VB.NET: Can the .EXE built by VS2005 be deployed as a standalone EXE?
When I change the mode in VS2005 to "Release" and build the solution, the bin\Release directory then contains the solution .EXE file, but also a .pdb, vshost.exe and .xml file. What are these extra files and are they necessary?
I copied the .exe file to another machine and it executed properly, but there was a significant delay when it first executed - thereafter it was like any other program. What is the reason for this, and can it be helped? Is it because the other 3 files in the Release folder are not there with it?
The project template that you used to get the project started doesn't have very optimum settings. You'll get the clutter as a result. It is easily fixable. Start with Project + Properties, Compile tab. Make sure the Release build is selected, upper left combo box labeled Configuration.
The .pdb file contains debugging symbols. You don't need it for the Release build although you get slightly more informative exception messages. The stack trace will contain line numbers. You cannot trust them for a Release build though. Click Advanced Compile Options, Generate debug info = None.
The .xml file contains IntelliSense info, it will be generated when you use XML Documentation in your source code. Meant to be used for assemblies that are referenced in another project, quite pointless for an EXE project. Turn off the "Generate XML documentation file" option on the Compile tab.
The .vshost.exe file is a helper process for debugging your app. It hosts a custom version of CLR, configured differently to help with security issues while debugging. It also makes the output of Console.WriteLine() appear in the Visual Studio Output window. There's little point in having it created for the Release build. Select the Debug tab and uncheck the "Enable the Visual Studio hosting process" option.
After making these changes and rebuilding, you should only have the .exe file left in the bin\Release folder.
The slow startup is what's called a "cold start" of the .NET framework assemblies. It is caused by a slow or fragmented hard drive. Since the DLLs were never loaded before, the disk drive needs to dig through the GAC to find the files. You can probably improve it by defragging the disk. Cold starts are never as fast as warm starts though.
A classic trick, used by Microsoft Office and Adobe Acrobat, is to warm up the file system cache by loading their DLLs at login time. They are called "optimizer" in the Startup folder or Run registry key. Very annoying btw, they slow down other programs. You can do the same thing by writing your own little .NET program that doesn't do anything but create a few classes. Put a shortcut to it in the Startup folder.
You should be able to just ship the EXE. The PDB and VSHOST files are used for debugging, you should be able to configure your Release build to not generate these files. You can set this in the 'Advanced Compiler Settings' dialog from the Compile tab in your project properties.
alt text http://philippursglove.com/stackoverflow/compilerdebugoptions.png
(Hat-tip to Amissisco for pointing out it's the same dialog in VS2005/2008.)
I'd imagine the 'significant delay' you experienced when running the program for the first time was due to the .NET Framework being loaded into memory (and probably then paged back out to disk) - unfortunately there's not much getting round that one. You could try throwing hardware at it - memory and a solid-state disk would probably give an appreciable speed increase but may not be a cost-effective option if your application is going to be released on a significant number of PCs. However this should only take place the first time you fire up the application after a machine restart, which is why subsequent launches of your application are quicker.
Only .Exe file is required for deployment. But its better to create a setup. If you are using App.Config file / Application settings, you need to copy the exename.config file too.
Yes, you can deploy it as a standalone EXE, together with any third party DLLs that do not belong to the .NET Framework as well as other resources such as application.config. images and/or other media assets.
The .pdb contains additional symbolic debug info which is not necessary for your application to run. It's meant to assist debugging so that you see your source code instead of assembly code in the debugger.
vshost.exe is used by Visual Studio only, not too sure about the exact purpose of it though.
Whether these three files (.pdb, vshost.exe and the .xml) are present with the .exe should not affect the loading speed of your application. As .NET applications have to be compiled upon first run, the delay that you're experiencing should be partially due to that.
Related
This is driving me crazy. I have developed a .NET COM DLL that is used by a VB6 DLL wrapper in order to update and replace some legacy functions in an application.
I am now trying to remove the requirement to use regasm on client machines so have worked out how to do that on a test DLL which all works fine.
I branched the DLL just in case and added an app.manifest file. Everything else worked out fine and I got it all working. The manifest is embedded and Visual Studio 2012 generates a mydll.dll.manifest file in the release folder.
Then I went back to the original trunk and added an app.manifest file (no point in merging as there were no code changes). I copied the contents of the branch into the app.manifest file and built the release version. The manifest is embedded in the DLL but no mydll.dll.manifest file is generated.
I know that it's not strictly necessary to have the mydll.dll.manifest file but I'd like things to be consistent (and for some reason the test process doesn't produce the same results with the trunk version) so how can I force it to be created?
