I’ve recently heard that a discussion about Ubuntu default media player has taken place at the Karmic UDS.
News is that Banshee will likely take the place of Rhythmbox sooner or later (possibly in time for Karmic Koala).
I don’t really blame the decision, it should be taken as a big compliment to the Banshee development team.
I am equally sure, though, that many people won’t like the choice, because of the many concerns that Mono carries with it.
If you’re a mono supporter, please don’t get angry with me. It’s not really about bashing anything, as much as providing choice to those who wish it.
On a personal note, I’m still a Mono user currently, but reading flames like this doesn’t really encourage me (and yes, I challenge you to read it completely). Oh, I like Miguel’s posts by the way, but don’t ask me about the other pro-monos in such thread.
Gosh, what were we talking about ? 
Ah yes..
Strip the mono from the box
A word of warning: performing the following command will remove Mono and all the related applications from your machine. Even if it’s your intent to do so, look carefully at the list of the packages to be removed (apt will likely prompt you to make sure you’re sure).
If you’re using a clean Ubuntu Jaunty installation, prepare to loose just f-spot (which can be replaced by gthumb) and tomboy (which can be replaced by gnote).
If you have installed manually other programs, some of those may be stripped, such as banshee, gnome-do and so on.
To remove Mono, perform the following command:
sudo apt-get remove --purge mono-common libmono0 mono libmono1.0-cil libmono2.0-cil
Mono no no
Nice name. 
Mono no. Mono no no no no ! The mononono package introduces a deliberate conflict between itself and mono.
The web is full of guides that teach you how to clean your computer from Mono. Still, the problem is that Mono may be silently re-introduced as a dependency the next time you install an application.
Mononono will prevent any application requiring Mono to be installed. It will prevent the Mono to come back.
That means essentially that trying to install a Mono application (even if you don’t know it requires mono) will cause a conflict with the mononono package itself and you’ll be prompted to deal with it.
Download mononono here, then double click it to install it. (here’s the original webpage).
Update: as noted by Jo Shields, this is pretty much a ugly hack. It’s simple and it works, though.
Update: ARCH USER ? download nomono and related instructions here !
Further warnings
Really. This stuff is bloody serious, I mean.. will remove f-spot! And other stuff. You could also not be able to have sex with more than a partner at time anymore. Use it with care. I also won’t able to give you support to any issue you may experience.
The day it will require you to remove the whole gnome, instead, you’ll know we’re in big troubles.
Does anyone know similar packages for other popular distributions (Fedora, OpenSuse, Arch etc.) ?
Crazo.
You might as well just stop using gnome and switch to something sane.
Only good mono thing for me is Gnome-Do, which isn’t part of mono.
F-spot is horrible, and rhythmbox works fine for me.
@Vadim P.: it depends on mono, though, so it will be stripped as well if you strip mono.
I also don’t like f-spot, and prefer rhythmbox to banshee (which I tried for some month)
Lol ……. what a big troll the thread on ppa
Just to point out something about that “flame” :
Just to say that a programing language is just a tool …….. knowing how to use only one tool makes you an amateur (like someone that only knows how to use an electric drill) ….. Knowing how to use a lot of tools makes you an expert
Someone said to me once : it’s not the tool that is valuable, it’s the knowledge how to use the good one and the good way that is valuable.
Reading such thread as the one in ppa leads to nothing …… and you can and will find the same thing on each thing in universe. Because there will be always “pro something” people. The big standards on that are :
Pro war Pro peace
Pro star wars Pro star trek (pretty funny to see it because they mostly fight with videos ….. search death star and enterprise on youtube and you’ll find one of the most recent on that theme)
Pro windows Pro Linux
Pro proprietary Pro OpenSource
Pro Javascript Pro Vbscript
Pro Java Pro C++
etc
and the funny part is that some pro groups join together
Threads like the ppa one : there is an infinite about an unlimited theme.
Putting attention on them is giving them force …… the best thing to do is to pass it and see what the future reserves us
If it were me I wouldn’t even point out the thread.
Thanks for your thread because it’s not a “con Mono” thread but just a thread that shows what you can do and that remembers that under Linux, anyone is free to do as he wants.
@Judicator: yup, everybody’s free to do what he/she prefers. Yet, threads like that (and I found even worst things I won’t ever link) disgust me pretty much.
All that flame born out of a post announcing the creation of the Gnote PPA. Pretty amazing.
