Is it possible to package a whole c# console application with it's applications folder/files into one executable .exe file so it dosen't need to be installed on the computer when it's going to run?
If it doesn't have a lot of resource DLLs (with translated strings, in separate subfolders) then you can use ILMerge to do this for the DLL files:
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/mbarnett/ilmerge.aspx
ILMerge is a utility that can be used to merge multiple .NET
assemblies into a single assembly.
If you have other files too, you will have to add them as resources to your program and extract them at run-time.
See here for more details on how to embed resource files and extract them at run-time:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/319292
Briefly: After you have added an embedded resource to your project, you do this:
var assembly = Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly();
var stream = assembly.GetManifestResourceStream("MyNamespace.MyResourceFileName");
// ... do something with stream, e.g. write it out to a file.
[EDIT]
You can actually do away with ILMerge altogether and have a much more robust solution.
See here for details: http://blog.nenoloje.com/2011/08/better-alternative-to-ilmerge.html
And here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/microsoft_press/archive/2010/02/03/jeffrey-richter-excerpt-2-from-clr-via-c-third-edition.aspx
The author of ILMerge says of this "As the author of ILMerge, I think this is fantastic! If I had known about this, I never would have written ILMerge"
It's written by Jeffrey Richter, who I hope most people here will have heard of. :)
Related
I developed a small project using C# and got everything working perfectly.
The only problem is that this app will be regularly sent via emails, therefore I'm trying to assemble all the files as one executable. The user will only have to open and see one executable, which will load the needed files and start the application.
The app does not use any external libraries. The only .dll file is for the IWshRuntimeLibrary.
The files that need to be assembled:
Note that I know that some files can be removed (svhost etc.). However this won't help because I'll still have more than one file. Also I've tried some free assemblers online but none of them worked.
In Solution Explorer, select the reference of Interop.IWshRunctime... and in the property window, change the value of Embed Interop Types to True.
This will not generate a separate dll for Interop Types.
PS: This is not a generic solution, but works with Interop Type only.
I've used https://github.com/Fody/Costura in the past. Nuget install Install-Package Costura.Fody (https://www.nuget.org/packages/Costura.Fody/)
Description about what it does from the source:
Take all assemblies (and pdbs) that have been marked as "Copy Local" and embed them as resources in the target assembly.
Actually you are looking for a method to merge some assemblies and resources into one executable file.
Custora.Fody, ILMerge, Obfuscators with assembly merging feature are some examples that can be used for this purpose.
You can find some answers here:
Embedding DLLs in a compiled executable
How to merge multiple assemblies into one?
List of obfuscators for .NET
If this is not about security reason, I would create the directory structure as follow:
- root
└ Startup.bat
└ lib
└ DiagnosticsSwitch.exe
└ DiagnosticsSwitch.exe.config
└ DiagnosticsSwitch.exe.manifest
└ Interop.IWshRuntimeLibrary.dll
And inside the Startup.bat
"lib/DiagnosticsSwitch.exe"
Im searching for a way to make my c#.net Application portable (or at least no installation needed). Some Background: I'm developing a small File-Manager for our Customers. As not every Employee of our Customer got Admin rights I need to hold it as easy as possible to use it.
My idea was to just deliver an .exe or Zip(containing .exe + dll of .net), that all Employees can use it by double clicking.
Is there any way to "bind" the dll to the exe?
Why not just use ClickOnce deployment?
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-GB/library/142dbbz4%28v=vs.90%29.aspx
No admin rights required... auto updating... what's not to like?
(Just deploying executables is a great way to eliminate your ability to update your clients... why do that?)
You can combine multiple .NET assemblies together using ILMerge: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/mbarnett/ilmerge.aspx
It's somewhat equivalent in concept to a static linker from C/C++ (except pretend that .lib files are directly executable).
Try ILMerge,
ILMerge is a utility for merging multiple .NET assemblies into a single .NET assembly
http://www.microsoft.com/en-in/download/details.aspx?id=17630
I also use this command line tool to merge several dlls and exe into single exe, use is very simple:
ilmerge /target:winexe /out:destination.exe source.exe dll_1.dll dll_2.dll dll_3.dll
In basic the program written in .net is 'portable' - you do not need to install it. (but the compatible .NET framework must be installed on client machine)
If you like to provide single assembly, you need to download and install the IlMerge utitlity (see Dai's answer) and then have either post-build command defined or I usually do a bat file with content like this:
"c:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft\ILMerge\ILMerge.exe" /target:winexe /targetplatform:"v4,C:\Program Files (x86)\Reference Assemblies\Microsoft\Framework.NETFramework\v4.0" /out:ALLINONE.exe PROGRAM.exe LIBRARY1.dll LIBRARY2.dll
Note, the paths depends on how it is on your system...
