Simple approach to updating AssemblyInformationalVersion via TeamCity's AssemblyInfo patcher feature - c#

By default a Visual Studio C# Library/Console etc project comes with an AssemblyInfo.cs file that does not include AssemblyInformationalVersionAttribute. TeamCity allows patching this attribute if found in AssemblyInfo.cs using AssemblyInfoPatcher.
Problem
A zero effort way of including AssemblyInformationalVersion for TeamCity.
Possible Solutions
Use a GlobalAssemblyInfo.cs file and link to each project, downside: each new project will have to be linked, frustratingly annoying if (often) forget to create link
Add AssemblyInformationalVersionAttribute to all templates in Common7\IDE\ProjectTemplates\CSharp\, downside: do it on each devs machine, mainly overkill
A first build step that runs a script based on this SO answer and creates links on all .cspprojs, downside: will have to check back in for patching step, overly complicated
Reason
The AssemblyInformationalVersion is useful because you can put any text there - I like to put the git hash of the commit used to build the assembly in it
Have you a better idea?

Related

How is dirs.proj used?

I'm afraid I may be asking a really dumb question, but I can't seem to find anything that makes this clear. I usually work on smaller applications but am now working on a larger one with several assemblies in a baseline framework and several assemblies for a product line domain (with more to come). I would like to manage the build by configuring MSBuild. I've done a lot of online research (specifically with several MSDN articles I found) and now feel knowledgeable enough to be dangerous.
I understand that in csharp the *.csproj file can be unloaded and modified with properties, items, and targets to control the build process. I also understand that I can import my own targets file to help separate and organize. In this link though (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd483291.aspx) a multilevel project build is organized with node-level dirs.proj files. This is confusing to me and has raised several questions I can't seem to find an answer to:
What is the difference in a *.proj and *.csproj file?
Can a *.proj be setup in VS to load on Build with F6 or does using this require use of the command prompt only? (i.e. "msbuild dirs.proj /t:Build").
Does dirs.proj load automatically? If so, my study-by is not working correctly, yet it does with command prompt.
Or am I overlooking something all the way around with "dirs.proj" Maybe it's just a substitue name for one of the project *.csproj files? If that was the case though there wouldn't have been a need for the root node's dirs.proj which from what I can tell doesn't have an actual project associated to it.
Anyways, I've seen dirs.proj mentioned in several forums regarding issues, but no where can I find how it's loaded or used in VS (outside of manual command prompt building which seems unreasonable if this is used to organize the build but the build won't really take a huge amount of time). I'm hoping someone can help me achieve that a-ha moment with this.
Thanks in advance.
Dirs.proj is an MSBuild convention typically used when dealing with very large source trees (> than 20 projects). I've worked with Microsoft engineers at a previous company and the dirs.proj convention appears to be one that Microsoft developed and uses internally to manage very large source trees.
A very good implementation reference for this is the Python Tools for Visual Studio project on CodePlex GitHub.
The link you shared by Sayed Ibrahim Sashimi is a very good explanation of the reasoning behind the msbuild paradigm, but it doesn't do a very good job of showing a practical example of how it works. The Python Tools project is an outstanding reference for this.
The idea behind using this paradigm is simple. I'd wager a guess that most .NET software engineers work on somewhat limited-scale projects that don't deal with more than 5-10 projects at a time, and they manage these projects in Visual Studio via Solution (.sln) files. They may even instruct their build system to run builds on the .sln. This works fine until you start thinking about scaling your product into or combining it with something larger, such as a platform with many, many projects. Solution files are not MSBuild files and as such they are not extensible like MSBuild is and they suffer massive performance penalties when dealing with large numbers of projects.
From an MSBuild perspective, dirs.proj stands in for Visual Studio .sln files. The difference, however, is that dirs.proj don't just include .csproj (and the like) as .sln do, rather, they can include source subtrees (e.g. other nested dirs.proj). So, building the root dirs.proj can result in the entire source tree being built, or building a nested dirs.proj will result in that subtree being built.
Therefore, the paradigm encourages you to look at your source as a series of interdependent nodes organized into features or product areas. That way, engineers can work on different source subtrees in very large projects without having to deal with the entire source tree, as you would have to with a VS solution.
Using this paradigm also carries certain benefits that don't come with .sln files. For example, if one project references a project from another, separate subtree, msbuild will build that reference first, automatically. Additionally, your source nodes can carry their own build settings, allowing them to be built dynamically using different build settings based on build scenario. For example, under one scenario a SharePoint source subtree needs WSP packaging, a C# subtree needs to be built without .pdb, a DB subtree needs to generate dacpacs, and the entire source tree needs to sign their assemblies using myCorp.snk and set build output to the $(buildRoot)\Output directory.
dirs.proj aren't opened via visual studio - they're built on the command line using msbuild. The only pain point is that the files have to be hand-curated.
So, long answer short take a look at the Python Tools project and see how they're using dirs.proj. Note how the entire source tree has common settings managed by Common.Build.settings, and how msbuild properties in this .settings file are used in the various .csproj files.

