Wine 1.5.5 Supports Mono As An Add-On

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Wine 1.5.5 Supports Mono As An Add-On

Wine 1.5.5 was released on Friday as the latest bi-weekly development snapshot. This latest release provides some Mono and .NET improvements...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTEwNzQ

[uid313]

Seems like a great new release, especially for people interested .NET applications.

http://wiki.winehq.org/KnownIssues

• Bug 3260 - Get Starforce copy protection working perfectly
• Bug 7991 - Rendering is garbled when a program need to use the maximun number of shader constants of a graphic card

DirectX needs a lot of work...

http://www.winehq.org/site/status/directx

http://wiki.winehq.org/DirectX-ToDo

http://wiki.winehq.org/WineReleaseCriteria

None yet for 1.6 but we can hope for Direct3D 10.

[benjamin545]

wine has come a long way, and the directx feature parity is pretty good, i know the list there shows a lot of stuff missing but stuf like direct music, who even knows of a program that uses that? they do focus on stuff that is actualy used since that is going to be in the greatest demand and that provides numerous test cases. dx10+ still doesnt seem al that important just yet since pretty much every game has a dx9 renderer, that will probobly change soon, it may be when the new game consols are released as they as of now use a dx9/ogl2.1 equivilant graphics requirment. i think wine's biggest goals right now should be actualy finish the DIB since old games that use 2d through the gdi api really should run at the same performance as they do on windows. also wayland support should be a top priority since that will take some time to do.

[Jimmy]

OMG teh Mono is evil!

So is Mono just as evil as a part of Wine as it is as a part of anything else? Or is Mono OK if it's part of Wine?

Remember now, the freetards have told me that the only part of Windows that is patent encumbered is .NET. MS has no pattens on anything else, apparently, and Wine has free rain over it all--just not .NET. Only .NET is a trap waiting to spring.

Wine is OK because it's open source, even though it practically only exits to run closed source software. So by extension (slippery slope) it's OK to run closed software on top of open--as long as it's not a kernel module or browser plug-in. All open source software written in .NET is evil. Not even the GPL can redeem it; it's just that evil. Encumbered codecs and DVD keys are OK as long as they are hosted in the right country (but no country is right for Mono).

Did I get it all right?

FTR, I don't have a problem with Wine or Mono. It's just that I find it hard to see how the same intense hatred over Mono doesn't exist for Wine and a lot of other software very often found on a Linux machine. Since we've decided that Wine is OK and Mono is not... where are we at if they become one? Are some Windows binaries more evil than others?

Let the irrationality fly, I'll go make some popcorn.

[DanL]

No, please not another lengthy debate on Mono. Apparently, you missed this discussion: http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...INE#post263380

[WorBlux]

So is Mono just as evil as a part of Wine as it is as a part of anything else? Or is Mono OK if it's part of Wine?

Remember now, the freetards have told me that the only part of Windows that is patent encumbered is .NET. MS has no pattens on anything else, apparently, and Wine has free rain over it all--just not .NET. Only .NET is a trap waiting to spring.

Wine is OK because it's open source, even though it practically only exits to run closed source software. So by extension (slippery slope) it's OK to run closed software on top of open--as long as it's not a kernel module or browser plug-in. All open source software written in .NET is evil. Not even the GPL can redeem it; it's just that evil. Encumbered codecs and DVD keys are OK as long as they are hosted in the right country (but no country is right for Mono).

Did I get it all right?

FTR, I don't have a problem with Wine or Mono. It's just that I find it hard to see how the same intense hatred over Mono doesn't exist for Wine and a lot of other software very often found on a Linux machine. Since we've decided that Wine is OK and Mono is not... where are we at if they become one? Are some Windows binaries more evil than others?

Let the irrationality fly, I'll go make some popcorn.

Mono on wine is less controversial than just mono because.

Wine is purely about compatibility. Nobody was trying to push default programs that required wine to run.

Including mono in wine to try to execute .net is only arguable a patent infringement, whereas using wine-tricks to the the .NET runtimes are most likely copyright violations, and certainly EULA violations. It also makes a better user experience for wine, should it work.

[vertexSymphony]

Well, windows includes .NET support by default, so this was pretty much a natural step ... I'm somewhat concerned about mono and how legal it is, but I suppose that wine people thought about this, and maybe that's why the support is added as an "add-on".
Anyways, this is a good thing, because **A LOT** of applications need this, and having it by default with the integration benefits it gives ... well, it's a win-win

[pvtcupcakes]

Is the mono add-on equivalent to running "winetricks mono28" or whatever it was. Which just installs the Windows version of Mono into Wine.

[directhex]

Is the mono add-on equivalent to running "winetricks mono28" or whatever it was. Which just installs the Windows version of Mono into Wine.

Looks like it's better integrated, e.g. telling installers "yes, I have .NET" by inserting registry keys to pretend Mono is MS.NET