4 ms·

.NET Core isn't packaged for Debian, Fedora and CentOS, and for Ubuntu you have to add a separate PPA. That makes it an instant no-go for me. I'm not a softwar

.NET Core isn't packaged for Debian, Fedora and CentOS, and for Ubuntu you have to add a separate PPA. That makes it an instant no-go for me. I'm not a software packager and I'm not becoming one to try new and unstable C# tooling. Visual Studio Community was a pretty terrible experience and I don't intend to spend more of my time on unreliable Microsoft products.

enibundo 10y ago
What do you code in normally?
- cryptarch 10y ago
  A GNU/Linux distro + vim usually, with some Docker and shell scripts/make for the build process. Very transparent and everything can be versioned in Git. Kinda the opposite of IDE-centric development, but the available Xamarin tooling didn't support that way of working.
rikkus 10y ago
While there aren't necessarily native packages pre-built and ready to pull down with the installers, you don't need to be a 'software packager' to install .NET Core and I don't know what the problem is with 'add[ing] a separate PPA' Instructions for Debian[1], Fedora[2], Centos[3] and Ubuntu[4]. These all seem like pretty simple copy+paste instructions. [1] https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxdebian https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxdebian [2] https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxfedora https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxfedora [3] https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxcentos https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxcentos [4] https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxubuntu https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxubuntu
- cryptarch 10y ago
  I don't want 3rd party repositories to manage. To do it properly I have to (in the case of Debian) trust some MS team's signing keys (yuck), add the repo and update my apt-pinning rules (I don't want apt accidentally installing MS versions of tools) and integrate this in my dev OS build automation. That vs. adding a single line in my list of selected packages. The price to adoption is high and it's just not worth it to me, especially seeing how immature the tooling and overall ecosystem is.
GordonS 10y ago
Just recently they started releasing statically linked, distro-agnostic binaries.
- cryptarch 10y ago
  And that's exactly what I don't want. I choose to trust Debian maintainers; I don't choose to trust Microsoft. If the package ends up in Debian stable, its pretty much guaranteed to be stable and to at least install and uninstall cleanly and consistently; it also won't have builtin telemetry because that's Not Done in the Debian distribution. With the beta stuff provided by Microsoft there's no reason for me to assume a similar level of diligence.
  - GordonS 10y ago
    Well, as a developer who needs to ship a packaged version of the CoreCLR runtime, this is exactly what I do want! But surely there's no reason why we can't have both?

enibundo 10y ago

What do you code in normally?

cryptarch 10y ago
A GNU/Linux distro + vim usually, with some Docker and shell scripts/make for the build process. Very transparent and everything can be versioned in Git. Kinda the opposite of IDE-centric development, but the available Xamarin tooling didn't support that way of working.

rikkus 10y ago

While there aren't necessarily native packages pre-built and ready to pull down with the installers, you don't need to be a 'software packager' to install .NET Core and I don't know what the problem is with 'add[ing] a separate PPA' Instructions for Debian[1], Fedora[2], Centos[3] and Ubuntu[4]. These all seem like pretty simple copy+paste instructions. [1] https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxdebian https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxdebian [2] https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxfedora https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxfedora [3] https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxcentos https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxcentos [4] https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxubuntu https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxubuntu

cryptarch 10y ago
I don't want 3rd party repositories to manage. To do it properly I have to (in the case of Debian) trust some MS team's signing keys (yuck), add the repo and update my apt-pinning rules (I don't want apt accidentally installing MS versions of tools) and integrate this in my dev OS build automation. That vs. adding a single line in my list of selected packages. The price to adoption is high and it's just not worth it to me, especially seeing how immature the tooling and overall ecosystem is.

GordonS 10y ago

Just recently they started releasing statically linked, distro-agnostic binaries.

cryptarch 10y ago
And that's exactly what I don't want. I choose to trust Debian maintainers; I don't choose to trust Microsoft. If the package ends up in Debian stable, its pretty much guaranteed to be stable and to at least install and uninstall cleanly and consistently; it also won't have builtin telemetry because that's Not Done in the Debian distribution. With the beta stuff provided by Microsoft there's no reason for me to assume a similar level of diligence.
- GordonS 10y ago
  Well, as a developer who needs to ship a packaged version of the CoreCLR runtime, this is exactly what I do want! But surely there's no reason why we can't have both?