I have a native dll (which is an activex control) that I need use with my .NET application without having to register the dll in the registry.
I have read several in depth posts about registration free activation, some of the better ones are
A lengthy one from Steve White and Leslie Muller
This one from samuel jack
And another from Mike Makarov
and from what I can see it is possible. However several hours and hundreds of tests later I just cant get it to work. I've done a bit of PInvoking and even less with ActiveX controls in .NET in my career, so would appreciate any input from anyone whom might have kicked goals on this before.
So far I'm following Steves advice, in terms of building an application that works and then trying to formulate the winning manifest file syntax via repeatedly running the regsvr32 command to add and remove the unmanaged dll's from the registry. Just a bog simple .Net console application with about 10 lines of code...
One part that I am confused about is the interop. The native dll's I have are also accompanied with managed runtime callable wrappers (RCW's). In my .NET application I add reference to these RCW's and then can consume the respective classes and functionality provided for by the unmanaged dll's. I'm not PInvoking via dllimport.
In creating the manifest files I'm unsure if I need to worry about these RCW's and how they work in a registration free scenario, or even if if they need to be in the compiled output?
I've also tried several tools such as (OLE/COM object viewer, Mt.exe from the windows sdk, and regsvr42 from codeproject). But the manifest structure and necessary GUID's all vary between tools and posts.
Current status is that I receive a InvalidCastException "Unable to cast COM object of type System.__ComObject to interface type MyFunkyDllLib.FunkyDllControl. This operation failed because the QueryInterface call on the COM component for the interface with IID '{some guid}' failed due to the following error: Library not registered.
Can anyone confirm the correct syntax for the application and dll manifest files ? Online posts even vary on the name with some using sxs in the name....
Update1:
Whilst Joe's answer below did not work it did give me some better insights into reg free COM. In the properties of the Interop dll (the one that that is added to the project reference from the list of installed COM components on the dev machine) I changed the Isolated Property to True. This has the effect of making VS dump a copy of the COM dll (not the interop, it is embeded in the exe) to the bin\debug folder. VS also then creates a myapplication.exe.manifest.
In this manifest file is supposedly sufficent information for reg free com. I found other posts indicating success with this method but in my case I still ended up with the same InvalidCastException.
Reading over Samuel Jacks post again, I tried his method of creating both a manifest for the exe and the COM dll using the clsid information from the VStudio output manifest when Isolated=true. (I also deleted the <file/> section created by VS from the exe.manifest). After unregistering the COM from the registry I now have success ! The application starts and does not error.
Why this approach works and not the Isolated=true I have no idea because it is beyond my knowledge of manifests and assemblies.
However we are still not at the wizards castle yet Toto.
Now I'm back at the same issue I posted on this SO thread. However in this scenario unit tests are not involved. Just a plain console application with 10 lines of code. Works fine when in normal registered COM mode, but not in reg free mode.
After many hours of trial and error I finally got a solution to how to successfully implement RegFree COM.
Here is a full explanation incase it helps someone else.
I create a new .NET class library in VS
Right click references and select the COM components of interest.
(Note: for the COM to be visible in the list they must be registered
on the development machine. This can be acheived by using the
Regsvr32.exe tool included with windows. Calling "regsvr32
mycomdll.dll" registers it in the windows registry)
Right click the COM reference, goto properties, and then set Isolated=True. This has the effect of causing VS to output a .manifest file supposedly containing all the registry details necessary for a consuming .exe to know what resources to load instead of querying the registry. However in my case it was incomplete. Calls to Interop methods would work, but events from the COM component would not. See step 5 for my solution)
Build the project. The .manifest should appear in the build output.