Antlr4 C# targets and output path of generated files

I have a C# solution with an Antlr3 grammar file, and I'm trying to upgrade to Anltr4. It turns out the grammar was the easy part (it became better, and one third the size!). Generating the parser turned out to be the tricky part.
In the old solution I merely ran AntlrWorks to update the lexer and parser .cs files when the grammar file changed. The lexer and parser were included directly in the same project as the grammar so the framework around the parser could make use of them directly.
With the Antlr4 targets for C# I noticed that (at least by default) the output path of the generated Parser C# classes is in the intermediate directory, e.g. obj\Debug. This means I can't use the parser directly in the same project. Am I supposed to change the output path if I want the generated source usable in my sln? Don't I want it in my sln?
I tried making a separate project for the parser generation, that is, a project containing only the grammar file. When this project is built using the Antlr4 targets, the resulting assembly can be referenced from projects needing the parser classes. However, if this project is included in the solution I still don't get any intellisense in visual studio since it bases its intellisense on source files for loaded projects, so it is still not quite usable. The only way I could get it working properly was to build then unload the parser project, and have other projects reference it as an assembly file rather than a project.
EDIT:
After looking on the antlr-interest list I found this thread indicating that the problem with intellisense may be Resharpers fault. If this is the case, then my question is rather how to keep using both Antlr4 and Resharper in my solution?
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/antlr-discussion/QSuJXphaBDg
I found an extension for Resharper: ReSharper.ExternalCode.
Tip for Antlr: add obj\Debug in Resharper -> Code Inspection -> External Code and reload solution.
It's works for me.
There is an easy way to get the best of both Antlr 4 and Visual Studio. You are on the right track in having a separate grammar project and implementation project, but you are missing a couple steps.
Follow these steps to get the Intellisense working
In Visual Studio, go to Tools -> Extensions and Updates and search the Online section for "ANTLR Language Support" by Sam Harwell.
This does a few things:
Adds Templates for the combined grammars.
Adds Syntax Highlighting
Adds an MSBuild target for the grammar to generate the parser.
In your solution, set up your project structure like this:
Solution
Grammar Project
ANTLR 4 Combined Grammar
Implementation Project
Folder for Links to Generated files
Listener Implementation Class
Write and Compile your grammar.
In your folder for the Links to Generated Files, Right-Click the folder and click Add -> Existing Item
Browse to Grammar Project\obj\Debug and select all the generated parser files.
This next step is important. On the Add button there is a little drop-down arrow. Click the drop-down arrow and click "Add As Link".
This will add the generated files to the implementation project using a symbolic link instead of a direct copy.
This gives the added benefit of not having to remove and re-add the parser files if you have to change your grammar later.
Intellisense should work now for your generated parser classes, and you don't
even have to disable ReSharper.
You are encountering a known bug with ReSharper. The ANTLR 3 and ANTLR 4 C# build integration is reliable, and uses long-established patterns that Microsoft uses with other languages and code generation tasks. Your options are:
Stop using ReSharper
Get the ReSharper authors to address the lack of support for this feature, or
Modify the ANTLR 4 target to work around the limitation in ReSharper, which will introduce other problems into the build which may or may not be acceptable for your use.
Option 1 is certainly the least expensive, and most likely to provide reliable long-term support for your projects.

Continuous integration and software versioning

I like the idea of automatically versioning my builds but I'm not sure what the right way is to get the AssemblyInfo.cs change back into source control (or should it not go into source control?). Is this something the CI server should be committing automatically for each build?
Using Bamboo at the moment.
We are using Teamcity as our CI server, and it comes with a feature called AssemblyInfo patcher
What this does, is temporarily add the teamcity build number in Assemblyinfo.cs, build generate the artifact and then revert the change. This way the generated artifact has the same version as the build number.
Source control can have the assemblyinfo.cs version entry as the current revision the developers are working on, with '*' as the build number. This can be updated after every release.
Edit 1:
Since you are using Bamboo, here is a link that describes one way of setting the build number in the generated artifact in bamboo, without having to check-in the AssemblyInfo.cs.
I'm sort of confused by your question. If you want the changes to persist you'll have to commit AssemblyInfo.cs after it gets edited by the build job. However, most build systems attempting to solve these problems do not persist the changes. They simply check out the file and edit the local version before kicking off the build task.

