Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use mono 6.4.0 #1640

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Oct 28, 2019
Merged

Use mono 6.4.0 #1640

merged 6 commits into from
Oct 28, 2019

Conversation

JoeRobich
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

"MonoRuntimeLinux32": "mono.linux-x86-6.4.0.198.zip",
"MonoRuntimeLinux64": "mono.linux-x86_64-6.4.0.198.zip",
"MonoMSBuildRuntime": "Microsoft.Build.Runtime.Mono-6.4.0.198.zip",
"MonoMSBuildLib": "Microsoft.Build.Lib.Mono-6.4.0.198.zip",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

maybe we can drop this completely. at the moment, the way build script has been changed recently - it doesn't take msbuild from these ZIPs anyway, it copies it from the global Mono on the build agent (since those are configured to use Mono 6.4.0).

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the embedded mono, on the contrary, is still taken from here so that part is still relevant

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, so a minimal install of mono is now built into and installed with omnisharp instead of omnisharp installing these artifacts?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nevermind my assumption, apparently github only loaded the first of your comments.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yeah no problem 😀

it's not immediately obvious as the build script is quite convoluted, but basically "both" (I quote "both" since there is more of them, but there are two variants - mono and msbuild) these ZIPs are downloaded at build time and embedded into the produced packages. however, since recent changes to move to msbuild 16.3, the msbuild binaries are actually copied from build agent's mono so the msbuild zip here is probably redundant (or we go back to the original approach and stop copying it from build agent's mono).

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Any reason to not go "all in" on the build script and let it package mono as well?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

that would make sense to me 👍 especially as it would also make it easier to move to newer versions of mono

in practice it would mean running the mono packaging script instead of this code https://github.com/OmniSharp/omnisharp-roslyn/blob/master/build.cake#L141-L164 at build time

@JoeRobich JoeRobich marked this pull request as ready for review October 25, 2019 19:12
Copy link
Member

@filipw filipw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! we can do the change discussed here https://github.com/OmniSharp/omnisharp-roslyn/pull/1640/files#r339205666 separately

for now what is important is that the bundled Mono is 6.4.0-based 👏

@JoeRobich
Copy link
Member Author

I agree. I'll try to find some time to look into the build changes.

@JoeRobich JoeRobich merged commit db5cc36 into OmniSharp:master Oct 28, 2019
bjorkstromm added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 30, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants