I was making an OpenGL application with C# and Windows Forms.
Recently I thought about making it cross-platform, I mean to make it run on Windows, Linux and OS X. I have never even tried to make a cross platform application.
I did some research and found that I should use mono. Do applications made with MonoDevelop will run fine all of these platforms without any additional installations? If not, what exactly user will need to install to run that application?
Is there any easy way to write the code once and then build it for windows, linux and os x without requiring the additional installations?
Does applications made with MonoDevelop will run fine on windows, linux, os x without any additional installations?
Well. They will require Mono to be installed on Linux and OsX and the corresponding version of the .NET framework on Windows (or Mono there too).
When developing, you will of course need to keep cross platform concerns in mind (directory separators, for instance, though the Path class helps here), and Mono have created the migration analyzer to help with this - see MoMa.
Now, assuming you kept these in mind and that Mono and or the .NET framework is installed on the end user system, you shouldn't need anything additional to install.
Related
I am completely new to Mono and Gtk#. I'm developing an app on Linux but I want to run it on Windows as well. However, if I build the app using MonoDevelop and then run the .exe file in Windows, it doesn't launch.
Is it really possible to make Windows apps using Linux/Mono, or am I missing something?
Baltasarq is correct. The reason that your app won't run is that the dependent GTK# binaries are not on your target machine. The compiled .exe will run on any .NET implementation so long as it is of at least the .NET version that your executable targets and the dependent assemblies are available.
Like Symon said, you have to build your project on the operating system you're intending it to be be compiled for because of the resources (API's etc.) that specific operating system is loaded with.
When I have a problem like this, I simply use a virtual machine software like VirtualBox or VMware to run Windows and then install and run MonoDevelop inside of Windows. Don't worry about the expensive cost of Windows, for you can just get Windows from Microsoft's website here. There will be a little watermark in the corner of the screen because you didn't pay for the copy, but everything is still totally legal and fit for software development.
UPDATE:
A better method to do this is to install the GTK# dependencies and then recompile the program.
I'd like to create a few simple C# applications and command line utilities to learn more about C#, affordably. Initially, I tried using Microsoft's free Studio Express in a Windows 8 virtual machine; however, it quickly reported that it could only create apps for the Microsoft app store and failed to build the simplest examples of an XML file transformer.
I also found Mono or rather MonoDevelop. I'm still reading about it. It seems that the SDK is entangled with the MonoDevelop IDE, and the MonoDevelop installer is actually the Xamarin Studio installer. Xamarin is a subscription based IDE and inexpensive versions of it appear to be constrained. Perhaps I need to continue studying; however, I thought I'd ask if anyone has experience getting started with C# on OS X.
Ideally, I'd like the simplest setup. I prefer using command line compilers, simple code editors, and build scripts. Are there Windows and OS X command line compilers for C# applications? Are there framework libraries that can easily be included that work on both OS X and Windows?
First, Mono is not an SDK, but a runtime. The specific point of Mono is to be able to, for the most part, run the same IL on other platforms as what runs on .NET for Windows. This means that, barring the slight hiccups in implementation, you could copy a program, run it via "mono program.exe" (via the console) on OS X, and get the same output (I have tested this with Console applications, at least - UI starts to get a little hairier).
In terms of library, the Mono libraries try to mirror the .NET ones so exactly, that the code you write for one is almost completely compatible with the other.
"MonoDevelop" and "Xamarin Studio" are the same thing, simply having applied a name change after a certain version. They are the most well known tools for building in the .NET language family on a non-Windows system (the only tools I even know of), and tend to mirror the shortcuts of Visual Studio well (at least on windows.) Unlike Mono itself, these are an IDE, and do not constrain you any more than VS constrains you into .NET.
The constraints you'll find with free Xamarin apply mostly to their mobile platforms (iOS, Android) and do not affect working with desktop (ie Windows and OS X) applications.
I've settled on using a Windows 8 virtual machine and Visual Studio Express for Windows Desktop as Dan J recommended. For usage similar to mine, simple desktop and command line apps, be careful not to select and install the "V.S.E. for Windows" version.
I have years of experience developing on microsoft development stack primarily visual studio 2012/c#. But right now, im required to develop app on linux. While i know c++, its been years since i really touch that. I have few questions.
Can i develop using mono and compile binary for linux and windows with no code(or minimal) code changes?
