I have found that adding an entry to the DbProviderFactories in LINQPad.exe.config does not make it show up in System.Data.Common.DbProviderFactories.GetFactoryClasses().Dump();
I had to add it to machine.config to be able to see it and use it. Is that to be expected?
Specifically I was trying to add the Oracle ODP managed entry since an assembly I reference requires it. I am told that the point of using the managed provider was to make the assembly more self contained and portable and so having to touch machine.config trashes that idea.
Try adding it to Linqpad.config. The Linqpad.exe.config file is for LINQPad itself whereas linqpad.config is for your queries.
Related
For example this happened to me when I added configuration (IConfigurationRoot) in the Startup.cs file, to be able to access appsettings.json file which has a connection string.
So the first time I write IConfigurationRoot it is obviously marked as not recognized, so I put my mouse over it and expand the Visual Studio suggestions from the light bulb, which are:
using Microsoft.Extension.Configuration:
Microsoft.Extension.Configuration.IConfigurationRoot
Generate Type
Add package Microsoft.Extension.Configuration.Abstractions 1.1.0
So if I pick "using Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration",a using directive is added at the top of my file and VS recognices IConfigurationRoot, everything works fine. But checking the References in my project, this library was not added to it:
No Reference Added
So if instead of picking the using directive, I pick "Add package Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Abstractions 1.1.0", Visual Studio also adds the using directive but additionally it adds a new Reference:
Reference Added
I'm not understanding why this happens, why adding the using directive (first suggestion) works fine, is it because the reference is already contained in another library?, if so, why should I add the package individually?. Is it better to add it individually?, what happens if I do, am I adding a reference to the same library twice?
Thanks in advance.
...is it because the reference is already contained in another library?
Yes, look under the Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.FileExtensions or Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Json and you eventually get to the Abstractions package.
If so, why should I add the package individually?
There is no need. The light bulb tooling might not quite up to speed with the whole package dependency stuff.
Is it better to add it individually?
Not really, but if your ever removed some of those base package then adding it individually from Nuget would ensure that it would remain.
What happens if I do, am I adding a reference to the same library twice?
In an indirect way, yes, but there's no harm. The Dependency tree view drills down into each layer of dependencies. You will see lots of "duplicates" if start expanding those nodes.
Getting error
A reference to "file path\file.sln"could not be added. please make
sure that the file is accessible and that its is a valid assembly or
COM component
You mean adding a reference inside a project?
If is this, you can´t add a reference to a whole .sln, you will need to choose, for example, a valid .dll of the service you are trying to reference.
A reference to "file path\file.sln" could not be added.
That's a solution file.
[...] and that its is a valid assembly or COM component
A solution file is not an assembly or a COM component, hence the error. You need to add a reference to an actual assembly. If it's a project in your current solution, add a Project Reference. If it's not in your solution (and for whatever reason can't be added, though I highly recommend adding it if at all possible) then you'll need to add a reference to the compiled .dll of the referenced project.
You can't add references to solution files, project files, anything like that. Those are just XML metadata about projects. You need the compiled output, the assembly.
Question:
If I have multiple projects in one solution is it still considered a single assembly?
Background Information:
I'm aware the 'MyApplication/Properties/AssemblyInfo.cs' file exists. Further, I confirmed that when I:
Add a project to the solution.
Appropriately reference the newly added project.
Lastly, Build the solution.
The 'MyApplication/Properties/AssemblyInfo.cs' file has not changed. This leaves me to believe, and please correct me if I'm wrong that I'll have met the demand.
Thank you
No.
Each project is compiled into one assembly in your case. The assemblyinfo.cs file (for each project) should not change at all when you compile anything. Also, that file's name is not important at all; it's the global attributes inside it that cause various properties of the assembly being created to be set. That file's name and location are simply a convention.
I am trying to use the generic DbSet class. I have tried adding the following references so far to my solution because the MSDN documentation states that DbSet lives inside System.Data.Entity:
However, as shown below I still cannot add a reference to System.Data.Entity, the only suggestion intellisense has is EntityClient which does not contain DbSet:
Resharper/Intellisense is not giving me any other suggestions of namespaces I could possibly add.
I have tried cleaning and rebuilding my solution, and I am using the .Net Framework 4 full version (not the client version).
I have tried using NuGet to search for EntityFramework and have found one result which I have added to no avail as is show below:
What DLL file do I need to add to my solution to add a reference to System.Data.Entity and use the DbSet class?
Thanks
The same MSDN reference page that you mention says that you need to reference EntityFramework.dll in your project.
Note that namespaces and assemblies are not the same thing. The following statement is a little over-simplified, but you can think of namespaces as residing inside (or becoming available by referencing) an assembly.
So, once you've referenced the assembly, you will still need the using System.Data.Entity; directive.
I want to remove AssemblyInfo.cpp, because of some metadata errors that sometimes come up.
Is AssemblyInfo.cpp useful for anything? Or can it be removed without any problem?
I've discovered one distinction for this file: it has to do with values reported under calls to Assembly.GetReferencedAssemblies. I was working on tracking version numbers of our binaries from our SVN repository by embedding the revision numbers into them. Initially I too was updating AssemblyInfo.cpp and found nothing reported in the file property details tab for the binary. It seemed this file did nothing for me in terms of updating those details, which was not the case with similar updates to a csproj's AssemblyInfo.cs. Why the difference right?
Now in one such csproj we happen to reference a vcxproj and that csproj dumps to a log the versions of all its referenced assemblies using the .NET Assembly.GetReferencedAssemblies method. What I discovered was that the number that was being reported in that log was not the vcxproj's version as given by the VS_VERSIONINFO resource I added (which does get the version details into the file properties details tab). Instead the number reported was actually matching that defined in the AssemblyInfo.cpp.
So for vcxproj files it looks like VS_VERSIONINFO is capable of updating the contents you find under the file properties details tab but AssemblyInfo.cpp is capable of exposing the version to GetReferencedAssemblies. In C# these two areas of reporting seem to be unified. Maybe there's a way to direct AssemblyInfo.cpp to propagate into the file details in some fashion, but what I'm going to wind up doing is duplicating the build info to both locations in a prebuild step. Maybe someone can find a better approach.
So far I never had the AssemblyInfo.cpp in my managed c++ dlls, so I don't think it is necessary.
(I just added the file to have version information for my c++ dlls).
Why not just fix the errors? On that note, what errors are you getting?
This file provides information such as a version number which is definitely needed in order to use the assembly you have built.