Re: [Banshee-List] ANN: mono-upnp 0.1.0

[Bertrand Lorentz <bertrand lorentz gmail com>]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Chow Loong Jin <hyperair ubuntu com> wrote:
> On 14/02/2012 21:34, Alexander Kojevnikov wrote:
>> I'm happy to report the first official release of mono-upnp, a set of
>> client/server libraries for the Universal Plug 'n Play specifications.
>> These libraries are used by the UPnP extension which was just merged
>> into the Banshee's master branch.
>>
>> Head over to GitHub for more info:
>>
>> * https://github.com/mono/mono-upnp
>> * http://cloud.github.com/downloads/mono/mono-upnp/mono-upnp-0.1.0.tar.gz
>> * SHA1: 1785ae4427ff1e9f58e4ebded42a951e5a1bd74c
>>
>> I would like to dedicate this release to Scott Thomas Peterson, this
>> project is mostly his creation. Rest in peace.
>>
>> Alex
>
> Hi,
>
> During the course of packaging this for Debian, I found one niggling issue: 4
> out of 5 dlls that are installed to /usr/lib/mono-upnp/ are signed strong-named
> assemblies, which are typical for assemblies meant to go into the GAC, as
> opposed to unstable libraries which are just copied around by their using
> applications and libraries.
>
> On the other hand, I don't see any mention of gacutil in the mono-upnp tree,
> meaning that the library isn't registered into GAC during `make install'.
> Checking with Banshee's build system seems to confirm that it is indeed intended
> to be an unstable library, as Banshee takes a copy into its own moduledir.
>
> The question is.. is Mono.Upnp really intended to be an unstable library, or is
> this just another Monodevelop-generated Autotools snafu?

The assemblies are not supposed to be in the GAC, as the API is
probably not stable nor mature enough.

Some assemblies are signed because they expose their internals to
other assemblies in the solution. See for
examplesrc/Mono.Upnp/Mono.Upnp/AssemblyInfo.cs.
I'm not sure why that is the case...

-- 
Bertrand Lorentz