Can i develop on windows platform using visual studio 2012, compile for linux on window platform? do i need to use virtual machine for compiling for linux in windows platform?
How do you setup your development environment if you want to develop linux app on windows platform(develop on windows, compile for linux and windows. my linux box use for testing is a separate machine.)
Some info on what im working on.
My project is about network channel analysis. The client is cheap industrial linux box most probably with no ui. Im using mono/c# to develop the client. The server would be windows develop using vs2012 c#. Most probably using wpf as ui. Im planning to share network/communication library between linux(client) and windows(server). My primary concern for using linux is for cost saving since the client is almost thousand units.
thank you.
Mono runs executables in PE (Portable Executable) format, the native file format of Windows. There's no need to "compile for Linux", as long as your app is pure MSIL. And even if you use native DLLs through p/invoke, Mono and Wine work together to run the Windows files on Linux.
(The a.out and ELF executable formats used by native Linux applications don't have mechanisms for storing .NET metadata, the PE format was modified to support .NET, so that's what .NET Framework (not Micro Framework) implementations use regardless of platform)
The most important things to consider at the beginning are,
WinForms of Mono is problematic. Not only most third party controls won't work properly, but also libgdiplus itself is not 100% compatible with Microsoft's GDI+. It might appear to be a sweet option, but later you might still need to fight hard against the incompatibilities.
WPF is not an option as Mono does not support it yet.
GTK# is your best choice for UI, which blends naturally with Linux distros. If you refactor your Windows project properly, you should be able to share the non-UI code between your Windows and Linux solutions. This is what Mono guys recommend (not only use native UI frameworks for Windows, Linux, but also for Mac/MonoMac, iOS/Xamarin.iOS, and Android/Xamarin.Android).
So go back to your questions,
You should never wish for no code change for a real world project. No, that's impossible. As I said earlier, you have a chance to share most non-UI portion.
You can develop the non-UI portion and the Windows only portion using VS2012 and test them out on Windows. If you plan to use Mono's WinForms or GTK#, you must develop and debug on Linux using MonoDevelop. Thus, you need either a virtual machine or physical machine of Linux.
For me, I frequently switch between Linux/MonoDevelop and Windows/VS.
As Mono + C# is much more productive than using C/C++, many successful Linux apps are developed on Mono, such as Banshee and Tomboy.
You can use Visual Studio without problems but for example you cannot use WPF, while Windows Forms are ok. For more information what you can use visit: http://www.mono-project.com/Compatibility
Moreover there exists Mono tools which integrates with VS: http://www.mono-project.com/GettingStartedWithMonoTools
I am creating a project on C#-.Net. The 'exe' file generated from the project is not executable on machines which do not have the .Net already installed. This error is popping up:
To run this application you first must install one of the following versions of the .NET.Framework: V4.0.30319
I don't want to make an installer file which installs the dependency files (.Net FW and other...) on PC.
As project requirement, I want to make an 'exe' that runs on every Windows PC without installing software or dependency sofware -> .Net FW. Just when clicked and the s/w exe should execute.
Is it possible to make such machine independent 'exe' for Windows from .Net ??
That's not exactly possible (there are some tools out there that will allow you to bundle dependencies, but I wouldn't recommend using them).
Your best possible approach to this is using an as-old-as-possible framework, for example .NET Framework 3.0. This way you'll use a framework version that is already preinstalled on pretty much all systems in use. Or in other words, you'll ensure your program runs on as many systems as possible out of the box. Just provide a link to the runtime in case someone is still missing it.
Also just to note that this is far better compared to what happened to the first few iterations of the .NET Framework: Those executables would just crash with a complex error message not telling the user that it's just the runtime missing. It improved a lot over time.
Also, just as an alternative: Have you thought about using ClickOnce deployment? This will allow you to provide users a simple and minimal installer they won't really see either. It will only download and install dependencies that are still missing. Also this is built into any edition of VisualStudio, even the Express ones.
This error is popping up
It is not an error. Just a friendly reminder to the user that your program need .NET 4 to be available before your program can run. He'll click "Yes, please!" and everything solves itself automagically.
You could create an installer to avoid the message. But, given that you don't want to do that, and it already takes care of it for you, there is very little point.
More about what this all looks like and why it works this way in this answer
"As project requirement, I want to make an 'exe' that runs on every Windows PC without installing software or dependency sofware -> .Net FW. Just when clicked and the s/w exe should execute.".
