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.)
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 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.
I am looking for a possible solution where I can add ShapeMap.dll as a reference,
but when I try to add the reference I get an error stating:
You can't add reference to ShapeMap.dll, as it was not build against the Silverlight runtime. Silverlight projects will only work with Silverlight Assemblies"
What do I do now?
While Silverlight code may look and smell like good old .NET-backed logic, the runtime for Silverlight is different from that supporting regular .NET applications.
It is useful to think of the Silverlight runtime as a subset of the .NET runtime: Silverlight is meant to run in a "sandbox" whereby many the unsafe features such as direct access to the file system are not allowed.
For this reason, one can only add Silverlight assemblies to a Silverlight project.
The error you're getting is therefore as said: the version of ShapeMap.dll you have wasn't build for Silverlight runtime.
There are two ways out of this situation:
find or build a Silverlight-backed version of the DLL
somehow refactor the Silverlight application so that it leverages the features of the DLL by way of WebServices (if that makes sense, for the name ShapeMap.dll indicates that this may deal with UI objects which are hard/impossible to deal with remotely)
To get a Silverlight-backed version of the DLL:
First choice: It may just be that you can get the binary of the Silverlight version of the assembly where you found the .NET version.
Second choice: it may be that you can get the the source code of the [.NET targeting] DLL.
If so you can try -and I stress "TRY"- to make a Silverlight assembly out of it. The problem may be that the source code uses .NET-only idioms/API calls and you'll then need to convert these; several just .NET-to-SL "gotchas" can easily be converted, others are absolute roadblocks (eg. direct access to the file system, registry etc.), although, it may be possible to merely comment-out the offending sections of the code, if, somehow the Silverlight was not going to use the underlying features of the DLL.
Now... for sake of full disclosure...
there are a few techniques which allow "fooling" Visual Studio so that .NET assembly be accepted within a SilverLight project. See for example "Reusing .NET assemblies in Silverlight". Beware, however, that while very insightful as to the nature of the .NET and Silverlight runtimes, and possibly useful in some cases, these techniques are undocumented and, more importantly, depending on the subset of .NET API used by the DLL, may merely allow to get over over the build-time blocking, to fall into various run-time errors (when/if the application makes calls into the DLL to methods which in turn invoke .NET-only methods of the runtime).
If you have access to the source files for that assembly (dll), create a new Silverlight Class Library project and add all the existing source files to your new project. Then attempt to build the project. Depending on the amount of dependencies you may succeed in building a silverlight compatible version of the assembly.
If you don't have the source code, then sorry you're out of luck.
Silverlight works in a "subset" of the .net framework, some stuff is organized differently and works not like a regular WPF application (like that everything needs to be async in order to keep the UI responsive). You can see it as a "protected" .net environment, and therefor you may not reference or use non-silverlight dll's.
Like the previous answer states, use the source code and copy paste it into a SL library project, compile, and use that.
I have a .NET CF 1.1 application that has been running perfectly fine for years. Occasionally, I get a help desk ticket with the following error message (generic):
Method not found:
MethodName
AssemblyNamespace.Class
The DLL is there, and it's the same version as my other devices. What could change that would make it not find the method. Does this error imply that the assembly was loaded, or did it break before that even happened?
Does it matter how I added the reference in Visual Studio (2003, btw)? I have Copy Local set to true, and therefore I made the assumption that it needs to be in the same directory as my executable.
Any help you can offer is appreciated. Thanks.
EDIT: I believe this DLL is also in the windows directory of the device, possibly a different version. It contains a lot of hardware specific functions (i.e. backlight, keyboard state, etc.)
No it does not matter how you add the reference in Visual studio 2003. (100% sure)
Now for the not so sure : I think that someone else has the same assembly in the GAC of the phone. So the GAC assembly gets called rather than the one you deployed and that version of the assembly lacks the requested function.
Depends on how you reference the file in your code. You could be relying on the current working directory which depending on how the app is launched or what they do after, it might not be what you expect it to be.
Sometimes .NetCf throws this exception when the device is running out of memory, instead of the expected "Out of Memory" exception. I have observed this behaviour more often when loading native dlls using P/Invoke than loading pure netcf dlls.