Also I recommend to 'obfuscate' your assembly - you can use for example good opensource utility 'ConfuserEx'
I am building a projects by C#. It contains many folders, each folder represents for a function. Now I want to make a .dll file for each of them. Is there any tools can help me to do it?
And after that I want to merge them together. Is there any solution for me to do it?
Thank you,
You are searching for modules in .NET. Where module is a file (not a DLL) with self sufficient (from structure perspective) content which can be read and executed by CLR virtual machine into machine code.
Read this for detailed explanation: How to: Build a Multifile Assembly
You will need to do a little command line execution, no direct visual studio support, afaik.
You might want to move from a folder structure to a project structure. Each project will automatically have its own .dll file. Then you can have a central project that has references to each of them.
It would be a good idea to group together certain code files by project for other reasons too. Suppose you have a lot of extension methods that could easily be re-used for other coding projects. You might separate these classes into a Util project / namespace for easy re-use and access across other projects.
I made a WPF program which uses SQLite. And by using Visual Studio 2012, it generates both Debug and Release version exe file. When I go to Debug or Release directory and run my exe file, e.g. MultiStart.exe, it can run normally.
But if I copy the MultiStart.exe to my Desktop and try to run it, it failed.
By several tests, I found that I also need to copy files MultiStart.exe.config and System.Data.SQLite.dll to my Desktop. And then it can run now.
But why? Do we have better solution so that I can make it run without addition files?
Thanks!
Why my WPF program cannot run without Visual Studio?
The question title is not really accurate since it's not really related Visual Studio. MultiStart.exe is dependent on configuration (MultiStart.exe.config) as well as other assemblies (System.Data.SQLite.dll). Without these dependencies the application cannot run (because that is how .NET works).
WPF doesn't necessarily need a config file to run so the question is what is in your config file that the application needs. It might be possible to move this configuration information into the code (e.g. connection string) and remove the app.config but then the values will be hard coded in the application.
In terms of dependent assemblies, instead of deploying them it is possible to embed them as resources and then use the AppDomain.AssemblyResolve Event to read the assembly from a resource (see Embedding assemblies inside another assembly for an example).
Another approach instead of embedding assemblies as resources is to merge them into one assembly. ILMerge is a popular choice for merging assemblies but I read that it can have issues with WPF assemblies (not sure if that applies to you). See Merging dlls into a single .exe with wpf for some other ideas for merging assemblies with WPF.
Note that setting PATH variables does not work because .NET does not use the PATH for resolving assemblies -- see How the Runtime Locates Assemblies for the details.
Another, option instead of copying the MultiStart.exe to the desktop is to use a shortcut on the desktop that links to the appropriate directory. Perhaps that is a simpler solution
You can also use ILMerge to merge all dependencies into single .exe file to simplify distributiuon of your application.
More detaiils on ILMerge can be found here: ILMerge on CodeProject
Example of usage: ilmerge /target:winexe /out:YourDestinationApp.exe
YourCurrentProgram.exe System.Data.SQLite.dll
Better solution that i used to do with my windows form apps is, Copy the entire folder, which contains supporting files. place it where you want. then create a shortcut of your .exe on your desktop. That always worked for me.
Because you are missing some dependency. You can open your config file and set the dependency...but I wouldn't recommend you to change config file manually.
You can also copy the dependent dll in system32 folder. ..but its only a trick because exe first search dlls in current folder than system 32 folder.
Because you're missing things from your PATH. Visual Studio is probably set to copy DLLs to the target directory on build.
You're almost certainly pulling in external libraries. Some of these are part of .NET, while others are packaged in libraries in specific folders. When you start your exe, it looks in your PATH and the current folder for everything (which includes all DLLs Visual Studio copied).
When you moved the exe to the desktop, suddenly it had no idea where those DLLs are. You haven't specifically added them to your PATH, and they are no longer in the current folder. This is why copying those DLLs to your desktop magically made them work.
Unless you stop use SQLite, there is not a way for you to not need that DLL (there are lots of ways to package/reference it though).
I am learning Java these days and I've spent a lot of time with .NET so when I want to export or import libraries, they are usually in .dll format which is called assemblies in .NET environment and they are compiled to IL and they can have resources like images, XML, audio and so on, anyways.
I am wondering the same process in Java as well. I've read documents but they actually confused me a little bit and to clarify things out I need your help guys.
Questions:
.NET Assembly is the same thing as Java .jar?
.dll contains compiled IL code and .jar contains compiled .class/byte code files?
They say resources, what kind of resources we are talking about here? Images, .txt files, etc. or all of them possible?
I've examined AWS (Amazon Web Service API for java) and I saw three .jar file and they are
aws-java-sdk-1.1.1.jar
aws-java-sdk-1.1.1-javadoc.jar
aws-java-sdk-1.1.1-sources.jar
and they contain .class files - java documentation in html format and .java files which are still not compiled. So then I've realized .jar doesn't just include compiled byte codes (.class) and also other things.
