reason there is a dispute over .NET is that it is written by a company that is apparently trying to create a monopoly in nearly every market related to technology that it can. Just leave it at that.

    12. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Hellkitten · · Score: 1

      Open source doesn't mean non-commercial

      Most linux distros can be bought on a CD, that's commercial and they can't include anything that has a clause like this

      Any business that uses Apache as a webserver for e.g a webshop is using it for commercial purposes.

      If you have a private hompage running on apache but have a banner ad on it that pays you, you are using apache for commercial purposes

      --
      - We are the slashdot. Resistance is futile. Prepare to be moderated -
    13. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Get back to me when someone writes a device driver in C#, then I'll be impressed.
      Why on earth would you be impressed by that? C# isn't for writing device drivers. Anyone who chose to do that - and anyone who thinks that's a good measure of C#s usefulness - is a pretty poor developer.
    14. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know you'll probably feel all smart from being being modded to +5, but please realize, your ignorant ass just happened to be the first and loudest MS basher to post in this article. I hope you realize deep inside that you're actually an ignorant idiot, who is discussing technologies of which he has no grasp. Next time you try to speak, do us a favor and shut up.

    15. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come back when your stupid troll ass stops using lists as a way to get mod points.

      There is an embedded kit available for .NET, you can build any apps in it you want. No operating systems written in .NET? It's brand new. I can't quite figure out if you're just a flaming retard, or an elaborate TROLL.

    16. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by pmz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ... .NET is simply the best tool out there for development....

      This is true only if you do not care about risk. .NET is ruled by Microsoft; what happens when Microsoft is 1% of what it is today? Don't argue back with those "Microsoft is God and is immortal" type arguments, since Microsoft is a company like any other.

      If you work on an application that is really important to your company's long-term health, and you want your company to be successful regardless of Microsoft's success, then .NET is simply the worst development tool out there. A well-designed C or C++ application (i.e., modular UI) provides much better risk mitigation, since mature C and C++ environments exist on nearly every available platform. If one platform folds, much of your application should port to an new one trivially, and the rework will likely be in the user interface (a smaller task that dumping a .NET application and starting from scratch).

      --
      Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
    17. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by jd10131 · · Score: 1

      I've recently upgraded to VC++.NET I did so hoping that some of the issues I had to v6 would go away. I was pleased to learn that they did.

      I was horrified to learn that they had been replaced by far more severe bugs. I will list a few of the ones which perterb me more.

      - Cannot dock the properties window, the UI will hang when I switch from viewing a resource to a source file.

      - Intellisense is better than in v6, but doesn't resolve properly if you create a typedef to a parameter type

      - If the complete definition is not available for a class when you wish to pass it as a template parameter, the generated code will have no knowledge of that type. This is a problem if you define a CAutoPtr for some type for which you provide a forward declaration, but haven't included the header for that type beforehand. This is a bit of sneaky bitch, because the compiler will only create a given template once, and if it generates the one without the declaration, you're fsckd.

      - Finally, it just up and locks up on me. Usually after a build, I think. I've really started getting in the habit of saving. (I hit ctrl-s ever time I pause to think, lest the system be unresponsive the next time I touch the keyboard)

      So obviously C# is not the silver bullet. Neither is Java, mind you. The only cross-platform language is Perl (or Python, for those who's minds work that way)

      I can show you a better tool for development, it's not hard...there are so many. Apple gives on away. MetroWerks makes a schweet product. Even Borl...Inpri...Borland's stuff is better.

      Maybe my criteria for an IDE are different than yours.

    18. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sure like the word "ass" - is there somthing you not telling you Microsoft coworkers?

      I'll laugh when you get the "one" on your MS performance review - that is, if you not just a perma-temp.

      Ta Ta.

    19. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by larry+bagina · · Score: 1


      In fact .NET is soooooo goooood that there are:

      No operating systems written with .NET
      No comercial games written with .NET
      No office suites written with .NET
      No drivers written with .NET
      No large apps at all with .NET except .NET itself

      s/.NET/perl/g

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    20. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by macrom · · Score: 1

      The argument that MS could possibly be a small fraction of the entity it is today -- well, it's just plain lame. People jumped on the Sun/Java bandwagon when Java seemed like nothing more than the pipe dream of a PhD locked in a corner office somewhere. There are also highly successful companies that continue to develop for Apple's platforms. Microsoft may be diminished in the future, but by the time it becomes a serious non-competitor in the marketplace, .NET will be a thing of the past and we'll all be programming in something totally different.

      And who said that just because you use .NET your application won't be portable. Unless you're using a framework like Qt, the GUI code has to be rewritten for each platform. As much as you'd like to think that C/C++ will just transfer from one environment to the other, most good apps require some sort of reworking to take advantage of OS-specific APIs for more than just GUI stuff. I've been doing x-platform development for a while now and C++ makes it easier, but it's not the panacea that you seem to think it is. .NET simply makes it easier to write the MS-specific portions of you app, and you can do it in C++. The rest of your code can be whatever you want -- you just may be stuck writing some hooks between your Win32/64 code and you .NET code, which is not very difficult if you know what you're doing.