Open the manifest in notepad or similar. Within the <assembly /> tag I needed to add a <comInterfaceExternalProxyStub /> tag with appropriate IID, tlbid and proxyStubClsid32 GUID elements. Elements of the manifest are documented on msdn. In my case the proxy/stub was proxyStubClsid32="{00020424-0000-0000-C000-000000000046}"/> which is the built in windows proxy. The iid and tlbid I originally discovered via Process Monitor whilst calling regsvr32. An easier and more reliable option I later discovered was to use a tool like SxS manifest maker as it added a second <comInterfaceExternalProxyStub /> that I originally did not have.
Create an exe project in VS and reference the previously built library.
Build the exe project.
Run regsvr32 /u mycomdll.dll. To remove all registry associations.
Run the exe. In my case calls to and events from the COM component in the class library worked perfectly.
Caveats: I dont know why VS does not include the <comInterfaceExternalProxyStub /> element automatically in the .manifest. At the time of writing the only way to automatically update the manifest was to add a post build Task in VS. In my case I copied the entire XML manifest into an XML in the class library project and then just overwrote the .manifest file in the build output.
Unit (integration) testing of the COM is inconsistent. Currently in my case calls to Interop methods work, but events do not. It has something to do with the fact that the Test Runner is not compiled with knowledge of the dependencies and therefore such are not present in the activation context.
You are probably missing a typelib declaration...but ignore that for now... Instead, do the following...
After playing with this on and off for a while, I decided that the easiest way to do it is using MSBuild and a GenerateApplicationManifest task. I've been using it with a unmanaged app, but I don't see why it would not work with a managed app. I say "app" ... because my app is managed but I have both COM libraries and .NET assemblies with ComVisible classes in them.
From your description it sounds like you are dealing with having COM and don't have to worry about consuming .NET assemblies from COM. You can google for MSBUILD and GenerateApplicationManifest to get an example MSBuild file.
So, I assume you will not need to populate the "Dependencies" attribute of the task. You will need to populate the "IsolatedComReferences" attribute with a list of your COM DLLs. They can be a simple semi-colon delimited list, but usually they are in "ItemGroup" declarations in the MSBuild project file. The COM DLLs need to be registered at the time you generate the manifest.
As for your RCW, there is nothing special you need to do. IMO, they don't need to be in the manifest. .NET has a way of finding them as long as they are in the same directory as your app/DLLs.
If you use MSBuild, you won't have to generate manifests for your COM DLLs... They probably already have manifests already... Usually, the wizards automatically generate manifests and embed them. The only manifest that will need the COM type information is the manifest you generate with MSBuild.
The whole point of the manifests used in this manner is to populate the manifest space with all the COM information that would be in the registry.
Related
I might be a bit stupid, but I want to create a tool in Visual Studio in C# and want to call third party tools via their API-DLLs. The only topics I found here are dealing with one of the two methods that I already know:
Compilation time: add a reference to "C:\FooTool\foo.dll" in my project + "using fooToolNamespace.fooToolClass" in my code (compilation time) --> I can "naturally" use the classes of the DLL and will even get full IntelliSense support if a suiting XML-file is available with the DLL. Also compilation time checks will be done for my usage of the dll.
Dynamic (run time): calling e.g. Assembly.LoadFile(#"C:\FooTool\foo.dll") and then using reflection on it to find functions, fields and so on --> no IntelliSense, no compilation time checks
So I actually have the DLL at hand and thus option 1) would be nice during development. But if my tool is used on a different PC, the third-party DLL might be in a different path there, e.g. "C:\foo\foo.dll" and "C:\bar\foo.dll".
In my understanding using a copy of "foo.dll" will not work, because "foo.dll" might have dependencies, e.g. requiring other files of the FooTool-directory. Thus in my understanding I have to call the DLL which is "installed" to the target PC and not a local copy of it.
So can I somehow change the path where my tool accesses the "foo.dll" at runtime and still use method 1) during development?
Or is there another way of doing things?
Or am I just dumb and there is a simple solution for all this?
Thanks a lot for the help and have a great day
Janis
To be able to use option 1 (a referenced DLL), you need to put the DLL somewhere "where your EXE (or, more precisely, the Assembly Resolver) can find it" on the customer's PC.