1) What if the version of Windows doesn't have any .Net Framework?
2) What if the version of Windows doesn't support any version of .Net Framework? (.Net didn't come around until Win2K/ME ish times, and Windows 95 won't take most .Net frameworks, 3.1 / 3.5 wont even take Mono)
"Is it possible to make such machine independent 'exe' for Windows from .Net ??"
Sounds like you're trying to make something like a Setup.exe that can be a single download that will work out the specifics after the fact... Actually the "machine independent" makes even C++ unsuitable, because while C++ will work on Windows, Mac, Linux, Unix, and a whole slew of more exotic systems with x86, x64, i64, PPC, ARM24/32/64 etc. (all of which exist with Windows installed on them, out there, in the wild, but are pretty rare) once the executable is compiled and linked, it will be targeted towards a single CPU architecture and OS. (OS/2, GEM and DOS all use .exe files, and there are some similarities between them, but most other OS don't require any specific file extension for executable binaries)
So, .Net isn't a terrible idea for this reason, any more than a .jar, .pl or .py would be. (which is relatively common for *nix software that you hope will run on Linux, Mac and BSD Unix... maybe even Solaris or HP/UX etc.) If you target MSIL, rather then x86 or x64, then your .exe will run on PPC Windows, DEC Alpha Windows, Itanium Windows, and ARM Windows, as well as the other two. (although this isn't what you are asking about) If you build it without a dependence on the WPF, or other Windows specific GUI engine, it will also work on Mac, Linux and BSD, so long as they have Mono installed. (it just may be worth considering, while you're at it... Versions of Windows Microsoft don't support with the appropriate .Net version will also need Mono to work this way)
To that end, I would recommend building a command-line executable in Mono, rather than .Net development environment. (Mono executable will run on .Net easier than .Net executables run on Mono... Though either is possible if you are careful about the dependencies you include in headers you import into your source)
I've had some success with this, writing a background service that would install on either Windows or Linux with the same binary executable. I used MonoDevelop. (https://www.monodevelop.com/) However, it's really just a flashy IDE around the core Mono development tools. (https://www.mono-project.com/)
We have a console app that runs in .NET 3.5. It connects to a USB device and spits out data received from it.
I'd like to port this over to OSX and have some questions about the strategy to do this. The USB Driver is already installed on OSX.
Mono looks promising but I don't get it. Does the end user have to install Mono or run something?
After looking at some other posts it seems that you can write a bash script and do some hacking to get the program installed...but I can't find a really good explanation of this. it also seems that mono wouldn't be installed in this process. These posts were also from '09 so I'm wondering if something has changed to make this easier.
My question is, what's a good way to approach running/porting a C# console app to OSX.
.NET is compiled down to IDL (bytecode) on all platforms including the windows platform. It is then run on the CLR (common language runtime iirc) which is a similar concept to the Java Virtual Machine. It just so happens that on most Windows machines that this CLR is installed by default. So if you wish your application to run on another platform you first need a CLR for that platform. Mono does include a CLR which can run on OSX. So either you (as part of your package/ bundle ) or the user would need to install this before your .NET will run.
The other issue you have is that .NET also contains certain API's which are not part of the ECMA standard which your application may or may not use. Some of these API's are present in mono, some of them are not. Those that are not usually have an equivalent or similar API which you can use to achieve the same thing however you may need to alter your application to deal with that scenario.
It really depends on what .NET api's your application is using as to how difficult it will be to port. I am guessing you are probably using winforms as part of your application so here is the guide from the mono site for that portion of the API
http://www.mono-project.com/Guide:_Porting_Winforms_Applications
You can bundle the Mono installer with your application (or your own build of Mono). You might even have the option of statically linking the mono runtime into your application on the Mac, I can't remember if it's supported (yet) or not. I'm pretty sure you can.
Also, wrt gordatron's warnings, if you use Path.Combine() to create paths instead of hard-coding \ as your path separator (which you should be doing anyway), you won't have to worry about having file system path problems.
For a nice easy way to check if your app uses any features which aren't available in Mono, you can use http://www.mono-project.com/MoMA to check for unsupported methods/classes and any other potentially non-cross-platform blockers like P/Invokes.
For a console application, I don't see you running into many issues (although you'll likely need to interface with the USB hardware differently than you do in Windows).