      Come up with a different argument than "Microsoft might possibly vanish in a puff of smoke just like the Earth did in Odyssey 5". Or at least back up your argument with more than ".NET is simply the worst development tool out there." So far I see no reason why I shouldn't rely on MS's new framework for parts of my next app based on your statements above.

    21. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You normally don't use JNI called to native GUIs in a web app.

    22. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by pmz · · Score: 1

      The argument that MS could possibly be a small fraction of the entity it is today -- well, it's just plain lame.

      It isn't "lame", because my argument is that using another company's success as the basis for your own success is just plain risky. Could Microsoft--or any company--be here today but not here tomorrow? Sure, recent history (Enron, Global Crossing, the dot-bombs, etc.) makes this clear. Microsoft is not immune to the discoveries of corruption (Enron) nor to the market forces (dot-bombs) that can make a company fall.

      As far as Java/J2EE goes, it is less risky than .NET, because Sun doesn't have total control over it. Sun's competitors are some of Sun's biggest licensing customers, and there are fewer single points of failure with Java than .NET.

      And who said that just because you use .NET your application won't be portable.

      Microsoft. It is extremely unlikely that .NET will be any different than prior Microsoft-imposed standards, unless there is a radical turnover of Microsoft's management.

      As much as you'd like to think that C/C++ will just transfer from one environment to the other, most good apps require some sort of reworking to take advantage of OS-specific APIs for more than just GUI stuff. I've been doing x-platform development for a while now and C++ makes it easier, but it's not the panacea that you seem to think it is.

      I never claimed C++ is a panacea but said that it can allow much less rework when used well (i.e., good C/C++ environments are common, good .NET environments are not). OS-specifics should be contained, so that the rework isn't such that it kills your product. Qt can be a great tool to this end.

      .NET simply makes it easier to write the MS-specific portions of you app.

      This could be one legitimate use of .NET, where it is peripheral to the rest of your application. Again, my point was about controlling risk. .NET is simply inappropriate as the "framework" of an application. It should not be the development tool.

      --
      Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
    23. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by xtremex · · Score: 1

      After spending a grand on VS6 Enterprise, and a grand on Delphi/Kylix I refuse to spend a grand on .NET when VS6 is still useable....but I do 95% of my devel on Linux now anyway. If there exists a cost-effective .NET IDE for Linux, I'll get it. To even LEARN .NET I have to spend at least $500...and unemployment sort of makes that an impossibility

      --
      If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
    24. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by lynnroth · · Score: 1

      Check out the GPL SharpDevelop, a IDE for .NET written in C#.
      MS also makes the .NET Framework SDK available for download, which is all you really need to develop for .NET.
      I have been using these for several months with no problem.

    25. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Mark+Pitman · · Score: 1
      Oh and by the way, the IDE for VS.net was written in 100% C#, the compiler is not.

      Visual Studio .Net was not written in C#. It was written in C++. A lot of the .Net Framework is written in C# though.

    26. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by Zamfir · · Score: 1

      should i not buy a general motors vehicle, because what if general motors could go out of business and won't be able to service my automobile? grow up.

    27. Re:I really don't care - I can't use it. by fuali · · Score: 0

      Maybe you are just upset that maybe microsoft worked hard to release a devolopment platform that every "REAL" developer that has actually work with enjoys.

      A) It's not meant to write OS's or drivers. B) It's brand new and not perfect. C) Right tool, Right Job.

      If you don't understand Point "C" then you just don't get much.

  2. Oooooooooh well. by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 2

    This is the biggest disaster since the conception of Windows.

  3. having played with .Net by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I played with MapPoint.Net and wasn't all that impressed. In fact, if you look at the examples provided on web documentation it's a joke. Not that the code is bad or doesn't work. It's just that the examples are 500+ lines in an ASP page. Now all the old problems with ASP pages being slow and bloated hasn't been fixed. They still aren't encouraging good coding practices.

    In fact, when I contacted the support people, they recommend copy and pasting their example and using it as is. The C# code looks fine. It's just that it shouldn't be in an ASP page.

    1. Re:having played with .Net by SteveX · · Score: 2

      Putting a ton of code in a page is a pretty silly thing to do, even in an example.. but ASP.NET makes it easy to do code-behind (and the tools do it by default).

      Write a "Web Form" with Visual Studio.NET and you get a .aspx page which is basically marked up HTML (ala JSP) with the code implemented as a class that gets compiled into bytecode.

      Best thing about this is the ASP.NET code has access to the same class library as any other app.. so it's really easy to do things like get a graphics object, render some stuff into it, convert it into a jpeg and stream it back to the client. Stuff that'd be nearly impossible with ASP.