“mononono” is not a package, which is why the RFP was rejected from Debian – it is an input file for a package called “equivs”, which even if it were prepared properly as a package, still violates Debian rules on archive integrity (and on equivs packages not being allowed)
On top of that, the guy who made it simply does not understand what he’s conflicting – There’s no “mono” package in Debian or Ubuntu, and libmono{1,2}.0-cil are packages containing non-ECMA Free libraries such as support for Gettext translations. The core libraries are libmono-corlib{1,2}.0-cil.
The CORRECT way to achieve the same result is with /etc/apt/preferences and pinning things as uninstallable.
Hi Stefano,
from my investigations I think that there is an even more succinct command required to remove Mono from a default install:
sudo apt-get purge libmono0 mono-common
That’s all you need.
I really hope Karmic doesn’t increase its dependence on Mono apps. But if it does, as long as the user can remove it and replace the apps with decent alternatives then I don’t see it as much of a problem.
SABDFL clearly understands the debate: http://www.theopensourcerer.com/2009/04/23/how-to-remove-mono-from-ubuntu-904-jaunty-jackalope/
Ciao
@Alan: thanks for your comment. By the way what SABDFL really thinks or fears is known only to himself. He recenlty claimed in an IRC session that ‘Microsoft promised to not sue’. The source of that promise, is unknown and that’s probably unfounded claim.
Karmic (or karmic+1) will probably increase mono-dependency and that’s it.
Yes, not much of a problem, not for end users as well. As I noted in the Mono Crusade, though, the issue is more about the (future) market you want to shape. Which is not one where anyone can sell any kind of IP peace of mind to anyone.
Removing Mono as a end user is choosing not to foster a development platform which may lead to that.
Sorry it’s a little outside the subject but :
With the same logics that there is against Mono :
How about Oracle buying Sun ?
1 – Must we replace all MySql based projects ? (because it’s a little foolish to think that Oracle will keep something that is competition to his own main product ….. plus his creator began to work a redo of MySql)
2 – Must we replace all Java based aplications ?
all to say that the Mono Debate is a false debate based on presumptions and hatred about Microsoft ….. That there is worse theme (like MySql one) that must be quickly resolved.
Microsoft is loosing control with his actual form of business …… The selling of windows is weakening in favor of alternatives (MacOs, Linux, etc). Company and People are tired of microsoft ……… Plus it’s old politic of changing of windows each 2 year will not work anymore.
About the presumptions, they may be true …. or false …… only the facts will validate this.
And, by the way, if you still wondering why Apple has only one button on his mouse : Microsoft has the patent that describe the contextual menu and the one that corresponds to the double click. So if you want to be Microsoft patent free ……. first clear those two patents
Best regards,
Actually Judicator, there is a lot of reasons to be concerned about Mono. I don’t know if you heard, but Sam Varghese at IT Wire attempted to purchase a royalty-free patent licence for Mono. They are supposed to exist, but Sam was unable to find out where he could get one:
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/25215/1090/
You might think that this is not a big deal. Microsoft has said that they won’t sue. There’s several problems with this. The promise is somewhat vague as to what they will or won’t sure about. And companies have changed their minds before. The Microsoft of tomorrow may decide to. Lastly, Java was released under a free software license by it’s owner. While Mono is free software, it wasn’t even produced by the supposed “Intellectual Monopoly” holder. So the free software license is no protection if Microsoft decides that it’s no longer in their interest not to sue.
Since the legal status of Mono is problematic, I think it should be removed from every Distro that uses it, including Ubuntu and Fedora (yes, Fedora Gnome has Mono), until Microsoft gives concrete evidence that they approve of the project, and that approval is checked by a good FOSS lawyer (Lawrence Lessig comes to mind), or a good FOSS lawyer signs off on the current situation.
Basically it’s the same as with VLC. It’s a great package, but it can’t be included in distributions that are downloaded into the USA and certain other jurisdictions, because it uses codecs that are supposedly covered by patents in those jurisdictions.
Well, nice to see a method for “blocking” mono on Debian based distros. I have created something similar for Arch Linux. Find it here: http://www.hanckmann.net/?q=node/41
I just wanted to mention it, maybe someone is looking for something like this.
@Patrick Hanckmann: thank you ! updated my post to include your link !
Thanks SO much for covering this topic, I was contemplating changing distros, but can live with mono-free Ubuntu for as long as that remains possible.