To preface, I've been working with C# for a few months, but I'm completely unfamiliar with concepts like deployment and assemblies, etc. My questions are many and varied, although I'm furiously Googling and reading about them to no avail (I currently have Pro C# 2008 and the .NET 3.5 Platform in front of me).
We have this process and it's composed of three components: an engine, a filter, and logic for the process. We love this process so much we want it reused in other projects. So now I'm starting to explore the space beyond one solution, one project.
Does this sound correct? One huge Solution:
Process A, exe
Process B, exe
Process C, exe
Filter, dll
Engine, dll
The engine is shared code for all of the processes, so I'm assuming that can be a shared assembly? If a shared assembly is in the same solution as a project that consumes it, how does it get consumed if it's supposed to be in the GAC? I've read something about a post build event. Does that mean the engine.dll has to be reployed on every build?
Also, the principle reason we separated the filter from the process (only one process uses it) is so that we can deploy the filter independently from the process so that the process executable doesn't need to be updated. Regardless of if that's best practice, let's just roll with it. Is this possible? I've read that assemblies link to specific versions of other assemblies, so if I update the DLL only, it's actually considered tampering. How can I update the DLL without changing the EXE? Is that what a publisher policy is for?
By the way, is any of this stuff Google-able or Amazon-able? What should I look for? I see lots of books about C# and .NET, but none about deployment or building or testing or things not related to the language itself.
I agree with Aequitarum's analysis. Just a couple additional points:
The engine is shared code for all of the processes, so I'm assuming that can be a shared assembly?
That seems reasonable.
If a shared assembly is in the same solution as a project that consumes it, how does it get consumed if it's supposed to be in the GAC?
Magic.
OK, its not magic. Let's suppose that in your solution your process project has a reference to the engine project. When you build the solution, you'll produce a project assembly that has a reference to the engine assembly. Visual Studio then copies the various files to the right directories. When you execute the process assembly, the runtime loader knows to look in the current directory for the engine assembly. If it cannot find it there, it looks in the global assembly cache. (This is a highly simplified view of loading policy; the real policy is considerably more complex than that.)
Stuff in the GAC should be truly global code; code that you reasonably expect large numbers of disparate projects to use.
Does that mean the engine.dll has to be reployed on every build?
I'm not sure what you mean by "redeployed". Like I said, if you have a project-to-project reference, the build system will automatically copy the files around to the right places.
the principle reason we separated the filter from the process (only one process uses it) is so that we can deploy the filter independently from the process so that the process executable doesn't need to be updated
I question whether that's actually valuable. Scenario one: no filter assembly, all filter code is in project.exe. You wish to update the filter code; you update project.exe. Scenario two: filter.dll, project.exe. You wish to update the filter code; you update filter.dll. How is scenario two cheaper or easier than scenario one? In both scenarios you're updating a file; why does it matter what the name of the file is?
However, perhaps it really is cheaper and easier for your particular scenario. The key thing to understand about assemblies is assemblies are the smallest unit of independently versionable and redistributable code. If you have two things and it makes sense to version and ship them independently of each other, then they should be in different assemblies; if it does not make sense to do that, then they should be in the same assembly.
I've read that assemblies link to specific versions of other assemblies, so if I update the DLL only, it's actually considered tampering. How can I update the DLL without changing the EXE? Is that what a publisher policy is for?
An assembly may be given a "strong name". When you name your assembly Foo.DLL, and you write Bar.EXE to say "Bar.EXE depends on Foo.DLL", then the runtime will load anything that happens to be named Foo.DLL; file names are not strong. If an evil hacker gets their own version of Foo.DLL onto the client machine, the loader will load it. A strong name lets Bar.EXE say "Bar.exe version 1.2 written by Bar Corporation depends on Foo.DLL version 1.4 written by Foo Corporation", and all the verifications are done against the cryptographically strong keys associated with Foo Corp and Bar Corp.
So yes, an assembly may be configured to bind only against a specific version from a specific company, to prevent tampering. What you can do to update an assembly to use a newer version is create a little XML file that tells the loader "you know how I said I wanted Foo.DLL v1.4? Well, actually if 1.5 is available, its OK to use that too."
