MonoDevelop Not Recognizing .NET 4.5 Support - frameworks

I have recently installed both Mono (3.0.8) and MonoDevelop (4.0) on my linux machine (Arch linux). I have a Solution that contains a number of projects that depend on the .NET 4.5 Framework. (Specifically, I'm working with the Casanova project) However, MonoDevelop does not seem to recognize the .NET 4.5 framework for projects; it only recognizes .NET 4.0 and prior as a target framework.
I know Mono 3.0.8 supports basic .NET 4.5, but I'm not sure why MonoDevelop cannot see this. When I create a project as Mono / .NET 4.0 and attempt to build it, it fails to find definitions for .NET 4.5 specific fields and members. Is there a way I can force MonoDevelop to read in .NET 4.5 projects?

I have built Mono and MonoDevelop from Github sources and it seems to have some .NET 4.5 support:
Not sure what about F#, I wasn't able to install F# addon yet.
The Mono version from Github master branch is Mono 3.0.4 (master/b23a610 Thu Mar 7 20:47:00 MSK 2013) for me, not 3.0.8.

Related

Can not select .NET Frameworks above 4.8

Hey I tried to install the latest .NET Framework 6.0.1 from the official Microsoft Website and it shows as installed inside the Visual Studio Installer but I am somehow not able to select it. Neither can I upgrade existing Applications to 6.0 nor create Applications with .NET Framework 6.0.
So i tried installing .NET Framework 5.0 instead but it has the excatly same issues.
The highest Version that I can choose is .NET Framework 4.8.
In case it is important I am on Windows 10 - 21H1 - 19044.1415.
Image 1
Image 2
Image 3
Last version of .NET Framework is 4.8. Last version of .NET is .NET 6. They are not the same thing, .NET is a successor of .NET Core.

C# SharpZipLib for .NET Core

We have version 0.86 of ICSharpCode.SharpZipLib.dll and it is not .NET Core compatible.
There appears to be two main (and several more) "latest" version of it. SharpZipLib and SharpZipLib.NETStandard, both by ICSharpCode.
Which is the correct one to use for .NET Core?
SharpZipLib runs on .NET Standard 2.0 in 2018.
Changes
The targeted frameworks are now:
.NET Standard 2.0 netstandard2 (Core 2.0+, FW 4.6.1+, Mono 5.2+, UWP 16299)
.NET Framework 4.5 net45 (Mono 4, Dependency-free on Windows 8+/2012+)
See: https://github.com/icsharpcode/SharpZipLib/wiki/Release-1.0
Use this one: https://www.nuget.org/packages/SharpZipLib/

.Net framework 4.0 issue on windows 10 os

I am trying to install one windows application on windows 10 platform. My application need to install Dot Net Framework 4.0 when trying to install then error message will appear and say to install Dot Net Framework 4.0 after that when I try to install Dot Net Framework 4.0 then error message shows me Dot Net Framework 4.0 already install in this system so I can't understand what is the issue with that.
Windows 10 included Dot Net Framework 4.0 and above.
Windows 10 (all editions) includes the .NET Framework 4.6 as an OS component, and it is installed by default. It also includes the .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 as an OS component that is not installed by default. The .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 can be added or removed via the Programs and Features control panel.
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/astebner/2007/03/14/mailbag-what-version-of-the-net-framework-is-included-in-what-version-of-the-os/
So you don't need to install as already "Installed"...

Is Entity Framework 7 going to work with .NET Framework 4.5?

Is Entity Framework 7.0 RTM release going to work with .NET Framework 4.5?
According to comments in issue 2443 EF 7.0 was supposed to support Mono which requires 4.5 version of framework.
Recent code changes suggest an upgrade to 4.5.1, is this going to stay that way?
EF.Relational now (RC2) requires .NET 4.5.1
The latest versions of Mono have updated to the Microsoft reference source, so compiling against 4.5.1 should work just fine on Mono now.

Upgrading from the June CTP EF 4.2

We're currently developing an application that is using EF Code first (EF June 2011 CTP).
My first question is: Is it worth trying to upgrade to use a later version of EF?
Secondly, if so, does anyone know the steps involved to upgrade - when I try to install the NuGet package for EF 5.0 - beta 2, I end up with issues as the target framework is still 4.2.
Many thanks,
James.
The CTP is long time dead with no other version coming because all that stuff is currently part of .NET 4.5 beta and EF 5.0 beta. You must upgrade to those two and the upgrade will consist of re-targeting application back to .NET 4.0 / .NET 4.5, removing all dependencies to your current EF version and re-adding those dependencies for .NET 4.5 / EF 5.0.
Some time ago I wrote a blog post on this: http://blog.3d-logic.com/2012/04/11/entity-framework-zombie-a-k-a-microsoft-entity-framework-june-2011-ctp/. There is a number of issues with CTP 4.2 because of technical challenges related to shipping a .NET Framework library out of the .NET Framework (like 4.2 target). Move to .NET Framework 4.5 that contains the same feature set as EF 4.2 + bug fixes and has a go-live license. Use EF 5.0 on top of it and you will be in a better world.
Thanks for all the responses.
My main issue is that we rely heavily on ENUMs in our implementation of 4.2 code first. I attempted to migrate the project to 4.5 but ENUMs are not supported, and there is also an issue with table per hierarchy (which is easy to fix). The next move will be to upgrade to VS11 and use 5.0 - but this is a big undertaking.
#jwsadler:
Enums are supported by core EF libraries released as part of .net Framework 4.5 (e.g. System.Data.Entity.dll). To make enums work with CodeFirst/DbContext you do need EF 5.0.0 package from NuGet (use Install-Package EntityFramework -pre (-pre is important)). You need VS 11 for this since Visual Studio 2010 cannot be used to create applications that target .NET Framework 4.5. Note that when installing the nuget package on Visual Studio 11 the target version of the .NET Framework set for the project is taken into account. If you target .NET Framework 4 you will not be able to use EF5 features like enums or spatial.