On Tuesday, 15 August 2017 12:21:20 Romain Tartière wrote: > Hi David, > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 09:11:57AM +0200, David Naylor wrote: > > Here is an update on porting mono 5: > > - mono: 5.1.0.1 (needs to be updated to 5.2, tests run) > > - msbuild: 15.3 (needs tests ported and run, upstream bugs filed) > > - fsharp: 4.1.25 (WIP) > > - monodevelop: 7.0.1.24 (WIP) > > - gtksharp20: 2.12.45 (WIP) > > - avahi-sharp: 0.7 (not started) > > - bumping all dependent ports (not started) > > - exp-run (not started) > > > > Would anyone be interested in doing a (Phabricator) review? > > I don't actively use mono nowadays but sure, I can check if my old code > tests suites still pass with the update. I have just registered to > Phabricator and have no previous experience with this tool, so get ready > to teach me stuff ;-)
Great, thanks. Here is a status update (with patch [1][3]). Things aren't ready yet, but as it stands: - lang/mono: 5.2.0.215 (tests failing in mcs/class/corlib [run-test-local]) - devel/msbuild: 15.3 (tests failing [with SIGABRT]) - lang/sharp: 4.1.25 (tests failing in math/measures/test.fsx [Invalid IL code]) - x11-toolkits/gtk-sharp20: 2.12.45 - x11-toolkits/gnome-sharp20: 2.24.4 WIP: - devel/monodevelop: 7.1.0.1297 (full nuget package restore required [extra nuget support required]) - devel/mono-addins: depreciate [2] (broken with mono5), fix dependencies TODO: - mono: test self hosting - update mono-lite version - avahi-sharp: 0.7 - bump all dependent ports - exp-run - commit to ports - upstream patches - fix tests Note that the failing tests don't worry me too much. Most of them are edge cases that won't affect the average user (i.e. not a blocker to commit to ports) - also I don't know how many tests are failing on other platforms (if any). [1] git clone https://github.com/DragonSA/ports; cd ports; git diff master..origin/mono5.2.0.215 [2] A general discussion needs to be had around nuget packages. How do we consume them? i) as downloads with each port containing a copy ii) local ports with consistency across the Ports Collections iii) A mixture of the above (i.e. (ii) is there is a native component, otherwise (i)) I prefer (ii) as I think it gives the end user the best leverage to patch issues with nuget packages locally (and to get updates without waiting on a) upstream, and b) us/ports maintainer). However, at this point that option is at 0% progress. [3] https://people.freebsd.org/~dbn/mono-20170825.diff.xz
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