Scott,
Changing distros is actually a good idea. It gives you a look at other options, and there is some really neat stuff out there. For example I switched to Moon OS a while back, and it’s really nice. I also would recommend trying Crunch Bang, it’s also really nice.
And the learning curve is very low. Both are based on Ubuntu, Moon OS uses Enlightenment, and Crunch Bang uses Open Box.
Where can one vote against Mono dependency in Gnome / Ubuntu, etc? It would help if we promote links to that sites. There’s something like that in Ubuntu Brainstorm (http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/11435/) though it seems that no one cares about theses ideas in the Ubuntu team (only 13 ideas were implemented from thousands). I moved to Free Software beacause of freedom… I want to vote.
Removing mono is not freedom , it is denying a tool and is just anti Microsoft the reasons are made up and invalid. Removing mono is the same as saying Linux will not support any user compiled apps anymore all most be via a runtime like LVVM . ( Which would have a lot of benefits in terms of security and stability) . However C /C++ would be quite upset.
Also im not sure whether complete freedom is a good thing .. The biggest issue with Linux is the freedom this is frustrating for end users and developers . The current Unix/ Linux development makes DLL hell look tame ,in comparison it is a bit like a dog vomiiting his breakfast on the table . Bits dont work , configuration takes forever , bugs and patches are everywhere as long as you stay with the common path your ok you move outside of that it gets painfull very quickly. Compare to mono i can drop an assembly compiled with Visual Studio ( which is the best tool by far) , dump it on Windows , Linux ( on any arch) or CE and it compiles to native code ( via JIT or AOT) and it runs .. You dont just save development time but also configuration , testing and deployment .
Now i dont neccesarily think this should be Mono , however open source (except for mono) has not come to the party due to the costs involved.
Java – Byte code , Superceded by CIL which takes all the good bits and has improved security and portability. ( Why doesnt Java update the byte code !!)
CIL – Mono , Good but has the MS stigma . Its also a pitty that the community still hasnt written a decent GC for it yet .
LVVM IR , Prob the best mono alternative but the arrogance in the team led to it not supporting many things and being limited just as a compiler IR rather than a VM which it could be.
Removing Mono isn’t freedom? How do you come to that conclusion Ben?
I love more and more the comments that are developing here
Removing or adding something by yourself is freedom (because it’s your decision)
to have it installed or not in the mainstream is not freedom (because someone made the decision instead of you)
So here we are in the “what is the first : the egg or the chicken ?” paradox : Must we let mono installed by default and simplify his removal or Must we remove mono from main branch and simplify his installation ?
In both case : we quit and give freedom to users
When we think “must we remove or add this or that on mainstream” it’s a freedom nonsense because the simple fact to choose one or another means quit freedom to part of users.
Hope that helps to understand what freedom is and is not.
“One persons freedom ends where another persons freedom begins” ….. if it’s not the case it’s not freedom: it’s called anarchy (everyone is free to do what he wants).
Mono is a lib , just like libc is needed for C apps mono is needed for .NET apps and to avoid giving unfair advantage to C/C++ Mono and Java should be part of any distribution unless you think running a dist without libc and stdlib is ok ….. Especially Ubuntu which tries to provide an all in one experience.
“So here we are in the “what is the first : the egg or the chicken ?” paradox : Must we let mono installed by default and simplify his removal or Must we remove mono from main branch and simplify his installation ? “:
Well depends on the distro – For a complete distor like Ubuntu which supports running out of the box it should be part of it . For a minalist distro remove it allong with everything uncessary like libc , kernel headers and a compiler.
Im beginning to really dislike the package manager mess with versioning issues ( makes DLL hell in windows look tame) and think bloatware OS but tested to work is looking good, Frustrated trying to get an app to work the last few days .
Ben, You are so right …..
Two things are very irritating :
1 – The speed of mono releases is very fast where it’s not the case for .net releases in the Microsoft ecosystem.
The result is that in the Microsoft world there is not a lot of trouble to know what you need to make your app run …… this case is made complicated with so much versions of mono present in the Linux World.
Other side effect of “speed vs reason” is that we have a preview of moonlight 3 since a lot of time ……. nothing real since the last winter Olympics ……. The project is stuck ? they have done a bad implementation that need a complete rewrite ? who knows.
