On 06/05/2012 03:00 AM, Francois Gouget wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jun 2012, Max TenEyck Woodbury wrote:
[...]
A native MSWindows application that wants .net support would either
connect to the installed dll that provides the required services or
install such a dll. It would know nothing about 'mono'. It is only
non-MSWindows platform programs that will try to link to the
non-MSWinows libraries in 'mono'.
So an MSWindows executable looking for .net support needs .net support,
NOT mono.
[...]
You obviously have absolutely no idea what the wine-mono package is for.
You should read up and apologize.
NO APOLOGY! You are missing the point.
If it is NOT a linux native interface, it is NOT an analog of 'mono'.
Call it what it is: DotNetFramework or something like that. Just do
NOT make the mistake of tying it to the contaminated package, even if
it is only by using a similar name.
This is because legal risks are fairly high here, and APPEARANCE does
account for a lot in that domain. While the odds are somewhat in favor
of any legal action coming out correctly if the tech is right, it IS a
crap shoot and the lawyer's are the only sure winners.