Bringing C# application under assembly version and using it to create patches and manage them

We have a C# desktop application which we run for clients on various servers on a software as a service model. We are still on dot net framework 2.
The software has a architecture in which we have an independent application to catch external data thrown by some server. Then an application to make calculations based on it. Also one more application on which the client sees the output. The link between the 3 applications is another application which communicates with the DB.
The 4 solutions are on a SVN for sourcecontrol. But the release management is still manual and the patches are made manually by checking the log and including the dlls, pdbs, xml. etc for the projects for which the code has changed.
There is no assembly versioning implemented and the patch or release management is just done in the dark.
I want to know what is the industry practice for generating automatic patches from the code. Also I want a patch for each revision in the SVN. Also is assembly versioning helpful in this?
I have read much about continuous integration but it fails because we do not have unit tests and other fancy code to moniter the correctness of code.
The only thing at this time I would be interested is to implement a way to make patches which can be applied and removed easily. Also I want to know a way to determine the way we can monitor which release is at which level(or what patches have been applied) by some automated way rather than maintaining a log manually.
We use a build script which creates a SvnVersion.cs file containing the last commited revision. This file is placed in the root of the solution, and then added to all projects in the solution (but added as a link, not copied).
The template for the file (SvnVersion.Template.cs) looks like this:
using System.Reflection;
[assembly: AssemblyVersion("1.0.0.$WCREV$")]
[assembly: AssemblyFileVersion("1.0.0.$WCREV$")]
And we simply use TortoiseSVN to fill these placeholders in a batch script:
type "%TRUNKPATH%SvnVersion.Template.cs" > "%TRUNKPATH%\SvnVersion.tmp"
SubWcRev "%TRUNKPATH%\" "%TRUNKPATH%SvnVersion.tmp" "%TRUNKPATH%SvnVersion.cs" -f
IF ERRORLEVEL 1 GOTO ERROR
DEL "%TRUNKPATH%SvnVersion.tmp"
If you don't use TortoiseSVN, there are other ways to get this info in the file.
You will also need to remove this same information from your AssemblyInfo.cs files or you'll get a compile error. Also, to speed up Debug builds, this is only executed in Release builds (and in Debug builds only if the file doesn't initially exists, like after a fresh checkout).

