May 13 14:53:01 <Zhila> I'm not sure how .NET is installed, but if it's installed as a subsystem, then it should be possible (though difficult I'd assume)
May 13 14:53:31 <Zhila> if that is the case, then when mono installs, it could have the option of installing a Mono subsystem
May 13 14:53:35 <maniel> right
May 13 14:53:50 <jonp> .NET isn't a subsystem
May 13 14:53:59 <jonp> it's a cuter trick than that. :-)
May 13 14:54:10 <-- bl4ckh4t has quit (Abandonando)
May 13 14:54:13 <Zhila> heh, that's why I said "if," as I didn't know if it was a subsystem, or a bootloader
May 13 14:54:22 <jonp> the standard .NET PE header asks the OS to load a DLL
May 13 14:54:39 <Zhila> of course, if it runs on non NT systems, then it can't be a subsystem
May 13 14:54:42 <ki9a> jonp: XP loads .net natively though
May 13 14:54:43 <jonp> that DLL has a function which loads .NET and starts executing the program.
May 13 14:55:39 <ki9a> ever since XP it loads .Net executables natively.
May 13 14:55:46 <ki9a> more natively at least.
May 13 14:55:51 <maniel> linux can manage mono assemblies like native binaries/scripts/sth
May 13 14:55:53 <jonp> yeah, more natively
May 13 14:58:44 <ki9a> kinda frustrating when testing compilers because you can create assemblies that work fine on winxp
May 13 14:58:51 <ki9a> but not on 2000
May 13 14:58:52 <ki9a> or 98
May 13 14:59:58 <pipeline> That's pretty weird.
May 13 15:00:05 <pipeline> What version of .NET does XP SP1 come with out of the box?
May 13 15:00:30 <pipeline> oh
May 13 15:00:33 <ki9a> not sure if it's actually installed on sp1
May 13 15:00:37 <pipeline> wait, you're saying XP uses an entirely different loader trick
May 13 15:01:09 <ki9a> but XP supports loading them differently than previous windows' when (And only when) .net is installed