2 – You may laugh with this one : the lack of real support from the Ubuntu/Debian Package maintainers ….. They stick with the 2.4 branch where this branch is about to be depreciated and has it’s stable replacement since more than a year. since 3 ubuntu release they have been ignoring 2.6 branch. Worse : they always stick to the past release of 2.4 branch …… (eg if the 2.4.32 was available they would use instead the 2.4.24). Why I complain about that ? It’s simple : you do it or you don’t do it but you must not stay between those two. By making those severe decisions the Ubuntu/Debian distros are one of the oldest distro in the Mono point of view …… witch make life to developers very complex (preview his app to run in Ubuntu/Debian and the others).
The magical thing in the Linux World is that, like this very case in Ubuntu, Microsoft doesn’t even need to try to make fuzz over Linux …… Due to the “misunderstood” concept of freedom there is a lot of fight between Linux groups :
There is a lot more dev people that make programs for Linux than for Microsoft. It is said and known that Linux has the biggest dev population in the world. However Linux can’t even begin to take over Windows : Why is that ?
1 – The user habits ….. it’s complicated to change habits. (Mono is one of many response to that problem).
2 – Too much internal fights : KDE vs GNOME, Debian vs Ubuntu, emacs vs vi, GNU vs Linux kernel, and here : Mono vs some users (sorry, it’s difficult to define the group here : it’s not GNU, it’s not against microsoft ….)
3 – The meritocracy system that has shown it’s Limits : in the last 5 years I haven’t seen any improvement of any OSS o FOSS system. The only thing that I’ve seen is an increase of egocentric moves like : “you can use my software as you please but you can’t sell it or having commercial use of it” or like when I read recently “let’s call Linux as GNU/Linux for giving merit to GNU” or simply when you have someone like Google that comes in by surprise and make android or chrome and nothing is made to counter it ….. (the worse is that there is projects for counter them …… but there is no moves to support them massively …. many collects critics instead just like Mono right now).
Divided it’s a lost battle.
That was just a little yell about it
1. Yes i have literaly spend a month trying to get mono and moonlight to compile on a uclinux distro ( for no mmu arm) .. It runs its just an install / configuration nightmare ( partly due to glib and pthread/__thread lib issues)
On .NET in windows you downlaod the app and it runs it doesnt matter if its 32 bit , 64 bit or Arm.
“There is a lot more dev people that make programs for Linux than for Microsoft. It is said and known that Linux has the biggest dev population in the world. However Linux can’t even begin to take over Windows : Why is that ?”
Im not sure this is true – there are lots of part time / hobby Linux devs ( compared to MS where is 95% 9-5 devs)
“1 – The user habits ….. it’s complicated to change habits. (Mono is one of many response to that problem).”
Agreed . Users want somethin like OSX / Ipod . Remove the 1970s command line /shell crutch and instead of being an OS system admins loves it will become one users love. ( note im old and from the 70 ‘s
)
“2 – Too much internal fights : KDE vs GNOME, Debian vs Ubuntu, emacs vs vi, GNU vs Linux kernel, and here : Mono vs some users (sorry, it’s difficult to define the group here : it’s not GNU, it’s not against microsoft ….)”
The fights are good.. eg Java vs .NET ( mono) , OSX vs WIndows and even KDE vs GNOME , WCF vs axis etc its survival of the fittest and all of these have led to improved products . What is not good is the lack of standards ( and dont speak to me of comitees like WS) eg OSX allow you to have Java , C++ , mono apps etc but they define a very consistant UI for app developers to follow. Without this consistancy devs just do their own thig which creates a bad user experience ( Even Linux command lines options are not consistant ) . Only someone like Linus could have the clout to say for a runs on Linux logo you must follow this but its against the anarchistic development we have now which attracts hobyists.
”
3 – The meritocracy system that has shown it’s Limits : in the last 5 years I haven’t seen any improvement of any OSS o FOSS system. The only thing that I’ve seen is an increase of egocentric moves like : “you can use my software as you please but you can’t sell it or having commercial use of it” or like when I read recently “let’s call Linux as GNU/Linux for giving merit to GNU” or simply when you have someone like Google that comes in by surprise and make android or chrome and nothing is made to counter it ….. (the worse is that there is projects for counter them …… but there is no moves to support them massively …. many collects critics instead just like Mono right now).
