Running .NET on FreeBSD?

Dan writes "Interesting read on running .NET on FreeBSD. Chip Morton thinks this could be very beneficial to FreeBSD or any OS to have a fully functional .NET CLR (Common Language Runtime) environment. With over 9,000 files, and including some 1300 public classes to pore through, the Shared Source CLI (Common Language Infrastructure) can teach you quite a bit about the internal workings of the CLR. This relevant MSDN article discusses some of the things you can learn from the source code facsimile of the CLR, like how JIT compilation works. One thing that the CLI specification does not mandate is that managed code has to run on Windows. To prove this point, Microsoft built the Shared Source CLI to compile and run on FreeBSD Unix as well as Windows XP."

Comments

Old News

[Mark Pitman]

And this is news because???? The article on MSDN was posted in July of 2002! Is there something new about Rotor on BSD that I am missing?

Re:Old News

[glenstar]

Unfortunately...no. And to add insult to injury, I found it impossible to actually build Rotor on FreeBSD (most likely something with my system configuration). However, Mono compiles flawlessly, so if you want to go that route it works very well.

There has got to be a catch..

[override11]

You can only run .net on BSD if you are emulating it under a licensed Windows .Net Server

Anyone else this there is going to be some kind of gotcha??

Re:There has got to be a catch..

[REBloomfield]

no catch! this is actually the point of the .NET framework, right once, run anywhere, what Java tried, and never quite achieved :(

The only 'catch' is that there needs to be a native virtual machine, which most platforms (apart from MS) don't have yet, but check out the Mono project for a Linux implementation.

Re:There has got to be a catch..

[rplacd]

Mono works on FreeBSD-i386. I've been using it off and on for several months.

The only real "catch" is the Windows.Forms libraries (this affects mono on Linux as well). You basically need Wine or something for them. Otherwise, for GUI stuff, you can use gtk#.

Re:There has got to be a catch..

[Arandir]

what Java tried, and never quite achieved

And of course, .NET hasn't achieved it either. Same overblown hype different framework.

Re:There has got to be a catch..

[evronm]

Otherwise, for GUI stuff, you can use gtk#

Any experience with this? Is it anywhere near ready for prime time?

Re:There has got to be a catch..

[f00zbll]

I hope you don't really think there's no catch. It doesn't matter what language or platform you choose, there's always a catch. The catch may not be relevant to your project, but there's always a catch.

There's still alot of catches in there, like how would ADO.NET work? Yes, I know ADO.NET isn't part of CL and is a library build on .NET. You have to ask yourself, "How am I going to connect to a database? What kind of databases have ADO.NET support? How can I leverage existing libraries written in other languages? Does it provide robust server threading model? Are there starndard API's for server management? Are there webservers written to take advantage of .NET on non-windows OS?"

There's a catch alright. About several hundred catches.

Re:There has got to be a catch..

[slick_rick]

right once, run anywhere, what Java tried, and never quite achieved :(

Stop modding the FUD up. The last time I checked Java ran on everything from stamp to Windows, Linux, Solaris, Macintosh, Palm, even OS/2.

So what does .NET run on? Windows, Linux, maybe BSD. And even then the GUI stuff isn't portable (by design BTW).

DONT SPREAD THE FUD. Java is far more portable then .NET ever will be.

There's already a Unix like JVM out there

[DrSkwid]

Lucent made a product called Inferno

http://www.vitanuova.com/inferno

it virtualizes the whole of the OS, not just a few APIs

it had a graphics context as well

it hijacks the hosted environment, running in a window or runs natively on hardware either way they are the same.

Socket programming, pah who needs it, all we need are file descriptors and auto-selecting files

it's all there

the source code is only available for a fee

it's really what Java & .NET should be but they aren't and it is

The real reason for this, of course...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is because Microsoft needs FreeBSD to run Hotmail's backend.

get yer hands out of my server closet

[ubiquitin]

Call me skeptical, but did occur to anyone else that Microsoft picked FreeBSD because
1) they despise the GPL for what it represents and
2) Mono is being developed on Linux?

Don't get me wrong, I run several FreeBSD servers and prefer the ports system over RPM. It just unnerves me when the Microsoft marketing machine starts mucking around on my chosen platform.

As a postscript, you all should be aware that PHP may well become the best platform for deploying .NET. Here's why and here's why this is irrelevant.

Re:get yer hands out of my server closet

[Realistic_Dragon]

"Don't get me wrong, I run several FreeBSD servers and prefer the ports system over RPM."

Linux has now stolen the ports system and done a pretty good job of it becuase RPM does indeed fellate not only donkeys, but dead donkeys.

I will not be kicking BSD off my server any time soon, but for a desktop Gentoo (and indeed Source Mage, Lunar Linux, the no-longer-GPL Sourcery, and to a lesser extent Debian) is pretty polished.

Hotmail doesnt run on FreeBSD

[Anonymous Coward]

Case Study on the migration of hotmail to Windows 2000

Re:Hotmail doesnt run on FreeBSD

[Anonymous Coward]

That is all nice and well, but Microsoft still uses and runs FreeBSD internally.
All you have to do is visit Netcraft to find proof for my claim.
It is very easy to confirm.

Re:Easy de-compilation?

[Casca1]

All so Bill can say "MS Owns your *BSD"

Re:Easy de-compilation?

[Beetjebrak]

The BSD license permits him to do this already.

1. Download freebsd ISO-file
2. rename to MS_BSD.ISO
3. Profit?

Re:And why are we dignifying .NET ??

[mnmn]

OK, even if it IS gaining ground,(which is not my belief), why should we still dignify a proprietary protocol there? If what you say is true (doubt it), .NET might be gaining ground through the help of unsure programmers looking around for APIs of the richest corporations that wont disappear in the next 5 years. Youre contributing to the viscious cycle, in favor of a monopolizing power, using one of the freeest operating systems.

Re:And why are we dignifying .NET ??

[magadass]

Your a fucken idiot... I can tell you one thing for sure .NET will overtake Sun's bullshit excuse for a language (Java) and incorporate it into many other operating systems in the such. Stuck in proprietary? Dude WTF do you think Java is? SUN is proprietary just as Microsoft, hell Sun even takes people to court left and right to protect their precious Java. Ok back to what I was talking about. .Net is gaining superior ground, most government agency's are switching over to .Net and dropping Java and I know this for a fact. Also Huge corporations like mine (HP) for instance are asking the majority of their employees to get .Net certified. Java is loosing its foothold! Why? #1: Backwards compatability between Runtime versions is Horrible!! a program will work in version 1.3.1 but wont work in 1.3.5 or any versions there after!
#2: It is slower than hell!!
#3: SUN itself is losing its foot in the market. Only holding about 3% of the market share now for server related products!

My key points and you can fight them all you want.. But one thing stand clear is that you have a clounded view on things and are refusing to take yur head outta yur ass to take a look at the big picture and with yur racist outlook towards Microsoft it seems you will not likely have much of a career left if you have one at all...

Re:And why are we dignifying .NET ??

[sdkone]

Proprietary? When did we start talking about the JVM?

ISO/IEC CLI standard

But then you did call the CLI/.NET a "protocol" so I'm guessing you're not too overstocked in the clue department anyways...

Wouldn't it be...?

[jo_ham]

"All your *BSD are belong to us" ?

never mind..