So where does the assembly resolver look for your DLL?
In the directory where the EXE resides (for desktop/console applications) or the bin subdirectory (for web applications). Since you mention that your DLL requires other dependencies as well, you'd need to copy them to that location as well.
The Global Assembly Cache (GAC). If your dependency supports this, installing it to the GAC ensures that it can be found by your application.
These two are the "supported" scenarios. There is also the possibility to tweak the assembly resolver to look into other directories as well, but that should be reserved for special cases where the other two options failed. (We had such a case and solved it with a custom AssemblyResolve handler on the application domain.)
I have a existing Java Project which needs functionality from a SDK written in C#. It should open a WPF Window and send the information back to Java on close.
For a basic connection of those two worlds i created a Java Project ("DotNetCaller") calling native functions. These are implemented in a C++/CLI Project ("DotNetBridge") which calls the C# Project ("DotNetApplication").
I already can set Strings from Java in C# and callback from C# to Java.
But as soon as i add a WPF Window and try to launch it with:
Application app = new Application();
app.Run(new DotNetWindow());
in a STA Thread it crashes.
The DotNetApplication doesnt find mscorlib.resources, after i provide the DLL, PresentationFramework.resources is missing and if i provide that, the DotNetApplication.resource is missing (which i cant provide).
If i call the DotNetApplication alone or from the DotNetBridge the Window displays as expected.
Can anyone tell ma what i'm really missing here?
Thanks
Edit:
I looked at this example once more and tried to adapt it to my needs.
I have set the dll directory of the ResolveEventHandler to the .NET dir in "Referenced Assemblies"
C:\Program Files (x86)\Reference
Assemblies\Microsoft\Framework.NETFramework\v4.0
and added a Window in C#.
It failed aswell but with a new exception in the C++ part rather than C#.
The ResolveHandler gets called with an empty argument causing an uncatchable exception in mscorelib.
I added a check if the String is empty and this basic approach works fine now.
I'm still unsure if i have the correct approach for this, so feel free to contribute.
Your AppDomain::AssemblyResolve handler probably needs to be overhauled and based on your own understanding of what you want to do. There is some guidance here. The basic rule is that you return nullptr for requests that you can't handle.
But first you have to plan the locations in which you want to deploy (and/or debug) your assemblies. A simple layout would be to put all of the assemblies that your JNI DLL depends on in the same folder as the JNI DLL (with the exception of any that will be installed in the GAC). You can then use its location to satisfy resolution requests. But remember to return nullptr if no file containing a manifest for an assembly with the requested name is present there. (This is likely the case with your ".resources" requests. If there isn't one it's okay unless you know otherwise.)
I'd be a little surprised if an assembly in a Reference Assemblies folder wasn't also in the GAC—but it'd be up to the assembly provider. Reference Assemblies is for design and build tools (e.g. Visual Studio). (The old way was for each folder that had assemblies in it to be registered for each version of Visual Studio so the assemblies could be used for design and build.) If a dependency is not in the GAC, you can use the "Copy Local" property on the reference to make it available for debugging.
You might find the Assembly Binding Log Viewer useful while designing and troubleshooting. With it you can see all the folders and extensions that are tried before giving over to calling the AppDomain::AssemblyResolve handler chain. (Disable logging when you are done.)
I need to late bind to a 3rd party VB6 COM object in a 3.5 C# application (to avoid version dependencies that we currently have). The dll that was provided is not consumable in most non-latebound ways due to some bug that causes errors when we try to consume it normally. Currently, we are using a custom VB6 wrapper that makes things VERY version specific, however I have found that I can use late-binding to access properties and methods. Now, I am trying to late-bind to events, however everything I have read says that I need to inherit from the COM wrapper's interface to create the event sinks that are needed. Here is one such article.