Visual Studio Long wait before Starting to build

We have a moderately sized solution, with about 20 projects. In one of them I have my business entities. On compiling any project, visual studio waits and hangs about one and a half minutes on this BusinessEntities project.
I tried our solution in SharpDevelop and it compiles our complete solution, in 18 seconds. Similar timing with MSBuild.
My guess is that VS is trying to find out if the project needs a compile, but this process is about 15 times slower than actually performing the compile!!
I can't switch to the great sharpdevelop, it lacks some small, but essential requirements for our debugging scenarios.
Can I prevent VS from checking this project, And have it compile the projects without such a check, just like sharpdevelop?
I already know about unchecking projects in configuration management to prevent building some projects, but my developers will forget they need to compile this project after updating to latest sources and they face problems that seem strange to them.
Edit: Interesting results of an investigation: The delay happens to one of the projects only. In configuration manager I unchecked all projects, then compiled each of them individually. All projects compile in a few seconds!! The point is this: if that special project is built directly, compiles in a few seconds, if it is being built (or skipped, because it is up-to-date) as a result of building another project that depends on it, VS hangs for about a minute and half, and then decides to compile it (or skip it). My conclusion: Visual studio is checking to know if any files are changed, but for some reasons, for this special project it is extremely inefficient!!
I'd go to Tools -> Options -> Projects and Solutions -> Build and Run and then change the "MSBuild project build [output|build log] verbosity" to Diagnostic. At that level it will include timings which should help you track down the issue.
We had the same problem with an ASP.NET MVC web project running in Visual Studio 2013. We build the project and nothing happens for about a minute or so and then the output window shows that we are compiling.
Here's what fixed it... open the .csproj file in a text editor and set MvcBuildViews to false:
<MvcBuildViews>false</MvcBuildViews>
I had to use sysinternals process monitor to figure this out but it's clearly the cause for my situation. The site compiles in less than 5 seconds now and previously took over a minute. During that minute the Asp.net compilation process was putting files and directories into the Temporary Asp.net Files folder.
Warning: If you set this, you'll no longer precompile your views so you will lose the ability to see syntax errors in your views at build time.
There is the possibility that you are suffering from VS inspecting other freshly built assemblies for the benefit of the currently compiling project.
When an assembly is built, VS will inspect the references of the target assembly, which if they are feshly built or new versions, may include actually loading them in a .Net domain, which bears all the burdens of loading an assembly as though you were going to run it. The build can get progressively slower as it rebuilds more and more projects. When one assembly becomes newer the others do a lot more work. This is one possible explanation for why building by itself, versus already built, versus building clean, all have seemingly relevantly differing results. Its really tht the others changed and not about the one being compiled.
VS will 'mark down' the last 'internal' build number of the referenced assembly and look to see if the referenced assembly actually changed as it rolls through its build process. If its not differnt, a ton of work gets skipped. And yes, there are internal assembly build numbers that you dont control. This is probalby not in any way due to the actual c# compiler or its work or anything post-compile, but pre-compile steps necessary for the most general cases.
There are several reference oriented settings you can play with, and depending on your dev, test, or deployments needs, the functional differences may be irrelevant, however may profoundly impact how VS behaves and how long it takes during build.
Go to the references of one of the projects in Solution Explorer:
1) click on a reference
2) open the properties pane if its not (not the Property Pages or the Property Manager)
3) look at 'Copy Local', 'Embed Interop Types', 'Reference Output Assembly'; those may be very applicable and probably something good to know about regardless. I strongly suggest looking up what they do on MSDN. 'Reference Output Assembly' may or may not show in the list.
4) unload the project, and edit the .proj file in VS as text. look for the assembly reference in the XML and look for 'Private'. This means whether the assembly referenced is to be treated as though its going to be a private assembly from the referencing assemblies perspective, vs a shared one. Which is sort of a wordy way of saying, will that assembly be deployed as a unit with the other assemblies together. This is very important toward unburdening things. Background: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc164080.aspx
So the basic idea here is that you want to configure all of these to be the least expensive, both during build and after deployment. If you are building them together, then for example you probably really don't need 'Copy Local'. Id hate to say more about how you should configure them without knowing more about your needs, but its a very fine thing to go read a few good paragraphs about each. This gets very tricky however, because you also influence whether VS will use the the stale old one when resolving before the referenced one is rebuilt. As a further example explaiing that its good to go read about these, Copy Local can use the local copy, even though its stale, so having this set can be double bad. Just remember the goal at the moment is to lower the burden of VS loading newly built assemblies jsut to compile the others.
Lastly, for now, I can easily say that hanging for only 1.5 mins is getting off very lucky. There are people with much much worse build times due to things like this ;)
Some troubleshooting idea's that have not been mentioned:
Clean solution?
Delete Obj and Bin folders plus the .suo file? FYI, neither Clean nor Rebuild will delete non-build files, eg files copied during a pre-build command.
Turn off VS scanning outside files. Options > tools > environment > document > detect when file is changed outside the environment?
Rollback SVN history to confirm when it started to occur? What changed? If the project file on day 1 takes the same time, recreate the project, add all the files and build.
Otherwise could you please run Process Monitor and let us know what Visual Studio is doing in the prep-build stage?
Sounds silly, but remove all breakpoints first. It sped up my pre-build checks massively - still don't know why though.
Based on the (limited) information provided one possibility is that there could be a pre-build action specified in the project file that is slow to compile.
Try disabling platform verification task as described here.
If your individual projects are compiling correctly then all you can do is change order of compilation by setting dependent projects explicitly in configuration.
Try to visualize your project dependency hierarchy and set dependent projects. For example, if your business entities project is referenced in each project, then in configuration of each project, this project must be selected as dependent.
When an explicit build order is not set, visual studio is analyzing projects to create an order of building project. Setting explicit dependent projects wiki make visual studio skip this step and use the order provided by you.
With such an extreme delay on a single project and no other avenue seeming to provide a reason I would attempt to build that specific project while running procmon from sysinternals and filter out all the success messages. You could probably also narrow it down to just the file system actions as well. From your description I might guess that the files are being locked by an external source like the event collection or workflow management process services.
Other things to consider would be whether or not this is a totally clean build machine or if it has been used to perhaps test the builds as well? If so, is there a chance that someone mapped an IIS application path to the project directly or registered it as a service location?
If you run procmon and see no obvious locks or conflicts I would create a totally new solution and project and copy the files over to see if that project also has the same delay. If it does have the same delay I would create a sample project of the same type but generic data (essentially empty) and see if that too is slow. If the new project with the same files builds fine you can then diff the directories to see what the variance is that causes the problem (perhaps a config or project setting).
For me, thoroughly disabling code analyzers helped per instructions here:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/visualstudio/code-quality/disable-code-analysis?view=vs-2019#net-framework-projects.
I thought my code analyzers were already off, but adding the extra xml helped.
Thanks Kaleb's for the suggestion to set "MSBuild project build [output|build log] verbosity" to Diagnostic. The first message took more than 10 seconds to display:
Property reassignment: $(Features)=";flow-analysis;flow-analysis" (previous value: ";flow-analysis") at C:\myProjectDirectory\packages\Microsoft.NetFramework.Analyzers.2.9.3\build\Microsoft.NetFramework.Analyzers.props (32,5)
Which led me to the code analyzers.
Just in case someone else trips into this issue:
In my case the delay was being caused by an invalid path entry in "additional include directories" that referred to a non accessible UNC location.
Once this was corrected, the delay disappeared.

Categories

Resources