Slashdot Mirror
Mono Adds Mac OS X Package
Good news for those of you who've went through the pain of trying to get Mono installed on Mac OS X: the team has quietly added a Mac OS X package. If you previously installed to /usr/local, however, be aware that the packaged version installs to /opt/local and adjust any paths accordingly. The Beta-1 Windows installer has also been fixed; download it here.
Is Mono actually in a state where it can be deployed?
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
Any one tried compiling DeDRMS with this? Any success?
Now all we need is Cocoa#
Writing a Cocoa interface isn't hard to do; all it takes is a volunteer.
But do you actually believe you would be programming in Cocoa using Mono?
I am sure that others have expressed this view before, but is this necessarily going to be A Good Thing? Isn't this going to lead to developers less likely to have special OS X ports that take advantage of specific OS X features?
Don't mean to be a whiner of course :)
I'm fascinated with these different packaging types. One single "distro" of OSX, and each package seems to have multiple packages... where the opposite seems to happen with Linux. Just one package type for each of many distros.
:D
/opt, OSX style packages like gimp2 being put in /Applications (where the OS is built to handle them)... any others coming to light, to make things more complex?
We can't make it easy on ourselves, can we
Still, it's a concern. along with fink packages, independent packages installed in
Not trolling, but an honest question: Why should I give a tinker's cuss? Judging by the flood of comments this story has generated, I'm hardly alone in my apathy.
Would someone who isn't feeling too cranky explain the usage of /opt/local versus /usr/local please? I would like to understand the differences in the organizational concepts. As it is now, I just have irritation at the software that installs in the location I am less "familiar" with. Thanks.
I *HATE* it that they have forced an '/opt' usage in OSX.
/opt IN OSX! FOR A REASON!!
/sw tree, now we gotta put up with an /opt.
/opt" ... there, that oughta fix those dufus's...
THERE IS -NO-
Godamnit, I'd just started to get over those fink morons and their
"ln -s ~/opt
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
"Godamnit, I'd just started to get over those fink morons and their /sw tree, now we gotta put up with an /opt."
/usr). If you're adding something yourself it goes into /usr/local. /opt was used for other software providers stuff.
/opt and /sw are much better than installing into system-provided directories (which is an insane practice).
Where do you think it should go?
It is a long-standing philisophy in some software development circles that you never install your software into system directories (/bin,
I think
A.
...bringing you cynical quips since 1998
I don't really know. I'm just having this wonderful period where I can finally dump Visual Basic and play with nicer things.
I was so happy when my CurrencyConverter.app compiled.
Day job is becoming C# and if I can write all my stuff in Something# then it'd be quite nice.
Join the Free Software Foundation
How about putting it into /usr/local/ as *BSDs do?
Read hier(1).
--AP
I am excited about this quiet release. First, it opens up the possibility of compiling Novell's OSS iFolder on Mac OS X. Second, 60% of the computers in my company run Mac OS X, allowing for greater compatability between the remaining 40%. Third (and relating to the first), there was a recent evaluation of deploying iFolder company-wide, and the missing Mac OS X support was a critical issue. Now, the chances of the deployment happening have increased with the relase of Mono for Mac OS X. This should be great news for Apple fans.
In Mac OS X, the bulk ought to go whereever the user chooses (usually in /Applications), except for the genuinely central stuff (shared libraries, etc) which should go in one of the appropriate directories in /Library.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I'm a .NET developer who owns a powerbook. Can I now develop completely on my machine and simply copy my binaries to a windows machine?
It should go where the OS X file structure guidelines dictates it should go, or don't bother making an OS X package.
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Well, Gtk# works well on Windows and Linux and will be available on Macintosh soon (if it's not already included in the beta, I haven't checked yet). Macintosh currently has Gtk/X11, but if Apple keeps being a viable platform at all, you are going to see a Quartz version of Gtk.
superb. Mono is available via DarwinPorts for a rather long time already.
Why should we need this so urgently? There is no package for Debian or FreeBSD either... no one with a brain would think about making packages for those!
Your point being what exactly? Are you saying that because many of the tools probably shouldn't be in /Applications, the user shouldn't be allowed to determine where they go?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
for any of you that have tried to compile mod_mono 0.9 with the apple GCC and apache 1.3 stock installs, you may notice that it fails on "sudo make install" because it compiles it to a dylib instead of a so. here's a workaround: cd mod_mono-0.9/src; apxs -c -o libmod_mono.so -DAPACHE13 -I../include/ -I/usr/include/httpd/ mod_mono.c; apxs -i -a -n mono libmod_mono.so
Where do you think it should go?
/opt is -not- something that someone is going to remember to include in their Toast-based backups easily enough ...
Let the USER decide. If you can't build a package that understands its own paths, and is re-locatable to any location, then its -not- finished, and you shouldn't release it.
Fixed-path installs are brain-dead and only come about as the result of laziness, utter. The user has a ~/Library, a ~/Applications - both of these directories exist, are useful, and will survive backups made by your average user of their home directory.
OSX is a Unix for Users. Use it that way!
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
By linking proc to ~/proc, you will limit the use of Mono (or whatever is installed in /proc) to one user (unless you duplicate it in every user account). Programs that should be available to all users should NOT be installed in a particular user's directory. That's a terrible practice. If you are so convinced in thinking different(ly), link it to /Users/Share/proc, but then again you have an absolute path.
Whose "utter"?
It should go in /Library.
/System/Library.
/Library/Ports
NOT
of course, if you just want it to play around with on yoru own, you can just go for ~/Library.
I, for one, have darwinports set up to use
Look out honey cause I'm usin' technology
Ain't got time to make no apologies