So, my question is whether it is possible to perform late-bound event handling without having any reference to the dll at compile time?
UPDATE
Here are the errors I have with the VB6 wrapper (Which is still being actively updated).
In OleViewer, I get
Could not decompile selected item Error loading type library/DLL.
TYPE_E_CANTLOADLIBRARY ($80029C4A)
In Visual Studio I get:
Could not determine the dependencies of the COM reference
"3rdPartyDLL". Error loading type library/DLL. (Exception from
HRESULT: 0x80029C4A (TYPE_E_CANTLOADLIBRARY))
From here:
I found that the problem is caused when the IDL contains an importlib
to another project's .tlb typelib.
This seems to create a dependency between one dll and the other.
If dependant dll is missing OLEView refuses to display the dependent
dll, which also manifests itself by not allowing #import from C++
code.
Therefore I would look carefully at the COM dependencies of the DLL in question and make sure they are all registered as well.
It also goes on to add:
...because both dlls are co-dependent,
components from each interact (via interface declarations on method
signatures) and use #import from each others typelib.
Therefore, unless both target dlls are present, neither can be
rebuilt. As you can imagine, this causes a terrible problem when you
try to completely rebuild the project's from scratch.
I've experimented with separating the interface definitions into
smaller IDL files...
Edit: here's a recent example of this problem coming about (I believe). I had a C# library exported to COM. Modifications to that library were made which changed the interface of several classes, but the library GUID was not changed. Also see here about risks of AutoDual which was in use.
Here's the odd part - the VB6 DLL was rebuilt referencing the modified C# DLL. It compiled fine. no errors. But its typelib was corrupt - OleView couldn't open it, failing with TYPE_E_CANTLOADLIBRARY. Changing the C# DLL GUID was necessary to get the VB6 DLL recompiled successfully.
Clearly a pitfall of VB6 / C# interop.
The problem is most probably caused by the platform you are using. I just had a similar problem yesterday. Make sure that you are setting your project platform to x86 / x64 when you are late binding a x86/x64 COM type library.
The same applies to oleview. Use the x86/x64 version to view x86/x64 type libraries. (Possibly you need to install the x64 Windows SDK if you are on an x64 system to get the correct executeable).
I've been trying to get a registration-free .NET based COM DLL to work, but without success.
In Visual Studio 2008 I added a new C# class library.
I enabled the 'make assembly COM-visible' and 'register for COM interop' options.
I added a public interface and class with some functions.
I added a manifest dependency to my C++ client application: #pragma comment(linker,"/manifestdependency ...
But when I start my application I get 'the application has failed to start because the application configuration is incorrect'.
I've used Microsoft's mt tool to extract the manifest files of both the C++ client application and the C# COM DLL and the information in both is the same (the dependentAssembly in the C++ manifest file contains the same name and version as the assemblyIdentity in the COM manifest file).
I've also tried the approach described on http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/eew13bza.aspx but with similar results.
Similarly I tried to add a reference to my COM project in 'Framework and References' of my C++ client application. The information on that property page looked promising (it shows options like 'copy local', 'copy dependencies', etc and properties like the 'assemblyIdentity'), but Visual Studio neither copies the DLLs nor adds a dependency to the manifest file automatically.
Note that the 'registered variant' works fine.
Anyone have any ideas of what I'm doing wrong?
Update:
When I create a simple C++ DLL and embed a manifest with the same name and version of my .NET COM DLL (same assemblyIdentity) my application starts up fine. So the problem lies with the manifest file of my .NET COM DLL.
I can successfully extract the manifest from the DLL with mt -managedassemblyname:... and then embed the same manifest with mt -outputresource:..., but this also doesn't cause Windows to successfully resolve the dependency.
I found the steps needed to get registration-free .NET COM interop working myself :-)
Run: mt -managedassemblyname:"myDll.dll" -out:"myDll.manifest"
Clean manifest (see format at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/eew13bza.aspx). Mainly I needed to remove all tags except for assemblyIdentity, clrClass and file (and specifically remove the runtime, mvid and dependency tags).