This is a VB.NET DLL project so it doesn't have (or I can't find) the 'Generate Manifest' property drop down mentioned in the first answer here. How can I set this? Or is there a way to set it by editing the project file directly?
References:
Original walkthrough article and some corrections.
Overview by Junfeng Zhang in two articles plus a useful tool
You are making a fairly common mistake. A reg-free COM manifest helps an application find a COM server without looking in the registry to locate the DLL. Embedding the manifest in the DLL is like trying to solve the chicken and egg problem, Windows cannot possibly find that manifest if it cannot locate the DLL first.
The manifest needs to be part of the client app. Which is tricky since it is VB6, it doesn't support embedding manifests in its executables.
You could tinker with the mt.exe tool, an SDK utility that supports embedding manifests in an executable. You'd have to run it by hand after building the VB6 binaries. That's unfun and very likely to cause trouble when you forget. It is in general not a joyful tool to use, documentation is meager, incomplete and unhelpful, a chronic problem with manifests.
The fall back is a separate app.exe.manifest file, what Windows will look for next when it cannot find a manifest embedded in the executable. Where "app.exe" must be renamed to the name of the VB6 program. The EXE, not the DLL. This now also gives you a chance to avoid having to register the VB6 DLL, presumably what you really want if you truly want to make your program run reg-free. The disadvantage is that it will not work when you debug your VB6 program, wrong EXE. You'd also need a vb6.exe.manifest, located in the VB6 install directory.
Needless to say perhaps, very hard to get ahead with VB6 here. It just wasn't made to help you do this, they didn't have a time machine in 1998.
I have to admit that I don't know VB at all, but in the case of C++ and C# Visual Studio projects I previously had to resort to calling mt.exe in a post-build step in order to get the DLL manifest I wanted. Maybe that workaround would work in your case as well?
I have a console application that dies very quickly, and upon inspecting the code, I can't tell exactly where it'll die (I've basically narrowed it down to a 10 line radius) so that I further debug it.
For reasons I won't go into, I can't execute the process from VS (I have the binaries, source, and pdbs though, but I can't build outside of the build server's environment), and would like to attach to the process... but when I start the process, it dies much sooner than I could ever hope to refresh the attach to process dialog.
Ideas?
One possibility for doing this is to use any existing Visual Studio project and specify the application as the application to debug. The steps (in Visual Studio 2010) are:
Go to the project properties.
Choose Debugging (under Configuration Properties)
Edit the Command and fill in the path to the binary
Then it should be possible just to start debugging (e.g., F5 or Debug\Start Debugging).
Another option that might be a bit quicker if you have the debugging tools installed would be to use WinDbg.exe. It would avoid needing to use a Visual Studio project. You can open the executable, specify command line parameters, etc. and then type g<ret> in the command line to fire it up.
I have a WCF service that I can debug. I put a breakpoint in the code at the point at which I want to debug and get the message
The breakpoint will not currently be hit. The source code is different from the original version.
I have been struggling with this for 3 days now and have tried everything I have found in other posts.
One thing that I notice is that if I go to Debug -> Windows -> Modules the module that I want to debug is not in that list. I think this may have something to do with it. Does anyone know what I should do.
Thanks,
Sachin
EDIT:
I have tried all these things and many more, but for some reason I still have the same problem. Is there any solution to this at all?
Try closing down visual studio after closing any files open in it. Then go into your bin folder for debug and delete all .pdb files. Now reopen visual studio and rebuild your project or do a clean and build ensuring you are in debug mode and not release mode. This issue can arise if your pdb files become locked. If you have a pdb file present for that dll then it should pick up that module for debugging.
If that doesnt work have you restarted your machine? If not try a reboot as sometimes the process can get caught up in Windows, and restarting will release the lock to overwrite the files.
Quick question. Is the module in question an external module or is it part of your current solution that you are debugging? If it is an internal module then the solutions above should definetly work as you will generate a new .pdb file for that assembly.
To state the obvious, this error means that compiled service does not match the source code i.e. source code has changed since service run. Make sure you rebuild your solution.
What I do to debug WCF services is to have 2 instances of Visual Studio. One runs a WCF service hosting app (console) and the other runs a client. Make sure you are running debug version. It should work (and debug) fine as long as the client can successfully connect to your service.
You get
The breakpoint will not currently be hit.
when a module with that breakpoint has not been loaded (yet). Your service will not be loaded until a client connects.
Right click on the project inside the solution explorer and choose to Clean. Build a new version of the project and the breakpoint will work again. If this not work, try to delete everything from the bin and obj folders, and build again your project.