When I want to import java libraries, will I always need to import .jar files?
When I want to export my own java libraries, should I need to export in .jar file.
Thanks for help in advance.
Is a .NET Assembly the same thing as a Java .jar?
They play the same role, yes.
.dll contains compiled IL code and .jar contains compiled .class/byte code files?
Yes. Although JARs are just zip files (you can open them in your favorite Zip tool), so they can really contain just about anything.
They say resources, what kind of resources we are talking about here? Images, .txt files, etc. or all of them are possible?
Any file type is allowed in a JAR. Your Java code can access the contents of files within the jar via, for example, getResourceAsStream or getResource. Obviously .class files in a JAR are treated specially (as bytecode).
I've examined AWS (Amazon Web Service API for Java) and I saw three .jar files and they are: aws-java-sdk-1.1.1.jar, aws-java-sdk-1.1.1-javadoc.jar, aws-java-sdk-1.1.1-sources.jar
The above packaging is fairly common. Sometimes people use .jar as an alternative file extension to .zip. I find this practice confusing, but it is not uncommon, and Amazon has done it in this case. I think this practice became more common with the launch of Maven, which stores reference source code in files named .jar.
aws-java-sdk-1.1.1.jar - This is the only file necessary for compilation and execution. It contains the classes (.class files) and resources necessary for the library to function.
aws-java-sdk-1.1.1-sources.jar - This is just a zip file that contains the source code (.java files) for the library. It is not necessary for compilation or execution. It is provided to help you troubleshoot problems you may encounter while using the library. You could unzip this file and read the source code from your hard drive. However, your IDE can probably utilize this file directly by creating a "source attachment" to the main library JAR. With this library->source association set up in your IDE, your IDE will be able to show you the source code of the library when you use your IDE's "Go to Definition" feature on a library class.
aws-java-sdk-1.1.1-javadoc.jar - This is just a zip file that contains the JavaDoc for the library. Again, it is not necessary for compilation or execution. JavaDoc is just HTML, so you could unzip this file and read the JavaDoc HTML directly from your hard drive. However, most IDEs can create a "Javadoc attachment" to the main library, which allows you to pull up context-sensitive JavaDoc for the library from within the IDE. Actually, most IDEs can generate the JavaDoc on the fly from the -sources.jar, so I rarely use Javadoc jars anymore.
When I want to import Java libraries, will I always need to import .jar files?
It's usually called "adding JARs to the classpath", but yes. You pretty much always need to help Java find all the JARs you're using by constructing a classpath whenever you build or execute. In general, using JARs and classpaths is a much more manual and explicit process than using DLLs in .NET. For example Java has no direct equivalent of .NET's "global assembly cache"; also vanilla Java will not automatically load .jars from the working directory.
There are a few other techniques for creating a more "automatic" feeling classpath, but they are kind of advanced: Manifest.MF classpaths are possible, for example -- but this approach is used infrequently as it is brittle. As of Java 6, Java has limited support for using wildcards in the classpath.
When I want to export my own Java libraries, should I need to export in .jar file
This is standard, yes.
I can answer part of that question :-)
As I understand it, a jar is just a "Java Archive" file. It can contain anything you want, but is most often used to distribute binary versions of libraries. It can also be used for distributing executables -- double-clicking a JAR file will launch the application, if that's how it's been packaged.
As such, it may be difficult to tell what a particular jar file is intended for. For example, what is aws-java-sdk-1.1.1-sources.jar?. Is it a self-installer? A compressed code archive? Without reading documentation, it's anybody's guess.
Edit: case in point, I just downloaded the JAI jar file assuming it was a binary build of the library. But in fact, it contains the installer application.
To answer this specific question.
aws-java-sdk-1.1.1.jar
aws-java-sdk-1.1.1-javadoc.jar
aws-java-sdk-1.1.1-sources.jar
The 1) is the compiler java archive file (jar), which in .NET is called a DLL. The 2) is the javadoc. An HTML documentation of java classes (found in 1)) along with method description. The 3) is the source code (java files) of 1).
When I want to import java libraries, will I always need to
import .jar files?
When I want to export my own java libraries, should I need to
export in .jar file.
For 1) If you need to use a class that is found in a jar file, then you'll need to import that jar into your project.
For 2) You don't need to. You can bundle your dependency jars into your library or package each into their own jars and import them into your project.
.NET Assembly is same thing as java .jar? Answer: Yes.
.dll contains compiled IL code and .jar contains complied .class/byte code files?
Answer: .jar files is an archived file of java resources, classes, images/icons/etc. that is necessary for an application, just like in .DLL. Class files contains compile java source codes (Called java bytecode).