Run mt -outputresource:"myDll.dll" -manifest "myDll.manifest". Basically this adds the modified manifest as a resource to the DLL. Note that this is apparently not the same manifest (location)! If I reextract the manifest with the managedassemblyname option I still get the 'old' manifest. If I extract it with the inputresource option I get the new one.
I pretty much found this all thanks to Windows Vista. Unlike my Windows XP it contains a tool called sxstrace that gives rather detailed information about the problems with side-by-side execution.
When I did this, I started with a very simple, basic component to get the COM stuff sorted. Also I used a script client in the initial development.
I did not use Visual Studio, but instead a text editor for the .NET code. I inserted the GUIDs for the assembly and for the Interfaces, and marked the interfaces for AutoDispatch.
using System;
using Interop=System.Runtime.InteropServices;
namespace Whatever
{
[Interop.Guid("xxxxxxxx-9120-4283-b972-changethis05")]
[Interop.ComVisible(true)]
[Interop.ClassInterface(Interop.ClassInterfaceType.AutoDispatch)]
public partial class MyClass :
...
}
I made sure my class had a default (no-arguments) constructor.
I ran regasm /codebase by hand, from the command line, specifying the .NET assembly.
I hand-coded the javascript to instantiate the object.
When things were confusing, I checked the ProgId with OleView.exe.
Once you have the very basic stuff working, add complexity gradually, until you get the working solution.
You can also use the approach from the other direction; from the client. .NET Assemblies like System.Random are marked for COM interop when you install .NET, so you can use them to verify that your approach in C++ is correct. Instantiating a System.Random ProgId is something like the "hello, World" of C++-to-.NET-via-COM. If that succeeds, then you know the basic approach in C++ is sound.
I've created and registered a managed COM library in C# on my development machine. I've successfully registered it and created a .tlb file with regasm, and successfully imported the tlb into a c++ console app used for testing.
My COM assembly is called "efcAPI.dll" and it references another assembly that has not been set up for COM or registered in anyway called "efcServerDiscovery.dll". This second dll contains some code used by my COM dll and exists in the same folder as efcAPI.dll.
Everything concerning loading the COM assembly works fine. I can create instances of my classes defined in the COM and call methods from them. However when I call certain methods that use the code defined in efcServerDiscovery.dll I get a _com_error which reports that it could not load file or assembly 'efcServerDiscovery'.
I've verified that everywhere on my hard drive where efcAPI.dll exists there's a copy of efcServerDiscovery.dll (which is just the location I built and registered efcAPI.dll from). I've also attempted to place efcAPI.dll and efcServerDiscovery.dll in the same directory as the c++ app with no success.
Any suggestions as to where the c++ app is looking for the assembly or how to discover where it's looking would be great!
Yes, this is a problem with COM components having non-COM dependencies. Windows doesn't consider the location of the COM DLL when it searches for dependent DLLs. The normal search rules are in effect, the folder that contains the EXE first, Windows directories, current working directory, PATH environment. The location of the COM server does not play a role.
Assuming you don't want to deploy to the EXE folder, none of these are good places to store your DLL, although plenty of installers made the desperation move of storing it in c:\windows\system32 or modify the system PATH environment variable.
One thing you could do is P/Invoke SetDllDirectory() in your C# code before running any code in the DLL. Using Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().Location will do it. That is however not a safe thing to do though, it might alter the search rules for the app that uses your component.
The only real fix is to install the DLL in the Windows side-by-side cache (WinSxS) and to include a manifest in your C# executable. Given the state of the documentation, I can only wish you the best of luck.
In these situations i always start with Dependency Walker verifying that what & where its trying to load is what i think it is.
fuslogvw will tell you where the CLR is looking for assemblies
Or use GAC.
(here are your characters, stackoverflow)