Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

.NET Core 1.0 Released

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by randomizer View Post

    I was kind of excited for it last year. I played around with ASP.NET Core 1.0 (or ASP.NET 5 as it was called at the time) and it was a really awful experience even on Windows. It required non-trivial changes to IIS as well as the deployment process. I was trying it out on a POC project but ran out of time to resolve the problems I had and switched back to ASP.NET 4.5. Then they went and deprecated the entire tool chain and did who knows what with project.json, all during the Release Candidate phase, which somewhat validated my decision not to keep burning time. Hopefully the sandstorm has settled.
    You made the right call not using anything before the RC's in production and even then, the RC's were more beta quality (well, RC1 was). I don't know when you last tried it, but getting it running on IIS as of RC2 was pretty trivial, just turn off managed code and install the dotnet hosted components, not much else to it now. I just made the jump from RC2 to RTM and the changes were trivial, mostly I just let nuget update pre-release packages to their now released versions. I expect this is what future releases will look like, the system is so modular that for the most part it's just a smattering of dependencies that you can tell nuget to upgrade when you're ready to move.

    Project.json is still here, it hasn't gone anywhere as of RTM. They'll eventually phase it out in favour of a "new and improved" .csproj that will supposedly have all the goodness of project.json with none of the badness of today's MSBuild, no idea on a time frame for that but I'd expect VS "15" to be the start of the shift. They'll supposedly migrate things automatically though and I don't see a reason why it'll be difficult to.

    I wouldn't rush to port an ASP.net 4.5 project to .net core just yet, but I'd definitely look into it again for new projects.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
      This is a Linux forum, therefore you can make mounds of money selling tin foil hats and popcorn the moment Microsoft comes up in the news. Also we apologize for the inconvenience but due to it's overuse we've had to move E.E.E to the free slot on your provided Microsoft Discussion in a Linux Forum bingo card, The reality is that most linux forum goers are ungrateful conspiratorial gits that are either luddites that pray to the glory of the "UNIX philosophy" as a cargo cult or are whiny children that don't understand that developing things takes time when they want it now.
      A few points on the top of my head:
      - Android OEMs still get hit by "patent deals".
      - The MIT license is extremely lax, even more so than BSD, I expect a few wildly incompatible .net implementations down the line, yet proudly displaying a ".net core approved" sticker.
      - The scope of those open source efforts is mind numbingly narrow, namely getting people onboard azure. Now, why would any sane person run a free OS atop a big black box of you-have-no-earthly-idea-about-what's-really-going-on-behind-the-scenes is beyond me.
      - The "microsoft hearts Linux" mantra was strangely left out of the minecraft (aka brainwashing for kids) and linkedin (aka shackles for adults) deals.
      - ooxml documents created in office are still stuck in the "transitional" format.

      So, no, trust still isn't the concept that comes to mind when I hear "microsoft".

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by Hi-Angel View Post
        Nah, it is standard practice assuming you target only binaries to the system. But the source released, I guess, in order to allow other people develop it, isn't it? So they ought at least to make sure it would compile on that target system.
        It would be stupid to delay the linux release just because FreeBSD support isn't finished. So they mention it in the release notes, and tell you that the runtime still works. *shrug*

        Comment


        • #24
          Already seeing tinfoil hat references in these comments is disheartening. I am currently running the KDE Neon distro which is based on Ubuntu 16.04. I decided to go look at this. First, to my dismay, MS packaged without comprehending packaging.

          sudo apt install dotnet-dev
          Reading package lists... Done
          Building dependency tree
          Reading state information... Done
          E: Unable to locate package dotnet-dev
          min@delta:~$ sudo apt install dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2
          Reading package lists... Done
          Building dependency tree
          Reading state information... Done
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003093' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003096' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003098' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003100' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003102' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003104' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003109' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003112' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003116' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003118' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003119' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Note, selecting 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003121' for regex 'dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2'
          Starting pkgProblemResolver with broken count: 0
          Starting 2 pkgProblemResolver with broken count: 0
          Done
          The following additional packages will be installed:
          dotnet-host dotnet-hostfxr-1.0.1 dotnet-sharedframework-microsoft.netcore.app-1.0.0 libcurl3 liblldb-3.6 libllvm3.6v5 liblttng-ust-ctl2 liblttng-ust0 libunwind8 liburcu4
          The following NEW packages will be installed:
          dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003093 dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003096 dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003098 dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003100 dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003102
          dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003104 dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003109 dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003112 dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003116 dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003118
          dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003119 dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003121 dotnet-host dotnet-hostfxr-1.0.1 dotnet-sharedframework-microsoft.netcore.app-1.0.0 libcurl3 liblldb-3.6 libllvm3.6v5
          liblttng-ust-ctl2 liblttng-ust0 libunwind8 liburcu4
          0 upgraded, 22 newly installed, 0 to remove and 120 not upgraded.
          Need to get 242 MB of archives.
          After this operation, 502 MB of additional disk space will be used.

          Or if that's too harsh, without understanding versioning.

          Secondly, after I chose the newest one, it helpfully gave me a VERY unexpected message during the setup stage of the deb package:

          Setting up dotnet-host (1.0.2-beta-000555-00-1) ...
          Setting up dotnet-hostfxr-1.0.1 (1.0.1-1) ...
          Setting up dotnet-sharedframework-microsoft.netcore.app-1.0.0 (1.0.0-1) ...
          Setting up dotnet-dev-1.0.0-preview2-003121 (1.0.0-preview2-003121-1) ...
          This software may collect information about you and your use of the software, and send that to Microsoft.
          Please visit http://aka.ms/dotnet-cli-eula for more information.
          Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.23-0ubuntu3) ...

          I quickly removed the packages with APT, and I'm seriously considering an OS reinstall.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by Min1123 View Post
            Already seeing tinfoil hat references in these comments is disheartening.

            ...

            I quickly removed the packages with APT, and I'm seriously considering an OS reinstall.
            This is why you get the tinfoil hat references...

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by dagger View Post
              Failed to initialize CoreCLR, HRESULT: 0x80131500
              HRESULT on Linux? Although, I shouldn't be surprised. They wrote a "platform adaptation layer" which is a Windows API layer for a non-Windows platform.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by Kushan View Post

                This is why you get the tinfoil hat references...
                That being the point (asides from mentioning their stupidity with versioning). I thought they were baseless, but even if MS isn't trying to Embrace, Extend, Extinguish, my Linux box doesn't get to be an add-on to their Windows 10 monitoring crap just for using an SDK.

                Comment

                Working...
                X