Am i the only one who thinks this custom runtime thing is not really acceptable 
for anyone who wants to - oh, say - *deploy* applications to regular users who 
can't/won't just patch their Mono install? what's the short-term plan for 
enabling people to actually ship apps based on Monobjc, and why can't we stick 
to the unmanaged dylib that can easily be deployed alongside the app, at least 
until an official Mono is out that contains these patches (if that will ever 

just thinking out loud, here.

On Dec 2, 2009, at 12:15 AM, Laurent Etiemble wrote:

> Hello,
> Sorry for the late update, but I had some busy nights trying to find
> another work-around for the Snow Leopard crash. The 4.0.436 release of
> the Monobjc bridge has brought mixed results regarding the Snow
> Leopard crash: some users have reported success while others have
> reported nasty crashes.
> So, I have resumed my work on the Mono runtime patching to find an
> acceptable way to do it (not too hacky so Novell would accept it).
> During my tests, I have discover that the conditions of the bug are
> already present under Leopard. Why it does not crash seems linked to
> the way TSD (Thread Specfic Data) are destroyed. So I have changed my
> approach and I have come to a workaround that seems to prevent the
> crash.
> The archive of the patched Mono runtime is available at:
> In order to use the archive:
> - you need to have a working installation of Mono.
> - uncompress the archive in /Library/Frameworks/Mono.framework/Versions
> - relink the Current symlink to the archive (sudo rm Current && sudo
> ln -s Current)
> Some points about this runtime:
> - The runtime is universal. I have made some tests under some
> OS/Processor combinations, but I cannot cover all hardware.
> - The runtime contains Mono, Visual Basic and NAnt. It does not
> contains libgdiplus or any of the third-party packages.
> - The runtime contains all what is needed to run mkbundle or the
> packaging tasks.
> - The runtime also contains other patches: embedded "machine.config"
> and "app.config" are now usable.
> If you decide to test this runtime, please provide the following:
> - hardware/system full version
> - kind of application/complexity
> - anything that can help in case of crash
> Regards, Laurent Etiemble.

Reply via email to