”
I returned to Linux 5 years ago ( i was involved in UNix in the 80s , Solaris in the late 90) and was astounded by the lack of change/progress and how small teams were though the Gnu c compiler actually seems to be low in bugs the last few years it wasnt always so
“you can use my software as you please but you can’t sell it or having commercial use of it” .
I dont think this is ego centric , I have worked with 3 open source projects and the model is rarely successfull. When its successfull there tends to be a single key driver ( either person or Company) who does the bulk and when almost finished or there is a product people join . However because of this creating a large initial code base from scratch , like something to challenge Flash , WPF /Silverlight is very difficult and it is easier done by a company. Its ironic that i dont think Linux would survive now if it started as a OS project the fact that Linus put his soul into it with his initial 10K lines of code but creating it now is no longer an option.
Personally im working on a new OS ( see http://www.shanghai-software.com/blog) based on ucLinux and borrowing some ideas from Android , Coyotos and Singularity. It will be more stable , more reliable , more secure and will run at the same speed . Now while im an experienced dev with OS experience this is a 300K line project ( at least) and i will hire people to build this out of my own pocket ( in China where i have moved to save costs and im safe from lawyers) and hope to sell to the embedded and security markets so will offer a non commercial licence. I have tried to attract devs but these tend to be kids who think its cool , know very little and cost more time to teach than they produce . Very few devs with 10+ years experience work in new open source projects in their own time.
Obviously if the projects fails it will change to a BSD licence but after all since im putting up my dough and time on a product that might help people ( porting apps in embedded systems is a royal and expensive pain) and hence I should be allowed a non commercial licence , after all why should people make money of my work / contribution there is no other field in the world like that eg entertainers , sports people etc yet devs often contribute more . I think Linus has some good comments on how companies should be part of open source.
That’s ok when the project wants to be economically stable to have that mention, like yours.
However that scheme is now obsoleted with a all new branch that are “online” projects. Right now, any famous online services has a FOSS or OSS project that can counter it (such as facebook, twitter, dropbox, youtube, gmail and many more)
All those project does not have any economic plan. They just live with donations and comunity help.
What is the meaning of those projects if it’s for being used by home users or one company ? It has it’s use but very limited ….. and going further it’s impossible due to licenses witch are too much restrictive.
When it’s time to go to the “mass use” and Commercial use you confront different situations :
- Like Mysql AB they “pervert” the spirit and you sale at the same price than proprietary software (or even more)
- Like Google you use it, you modify it, you massively gain money with it but you don’t share. It’s the famous “know how” that one proprietary company will protect that make his product unique
- Like Sun you make a bait (openjdk) so that the OSS/FOSS comunity will not complain about having FOSS from java and blur/evangelize about their technology that, in fact, is totaly proprietary.
- Like so many companies that have tried to promote OSS and ends and dies in trials with the FSF or equivalent because they have not respected 100% of the licence. (witch is normal to be punished for that but make also collateral damage to OSS/FOSS and that may be even greater than not respecting the license)
It’s a loose/loose scheme in 90% of the cases. And in front of that there is just a static positions from the “big institutions” of the Linux ecosystem.
The battle theme :
battle can be healthy when they are won …. and winning is consisting of gaining the other camp territory, not having more territory. If it’s for having a battle that is a never ending battle it’s not healthy and more when there is others in the play (google and other projects that evolves quicker). When there is a common threat the common sense is to stop the war and to stick together.
Let me show you how bad this is for KDE and GNOME right now :
1 – KDE and GNOME are making battle one against another.
2 – KDE has made a big mistake with the 4th version and Gnome is about to make the same error with the 3rd version
3 – Inside GNOME there is many wars just like this one : having or not Mono and Mono apps
4 – KDE has a very poor app support due to their error with the 4th version, the kde apps are buggy and incomplete mostly
5 – Google announce an OS based on linux but without KDE or GNOME ….. with their own made window manager
6 – Reaction of KDE and GNOME ? still making war between each other without learning from each other mistake. And we all know how well done Google projects are.
7 – Possible result in the future : disparition of KDE and GNOME in the Linux ecosystem.
Competition is ok, battle are not in many times. The difference between the two is that in one you react and you are creative, in the other you just try to find how to attack your opponent.
I’m bored to read how much KDE and GNOME have changed since XX version ….. in the fact they are exactly the same as 10 years ago with just higher resolutions and better image presence or with better tweak support. They just find a way to do the same or what already exist with different techniques. And this applies to the other existing windows manager …… once created they really don’t change a lot.