I have a seemingly random problem where my project will run using an old version of a DLL file that no longer exists. Sometimes the real version of the DLL file will be used, other times an ancient version of the DLL file will be used. Who knows where Visual Studio is getting this DLL file from - it's months out of date!
I know that it is using the old DLL file, because when the application runs I start getting weird 'TypeLoadExceptions', complaining that methods don't exist or don't have implementations.
The following actions will sometimes help, sometimes not:
Restarting Visual Studio
Restarting the computer
Cleaning and rebuilding the solution
Deleting everything in \WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v4.0.30319\Temporary ASP.NET Files
Searching for and deleting instances of the DLL file in \Documents and Settings\username\Local Settings\Temp
Sometimes I perform all of the above steps, and it still uses an old copy of the DLL file. Where is it hiding it?!
The same issue exists on our TeamCity server which is using MSBuild. When TeamCity tries to run unit tests it uses an old DLL file.
Now, I know that I can use assembly redirection in the web.config file, but the version number of the DLL file hasn't changed (I don't bother to update it, so it just stays at version 1). I don't want to have to start versioning the DLL files just to solve this problem. I would just like to know which particular caches I need to clear so that I can get on with developing.
It hides it in the GAC. There it may reside indefinitely. Using a more recent version may indeed solve the problem, but there is an outstanding bug in Visual Studio that has to do with choosing the correct version of DLL files. (If DLL Hell wasn't bad enough, the Visual Studio team is making it worse!)
Finding it in the GAC is tricky, and I cannot advise you on how to do that, but once the old version is deleted from there, it will not be found again. Sometimes, even though you are pointing the compiler at a newer version (by date), it will use the older version, because it has the same version level (by version). That is its bug.
Who knows where Visual Studio is getting this dll from - it's months
out of date!
The Modules Window is your friend...
It'll tell you exactly where that file is coming from. You can even use it with arbitrary processes if you attach the debugger.
I too would guess that they're hiding in the GAC.
You can look in 'C:\Windows\assembly' to see all the dlls and unregister yours from there.
The problem may exists with the build order or your projects.
If your Test project is built before the application project, this cause the behaviour you describe. To fix this: right click on your main project in VS and select the Project Dependencies... option and check the build order. Changes to the build subsequence can be made here by correctly setting these dependencies.
I had a similiar problem (but without Visual Studio). I am loading a .NET dll using UnsafeLoadFrom.
On one computer (a terminal server) the old file still remains being used, regardless of updated version numbers, etc.
The reason is simple: As long as a program instance is running, which has already loaded the old dll, the new dll will never be used. All further UnsafeLoadFrom will become the old dll although the old version doesn't exist on the harddisk anymore, because it has already loaded some time ago.
The solution is to shut down all running instances of the application or even restart the computer. Then all new instances will get the updated dll.
In my case, this was caused switching to Release mode, which had a different configuration (that used different location of the DLL).
In my case, I use Visual Studio to Publish Website, and though I check the reference of the dll file has changed, but the published dll still is old. Finally I new a Publish Web Profile and choose the right configuration (such as Debug - x86 / Release - Any CPU), publish again then the dll is corrected.
While this question is old, maybe someone will stumble upon it again in his/her quest for finding a solution.
In my case i got a CS0433 error for an ASP.Net page. After deleting the content in the obj\ and bin\ folders of the project, it worked again. Probably has to be done with a closed Visual Studio. Maybe also clean out those folders in referenced projects in the same solution (if used in the project and not pulled via Nuget).
In my case, the old DLL was in
C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\assembly\GAC_MSIL\MyDLL\MyDLL.dll
It DID NOT show up in c:\Windows\assembly.
I did a search of my drive for MyDLL, and it showed up as indicated above. I was debugging my test app at the time, and tried to delete the offending folder...no go...it was locked by Visual Studio. I had to stop debugging my app, close Visual Studio, and then delete the folder. Problem solved!! I don't know how my DLL got there, but it hasn't showed up there since I deleted it.
It's possible that the DLL is being referenced from another folder. It could even be on a network drive if you have one in your PATH environment variable. Here's how Windows searches for DLLs:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/7d83bc18%28v=vs.80%29.aspx
In My Visual Studio 2015, I ensured that the offending Visual Studio project's Reference Path Listing is empty:
If you find such problem ,delete your Reference dll and pdb extensionfile add new references and rebuild your project .This often happens due to no rebuild of project,commit and updates.
