The long anticipated update to Portable.NET has been released. The new version features important patches and fixes for Serial I/O, threading support, sockets and many more – read the full announcement for details or download the source code now (binaries will be available shortly).
Portable.NET 0.6.10 released
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Does anyone know if Portable.NET is being used for any embedded work? Being a fairly light implementation written in C, it would seem a natural choice. Or are any perspective developers too scared about what Microsoft may do.
I have a small “real live” application that I’d love to be able to run on eighter Mono or Portable.NET. Last time I tried, it didn’t work (mostly problems with System.Windows.Forms). Now it does! First time I was able to run the app on Linux!
Apparently this release supports BeOS w/BONE. Bit odd considering BeOS has no GTK# or any of the other major toolkits that might be used.
It supports SDL via Tao under BeOS
And you can always write your System.Drawing.BeOS to make winforms work under BeOS.
http://getdotgnu.com/article15
Can I ask if MS Patents, etc affect Portable.NET.
I really would like to know because everybody at OSNEWS/world seem to be down on MONO. As if MONO is in big trouble with MS, yet I hardly ever see the same said of Portable.NET
So is Portable.NET safe? Why?
John, that’s very difficult to say and well, there is a huge difference because mono has another license for their class library than pnet has etc..
To read more on how the different licenses have different effects and some general patent snu-snu, you may want to read this:
http://wiki.dotgnu.org/PatentFUD
Needless to say, it was written by someone from the DotGNU steering committee, but that’s the best eassy on that matter I have found so far.
Personally I think neither pnet nor mono will have “real” problems (well, parts of mono will probably become proprietary (mono contributors need to sign a form that Novell may relicense their code under another license and their FAQ also states that [“The Mono runtime and the Mono C# Compiler are also available under a proprietary license”]), but some people may not have a problem with that anyway.
Bottom line? I think the problems are made bigger than they really are, at least from the perspective of someone who knows what’s going on (I don’t, only very few do [like the lawyers of the FSF who are working together with DotGNU], you just need to find one of those and talk to him
and not those people spreading myths all the time.
PS: I wonder when we will see the first pnet or mono story which doesn’t have a comment asking about patents or “what’s different to [the other project]”
PS: I wonder when we will see the first pnet or mono story which doesn’t have a comment asking about patents or “what’s different to [the other project]”
That is exactly my argument. There are all these whiners here at OSNEWS complaining about MONO.
Just a quick browse on the pNet website and I read they use MONO code for somethings and MONO uses pNET code for some things and that they may try and work together in future.
I think because pNet is somehow related to FSF then they are okay with everyone.
How come people didn’t come down hard on Linus and the first group of kernel hackers. Afterall they were trying to implement a UNIX like kernel.
I would like to see people abuse pNet at OSNEWS/Slashdot. All this MONO criticism is just stupid.
Notice how after many hours only one person replied to my post. This just shows no one wants to harass a project closely related to there holy FSF.
Strange that OSNews never mentioned about superwaba.. i see a pattern here. if pocket pc is your only concern, use it,
http://www.superwaba.com.br/en/default.asp
Is Portable.NET available on IRIX?
Get it and try it.
It may require some tweaks, but will work fine after them, i think.
> I think because pNet is somehow related to FSF then they are okay with everyone.
No, because pnet is developed in Australia, India and Canada for most of the code ..
Also we’re not guiding the next generation of free software to be written in C#/.NET …. That would be too much of a risk in any case
http://www.gnome.org/~seth/blog/mono
“We exist only for compatibility” – I’d rather let Parrot do all the innovation than Portable.net .
> Is Portable.NET available on IRIX?
Download , compile … let me know about changes needed
BeOS needed ~3 changes to port fully, Ask me for help if you need
Pnet works on an AS/400 … it should work anywhere
http://t3.dotgnu.info/code/beos-screen.jpg …
> Does anyone know if Portable.NET is being used for any embedded work?
Have a look at
http://dotgnu.org/pipermail/pnet-developers/2004-October/001731.htm…
and http://www.southern-storm.com.au/doc/embedded.html
There are three groups (of which at least one is willing to pay for portable.net modifications) evaulating Portable.net to higher end embedded systems for deployment .
IL is an excellent format if your current limitation for embedding is FLASH size rather than RAM/CPU . I’m trying to see if I can port it to SymbianOS.
http://t3.dotgnu.info/code/monodoc.png
With the next XPath engine monodoc works … next, I’ll see
how MonoDevelop ports over
Maybe Portable.net and Mono can indeed work together …