      (There are toolkits to do this for ASP, the same as there are for Perl and other languages - the difference in this case is that the ASP.NET code is calling the same drawing functions that any other non-web application would be calling.. not calling through a wrapper etc).

      - Steve

    2. Re:having played with .Net by Khazunga · · Score: 1
      the difference in this case is that the ASP.NET code is calling the same drawing functions that any other non-web application would be calling.. not calling through a wrapper etc).

      The big question now is:
      How does a BSODed Webserver look like, when viewed from a browser?

      --
      If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you
    3. Re:having played with .Net by Lando · · Score: 2

      So it's not called through a wrapper. And why exactly does this make a difference? When I use php I'm making a call to the GD libraries, so there is a bit of a wrapper in there, it hardly effects the time it takes to send back an image.

      I don't see that this is any advantage.

      Lando

      --
      /* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */
    4. Re:having played with .Net by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good question. I wouldn't know though as I've never seen a Windows NT 4.0 or 2000 server BSOD from anything other than faulty hardware/drivers.

    5. Re:having played with .Net by xtremex · · Score: 1

      Then you haven't used either nT or 2k enough. Sure, I havent seen BSOD's either, but they are different in the NT world. Ever have a hive corruption in 2k?? Not very pleasant

      --
      If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
    6. Re:having played with .Net by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would have to disagree. .Net code calling other .Net code, being loaded into the VM, and JIT'd is just as good as having a wrapper. =)

  4. subversive plan by tongue · · Score: 2

    Yup, that's what M$ intended alright... contaminate as many programmers as possible by exposing them to the rotor libraries, so they can claim copyright infringement on anyone working on free implementations. not a bad plan, actually...

    1. Re:subversive plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Slashdot should implement a filter, where any post that includes M$ should be moderated as -1 Flamebait. What are your thoughts on that? Just kidding, I know you don't have thoughts.

  5. How can I benefit? by Domini · · Score: 2

    Does anyone know how I can benefit from this?

    Specifically I would like to offer customers solutions using Python. But if they want .NET integration, what do I tell them? It's not possible at all?

    I'd prefer not to lie to customers.

    If I could tell them that it's possible, at a price, that would be something! My customers would be prepared to pay! Not that they may ever need it once I get them their Zope/Python sites, mind you. I just want to leave them the option.

    Firstly, what would I have to do (pay) to get .NET commercially for Linux (Python)?

    Secondly, is it even possible to get .NET integration going in an effective manner? Are there tools/wrappers?

    1. Re:How can I benefit? by flacco · · Score: 2
      Does anyone know how I can benefit from this?

      With Microsoft Rotor, you will leverage your synergies to a higher ROI on your brain-share throughputs - now with new patented Microsoft "Shit-In-A-Box" Technology*!

      * Microsoft Rotor "Shit-In-A-Box" technology includes intellectual property licensed from Star Trek Ear-worm Developer Systems, Inc.

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    2. Re:How can I benefit? by zulux · · Score: 2

      Specifically I would like to offer customers solutions using Python. But if they want .NET integration, what do I tell them? It's not possible at all?

      Perhaps if you can't bring .NET to Unix, you could bring Unix to .NET via Cygwin?

      You'd still be running a 'chalenged' server software, but it's an option.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    3. Re:How can I benefit? by cduffy · · Score: 1

      You could use XML-RPC or somesuch to connect between Python and .NET code -- or wait for a .NET-based Python implementation (and, preferably, a good Linux .NET environment) and use your existing code then.

    4. Re:How can I benefit? by Hippie-Artist · · Score: 1

      ActiveState is working on a python implementation for dotnet.
      http://www.activestate.com/Corporate/Init iatives/N ET/Research.html?_x=1

  6. Can't Wait by Retard+Sevant · · Score: 1

    I don't know about you all, but I can't wait until Linux has the blue screen of death so I can see exactly why it crashed.

    1. Re:Can't Wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAHAHA.. BSOD = Microsoft, you're the funniest and most original poster Slashdot has ever seen. Err .. lamest.

  7. Taxonomy of OS crashes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or rather, user attitude during crash.

    Windows:

    -- Please, don't let it crash this time again! Let it compile just once without me having to reboot! I think it's gonna happen this time! Yes! Yes! Yes! Wha...? Nooooo! BSoD!

    Linux:

    Ok, hmmm, er, this guy is doing 1800x1440? Ok, if he can do it... But what if the system hangs? Well, it hasn't crashed since long. Oh, what the heck, I'll do it! Let's see... startx... what? no Ctrl-Alt-Del? Sigh... Well, fsck time!

  8. Trivial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course, since FreeBSD is a reference platform it is obviously easy to build it under Linux.

  9. Still not interested by HappyPhunBall · · Score: 1

    If I wanted to play with .NET, I would be running Windows right now. I'm not. I don't.