Dan Williams wrote:
On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 07:21 -0500, Benjy Grogan wrote:
On 12/15/05, Patrick Barnes <nman64@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Benjy Grogan wrote:
> Hello:
>
> I know this topic has been mentioned over and over, and
everyone is
> irritated by it. But why not meet the Mono project
half-way? Why
> can't the hal-sharp and the dbus-sharp, and gtk-sharp
add-ons be
> included in the fedora packages?
Patents
There are patents in Mono. But what patent is there in a mono binding
do d-bus? D-bus has no patent issues.. So a mono binding is just
like a c++ binding, or a c binding.. or any binding.
I'm talking about including the mono bindings in Fedoro system
libraries.
I can't see how there would be a patent in a mono binding for d-bus?
Because you have to have Mono first, before you can build the bindings
for dbus/hal/etc. And to make the bindings useful, you must build them.
Dan
but what about a %with_mono flag in the spec file which lets us build it
without using third party packages? like its done with the bytecode
interpreter in freetype. (or the ntfs kernel module but this is
something different)
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