The fix for me was making sure that the virtual directory in IIS was pointing to the correct directory. I have two projects on my system, a v4 and a v5. The virtual directory on my dev system was pointing to the v4 bin directory instead of my v5 bin directory - oops!
The file that was being cached in the dll, I couldn't trace the file, so I ended up renaming the file. This might not resolve the problem mentioned here but this was the fix that worked for me related to this question.
I tried a ton of things including re-installing VS 2107.
You can see where the DLL files are being loaded from in your Output window. After going through all mine looking for project DLL, I found it.
Clearing this worked for me.
C:\Users\YourUser\AppData\Local\assembly\dl3\222Q4G1T.8AT\JBEAR7PB.E3J\8bfcf9ab\6e61cbd5_30acd401\YourDLL.dll'
I actually deleted all the files in:
C:\Users\YourUser\AppData\Local\assembly\
Holy Crow! I had an old, old suite of applications including 2 web services and a bunch of class libraries and a click once application. Well, click once stopped publishing for VS 2005 with a bunch of 'not found' errors. So, rather than hack away at my registry as suggested on this site, I figured it was time to upgrade the projects to 2017. Well, when I did this, the projects references in my web service projects got lost. Then, rather than helpfully just telling me that with errors, VS 2017 must have went to some cached file in C:\Users\XXX\AppData\Local\Temp\WebSitePublish or C:\Users\XXX\AppData\Local\Microsoft\VisualStudio\8.0\ProjectAssemblies or C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v4.0.30319\Temporary ASP.NET Files\root and 'helpfully' just used those files instead! I had to do a hardcore search with a custom program to find all the files on my C:\ drive and delete them before I finally got the errors!
Is it possible to create a VB.Net application which users can just run without installing it first.
If not, is it possible in another .Net language.
If not, how IS it possible :)
PS: The application only has to run under Windows (>= XP).
If they have the .NET Framework installed (the version of it that you developed it), they only need the .exe. You can find the .exe file in the bin directory of your projects folder in your Visual Studio workspace.
If they do not have the framework installed, you'll need to produce an installation for them. It's extremely easy with Visual Studio by just creating a setup project in the same solution as your code.
As long as the user has the .net runtime installed, and your exe has any needed resources in the same folder (dll's, images, ect) theres no problem with that.
If you mean without installing the .net framework though, that won't be possible.
just build the program, and go into the (assuming the project name is app1) app1/app1/bin/debug/ dir. there should be a file there called app1.exe. this file is the compiled .exe from you project. any other computer will be able to run this without doing any installation (provided they have the .NET framework installed (it comes standard on any computer with an os > WinXP))
EDIT: If you were building with debug configuration, it would be app1/app1/bin/debug/, but if you were building with release configuration (which would probably be a better idea if you are distributing) the path would be app1/app1/bin/release/
If you mean running it without the .NET Framework, it used to be possible, but apparently the company's website is no longer in English so I have no idea what's happened to it.
EDIT: If you were building with debug configuration, it would be
app1/app1/bin/debug/, but if you were building with release
configuration (which would probably be a better idea if you are
distributing) the path would be app1/app1/bin/release/
I am developer and have no administration rights to live(production) network.
I had to find away to deploy an app without installation... and my app is self updating this cause other problems too....
The production network Computer check/monitors the file versions etc, so updating in the program files can not be done, where a MSI has been used for deployment.
Using this above I am able to copy and Run the App from the User Profile (where the user has full rights).
lets understand how program runs-
an .exe needs some function which are not inside the .exe, such as , for example substring() function. these predefined function resides in some .dll libraries.
when .exe is executed by user, .exe first finds the .dll and then the function inside that particular .dll.
.exe first looks within the current folder for that .dll
if not found then it searches that in PATHs. (PATH is Environment variable which value is a list of folders such as System32 etc.)
an .exe usually needs only 3 things - .exe itself, .dll which predefined function it is using, and some ActiveX controls(.ocx). apart from these 3, .exe only uses resources (such as icons etc).
lets focus on these 3(.exe, .dll, .ocx)
first you need to check what .dlls your .exe is using. you can easiely do this by using a dependency walker.
then make sure all these .dlls (that dependency walker is showing,or in other words- all these dlls whose functions your .exe needs) are either in current folder(in which your .exe resides) or in the PATHs.
if this step is done then your .exe has high chances to run whithout "installing".
the only problem is that some .dll and all of .ocx, needs to be registered first(means they have to have some kind of registry entry). they are not ready to use just by copying and pasting in current folder or PATHs.
but you can register these .dlls and .ocx's by using regsvr32 (with command line).
after that your .exe should not face any problem to run successfully.
hope you got the main concept.