” All those project does not have any economic plan. They just live with donations and comunity help.”
This works ok for apps though facebooks while free , sells personal details and details to advertisers so they can place adds . Paying for a 300K-1M+ line lib or driver is a different matter your not going to get donations to even cover your dev costs and adds are difficult.. How to get money for a new KDE/Gnome replacement ? Maybe the lack of improvement in certain areas reflect the difficulty to comercialise / pay for the R&D – meanwhile things like axis get a steady stream of patches / updates since it suits the commercial interests.
Gnome and KDE have made improvements but in the scheme of things they are trivial and focused more on software quality then the product . Google chrome was commercial and is a good example they copied WPF ( which copied other people) and uses XML to render a GUI . Though it is vasty inferior to Silverlight/WPF its good enough for phones , Google bought the company and made it open source to suit its own commercial purposes ( stop Apple controlling hand helds ) – the original creators have been paid.
Nah, just strip Mono out. I switched to Linux to avoid Microsoft ‘technology’, and I’m damned well going to avoid Microsoft technology. I’m not the only one who feels this way.
Miguel has wasted a lot of time and effort, on something that no one really wants. Which is too bad, he’s one hell of a programmer, too bad he hasn’t been doing something productive.
I think thats the real reason for this comment , a personal dislike of MS products . Its a religious crusade and its wrong ( Linus “fanboys must die “) , the difference between Windows and Linux is very minor and both are very dated 1970s designs ( though they were written around 20 years ago ) . I care about neither as i work for a new gen OS. Though i do feel Apple has got it right with the GUI focus and users are voting with their feet (and apple makes MS look like a saint when it comes to standards and interoperability. ) .
Open source is stagnating there is very little change – now some people who are new to Unix may find it all different ( or they came form MS world when the terrible windows ME ruled the roost) but when you started using Unix in the 80s and return to it 12 years later to find very little has changed its a bit disconcerting especially with the suite of MS latest offerings Windows 7 , Azure , WPF , WCF , ASP.NET ( MVC) , VS 2010 etc . (That said i think Microsoft are too afraid and risk adverse now they should have shipped Midori OS , their fold out tablet etc however their dev team has delivered great products) .
When im building my cross compilers and tryng to hack some libs to build im just going this makes DLL hell look like a picnic im spending forever in configuration . Compare to .NET i just drop the assembly on Mono linux or CE or 64 bit windows and it runs never a seg fault , never an error (except for assembly not found which is fixed by copying an assembly) . Java almost got there but not quite . Why cant Open source get closer to this !
Mono is one of the few examples where Open source has taken a good proprietry large program and made it almost feature complete open source ( Linux is another since Minix was proprietry) .
Like Linus said open source needs to use the input of companies more, even Microsoft , open source needs to stop looking at Microsoft and the past and start developing something new. How will software and operating systems look in 20 years time ? Or how can we improve the developer and user overall experience … rather than occasionally playing catch up . I guarantee while huge open source repositries for vi , emacs , awk , rm , se in c programs will still exist no one in their right mind will program a new application in it this is almost true today. C will not even be tought in Universities anymore outside some specialty courses ( just like assembler is now) .
Microsoft earned that hate by itself, but one thing are the products they do (which are not that bad) and another thing is the corporation which is a absolut totalitarian, uses it’s inmoral (some of them illegal) techniques to get what they want.
If i had a software company i wouldn’t feel safe developing for Microsoft’s products, the wqay they treat their partners is not ethical (see groklaw.net and read a thing or two about the obscurity behind the corporation, the patent wars and anti-trust wars).
About the C issue: Every programmer in the world must know a little C, it’s the most basic and common software development tool and of course know well the fashion language.
And about .NET, there is no true legal support for developers to use .NET and about the ECMA standard is only c# and is not complete, several parts of .NET are obscurely patented and is not and it will not be open. And just for that .NET should not be considered an standard package for standard distributions, at least the people should know that the distro they are using contains non-standard packages.
No one knows when Microsoft will go against every distribution claiming they hold the rights for everything GNU/Linux had become thanks to .NET (i know it’s a very dramatic case but remember tom tom, and now TiVo, they waited some time and then attacked… i hope Attachmate Corporation be aware of this).
http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-analysis/open-sauce/25215-the-elusive-royalty-free-patent-licence-for-mono