 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
.NET Forum / .NET Framework / New Users / March 2006Creating simple exe that runs without framework?
Hi all, probably a simple question for most of you: Can I create a simple executable with vb.net, that can run without the .Net framework installed? (like any executable created with VB6 in the old days..) I would like to stay away from permissions, strong naming GAC etc. for some simple tools... Thx, Marcel P.S. Why is it that .Net ships with command line tools that could easily be implemented with an interface???? (sn, gacutil, caspol..) Hi, No, you can't do that. However, I have seen tools that combine your application and the .NET Framework installer into a single installation package. Note that VB6 apps also use a shared runtime consisting of several DLLs. The trick is that modern versions of Windows have these DLLs by default, but in older days, one had to deploy the VB6 runtime along with the application. > Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > P.S. Why is it that .Net ships with command line tools that could > easily be implemented with an interface???? (sn, gacutil, caspol..) > Can I create a simple executable with vb.net, that can run without the > .Net framework installed? (like any executable created with VB6 in the > old days..) I would like to stay away from permissions, strong naming > GAC etc. for some simple tools... While it is certainly possible to do this, it is a great deal of trouble (and some expense). If you want a native executable, use VB6 to write it.  SignatureHTH, Kevin Spencer Microsoft MVP Professional Numbskull Show me your certification without works, and I'll show my certification *by* my works. > Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > P.S. Why is it that .Net ships with command line tools that could > easily be implemented with an interface???? (sn, gacutil, caspol..) Even with VB 6 you need runtimes that are now supplied with the OS. As for native executable, VB 6 can compile to native code but a lot of it calls the runtime DLLs and is actually slower than the VB 6 pCode when you use collection and other objects. (The information on VB 6 performance came from an old MS technet article.) Mike Ober. > > Can I create a simple executable with vb.net, that can run without the > > .Net framework installed? (like any executable created with VB6 in the [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > P.S. Why is it that .Net ships with command line tools that could > > easily be implemented with an interface???? (sn, gacutil, caspol..) Don't know if it's helpful but there's always Mono: "Mono provides the necessary software to develop and run .NET client and server applications on Linux, Solaris, Mac OS X, Windows, and Unix" http://www.mono-project.com You'd don't need to go down the route of gac/strong naming/permissions etc for a "simple executable". You'll need these in a more Enterprise environment. Caspol has the almost equilivilant MS .Net Framework Configuration in the Admin tools section of Control Panel. The Setup projects can do all the work of bootstrapping the installation of Framework runtime and can do all the clever GAC registration for you. Windows XP already ships with the Framework No (you may want to explain the exact problem, you don't necessarily need to use the GAC, strong naming, and permission is not a problem for locally installed EXE file). Else you'll have to use another product (actually VB6 needs a runtime). For the UI stuff my guess would be that most the time they are called from a command file as part of the build process (you have shell extensions for the GAC and the control panel might provide some of what CASPOL does)... SignaturePatrice > Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > P.S. Why is it that .Net ships with command line tools that could > easily be implemented with an interface???? (sn, gacutil, caspol..) By now you've seen the answers of no, you need the framework which is correct. Just have your users install the framework, then you can create some simple exe's that they can just xcopy install. One question, and I haven't experimented with this, what about an UNMANAGED C++ app? Does unmanaged C++ still require any type of supporting framework? Anyone? Bueller? Robert > Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > P.S. Why is it that .Net ships with command line tools that could > easily be implemented with an interface???? (sn, gacutil, caspol..) For simple exe, it's possible to distribute the .NET Framework inside the application directory, and make the framework only applicable to your exe. There are some undocumented features to control this, I will write up an article to post on our website, so everyone can use the techniques to deploy an application with .NET Framework inside the application directory. For the time being, you can spend some money for our linker and native compiler tool that does the job. http://www.remotesoft.com/linker/ Huihong Remotesoft, Inc. > One question, and I haven't experimented with this, what about an > UNMANAGED C++ app? Does unmanaged C++ still require any type of supporting > framework? If you use the standard C++ library, then yes, you need msvcrt.dll (comes in different flavours depending on the runtime version). > By now you've seen the answers of no, you need the framework which is > correct. Just have your users install the framework, then you can create [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption > =---- And you can static link that if you want. >> One question, and I haven't experimented with this, what about an >> UNMANAGED C++ app? Does unmanaged C++ still require any type of [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption >> =---- > Can I create a simple executable with vb.net, that can run without the > .Net framework installed? (like any executable created with VB6 in the > old days..) I would like to stay away from permissions, strong naming > GAC etc. for some simple tools... There is at least one option that I'm familure with for doing this: http://www.xenocode.com/ One of the people I work with has had signifigant success with this - we were able to build a complex C# WinForms application in .Net 2.0 (it even had some Managed and UnManaged C++), link it with this tool, and deploy it to lots of computers that didn't have the .Net framework installed. The install was pretty big (14 megs), but it ran everywhere with little or no work. SignatureChris Mullins Well... A lot has been said on this topic by the experts, but I find that one of the original questions was unanswered : Nenefta wrote : >> P.S. Why is it that .Net ships with command line tools that could >> easily be implemented with an interface???? (sn, gacutil, caspol..) So, here's my bit : I think it is to facilitate managment of .NET applications, to help in deployment, to automate processes, such as calling the tools in batch files. Also, some command line tools offer more flexibility than their interface equivalents. Regards, Cerebrus. That's a load of helpfull answers, thx everyone! It doesn't matter very much, but I still don't get why they can't make the commandline tools as forms-applications with optional commandline usage.. Ah well, I'm still working on the meaning of life as wel... ;-) Grtx, Marcel hi, i can help you with the question relating to the meaning of life. Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.