.NET

Dark SavanT · Post by **Dark SavanT** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 8:45 pm

Can I hope on implementing .NET support in ROS?

(sorry for my bad english...)

ma-games.de · Post by **ma-games.de** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:34 pm

There should be no need for implementing .NET for ReactOS. The Runtime Environment should be installable when the needed APIs and DLLs for ReactOS are running.

Post by **GreatLord** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 4:34 pm

It has been talk about using go-mono as dotnet framework in reactos

We can not ship with microsoft dotnet framework with reactos, I have not read the licen agreement for it when you install it. I suppect it is same as directx

ma-games.de · Post by **ma-games.de** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 4:47 pm

Yes, in the english version of wikipedia it is mentioned that .NET will be supportet through mono.

nothin2g · Post by **nothin2g** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 6:26 pm

but if i want to i can install ms.net sandbox, right?

ma-games.de · Post by **ma-games.de** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 1:39 pm

nothin2g wrote:but if i want to i can install ms.net sandbox, right?

Yes, but I'm not 100% sure. There maybe a problem with the license. I don't know the license of the .NET-sandbox.

nothin2g · Post by **nothin2g** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:31 pm

the main thing is that i can install it. the license issue is the problem of mine.

Z_God · Post by **Z_God** » Sat Jan 01, 2005 4:18 am

LOL

I've heard that the license does not have any OS restrictions, so it should be legally possible.

uniQ · Post by **uniQ** » Sat Jan 01, 2005 5:14 am

Couldn't someone find and post the license so we can all find out and then go from there?

-uniQ

Post by **frik85** » Sat Jan 01, 2005 12:21 pm

uniQ wrote:Couldn't someone find and post the license so we can all find out and then go from there?

You can read it online:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/defau ... ula1_1.asp

A possible problem:

Microsoft .NET Framework 1.1 Redistributable EULA - MSDN wrote:NOTE: IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALIDLY LICENSED COPY OF ANY VERSION OR EDITION OF MICROSOFT WINDOWS 95, WINDOWS 98, WINDOWS NT 4.0 WINDOWS 2000 OPERATING SYSTEM OR ANY MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEM THAT IS A SUCCESSOR TO ANY OF THOSE OPERATING SYSTEMS (each an "OS Product"), YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE THE OS COMPONENTS AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EULA.

ma-games.de · Post by **ma-games.de** » Sat Jan 01, 2005 2:13 pm

Oh, that seems to me, that the .Net framework could'nt be used legally. But we've got Mono

Elledan · Post by **Elledan** » Sat Jan 01, 2005 3:28 pm

Fortunately, the legal value of an EULA is still undefined. Whether or not an EULA can actually be enforced remains therefore an open question.

While distributing .Net with the official ReactOS distribution might not be a good idea, there's little MSFT can do if users were to follow a link to the .Net runtime on MSFT's site and install it themselves, aside from prosecuting every single indidual who does this.

Methinks MSFT should be happy if people are willing to use .Net in the first place, though

From a long-term perspective, it would seem more useful if a project like Mono were to be distributed with ReactOS, though.

daniele_dll · Post by **daniele_dll** » Sat Jan 01, 2005 6:27 pm

mono is a wonderful project but do not support (now) system.windows.forms and system.drawing and similar...there are, hovewer, a work in progress but i think that they will need many many time

http://www.mono-project.com/contributing/winforms.html

wolvenwraith · Post by **wolvenwraith** » Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:58 am

frik85 wrote:
uniQ wrote:Couldn't someone find and post the license so we can all find out and then go from there?
You can read it online:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/defau ... ula1_1.asp

A possible problem:
Microsoft .NET Framework 1.1 Redistributable EULA - MSDN wrote:NOTE: IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALIDLY LICENSED COPY OF ANY VERSION OR EDITION OF MICROSOFT WINDOWS 95, WINDOWS 98, WINDOWS NT 4.0 WINDOWS 2000 OPERATING SYSTEM OR ANY MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEM THAT IS A SUCCESSOR TO ANY OF THOSE OPERATING SYSTEMS (each an "OS Product"), YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE THE OS COMPONENTS AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EULA.

of course I haven't read the whole EULA, but there is a loophole there for the individual... Nowhere does it say that the product must be installed ON the OS. As long as you have a licensed copy in your legal possession, you're fine (even if its an old OEM windows 98 disk laying aroung).

That is a nice loophole which can be exploited. Otherwise, you're on your own if you install and run it.

Personally, I think we should use mono though. That would raise support for the mono project and keep the sharing nature of OSS at the level that it is at now. If people write software to support mono, it benefits us as well as everyone else (even though technically they shouldn't have to write it to support it, it should just work).

Owen · Post by **Owen** » Sat Jan 08, 2005 4:01 pm

Yes, without reading it all theres the loophole.

Considering I write EULAs regularly (Both open source and closed source) I should be able to interpret it well - But im no lawyer!

If were going to include Mono, it should be an installable/uninstallable subsystem for when the .net framework from MS is desirable for compatability.

.NET

.NET

Who is online