What should I look for? I see lots of books about C# and .NET, but none about deployment or building or testing or things not related to the language itself.
Deployment is frequently neglected in books, I agree.
I would start by searching for "ClickOnce" if you're interested in deployment of managed Windows applications.
Projects can reference assemblies or projects.
When you reference another assembly/project, you are allowed to use all the public classes/enums/structs etc in the referenced assembly.
You do not need to have all of them in one solution. You can have three solutions, one for each Process, and all three solutions can load Engine and Filter.
Also, you could have Process B and Process C reference the compiled assemblies (the .dll's) of the Engine and Filter and have similar effect.
As long as you don't set the property in the reference to an assembly to require a specific version, you can freely update DLLs without much concern, providing the only code changes were to the DLL.
Also, the principle reason we
separated the filter from the process
(only one process uses it) is so that
we can deploy the filter independently
from the process so that the process
executable doesn't need to be updated.
Regardless of if that's best practice,
let's just roll with it. Is this
possible?
I actually prefer this method of updating. Less overhead to update only files that changed rather than everything everytime.
As for using the GAC, whole other level of complexity I won't get into.
Tamper proofing your assemblies can be done by signing them, which is required to use the GAC in the first place, but you should still be fine so long as a specific version is not required.
My recommendation is to read a book about the .NET framework. This will really help you understand the CLR and what you're doing.
Applied Microsoft .NET Framework Programming was a book I really enjoyed reading.
You mention the engine is shared code, which is why you put it in a separate project under your solution. There's nothing wrong with doing it this way, and it's not necessary to add this DLL to the GAC. During your development phase, you can just add a reference to your engine project, and you'll be able to call the code from that assembly. When you want to deploy this application, you can either deploy the engine DLL with it, or you can add the engine DLL to the GAC (which is another ball of wax in and of itself). I tend to lean against GAC deployments unless it's truly necessary. One of the best features of .NET is the ability to deploy everything you need to run your application in one folder without having to copy stuff to system folders (i.e. the GAC).
If you want to achieve something like dynamically loading DLL's and calling member methods from your processor without caring about specific version, you can go a couple of routes. The easiest route is to just set the Specific Version property to False when you add the reference. This will give you the liberty of changing the DLL later, and as long as you don't mess with method signatures, it shouldn't be a problem. The second option is the MEF (which uses Reflection and will be part of the framework in .NET 4.0). The idea with the MEF is that you can scan a "plugins" style folder for DLL's that implement specific functionality and then call them dynamically. This gives you some additional flexibility in that you can add new assemblies later without the need to modify your references.
Another thing to note is that there are Setup and Deployment project templates built into Visual Studio that you can use to generate MSI packages for deploying your projects. MSDN has lots of documentation related to this subject that you can check out, here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ybshs20f%28VS.80%29.aspx
Do not use the GAC on your build machine, it is a deployment detail. Visual Studio automatically copies the DLL into build directory of your application when you reference the DLL. That ensures that you'll run and debug with the expected version of the DLL.
When you deploy, you've got a choice. You can ship the DLL along with the application that uses it, stored in the EXE installation folder. Nothing special is needed, the CLR can always find the DLL and you don't have to worry about strong names or versions. A bug fix update is deployed simply by copying the new DLL into the EXE folder.
When you have several installed apps with a dependency on the DLL then deploying bug fix updates can start to get awkward. Since you have to copy to the DLL repeatedly, once for each app. And you can get into trouble when you update some apps but not others. Especially so when there's a breaking change in the DLL interface that requires the app to be recompiled. That's DLL Hell knocking, the GAC can solve that.
We found some guidance on this issue at MSDN. We started with two separate solution with no shared code, and then abstracted the commonalities to a shared assemblies. We struggled with ways to isolate changes in the shared code to impact only the projects that were ready for it. We were terrible at Open/Close.
We tried
branching the shared code for each project that used it and including it in the solution
copying the shared assembly from the shared solution when we made changes
coding pre-build events to build the shared code solution and copy the assembly
Everything was a real pain. We ended up using one large solution with all the projects in it. We branch each project as we want to stage features closer to production. This branches the shared code as well. It's simplified things a lot and we get a better idea of what tests fail across all projects, as the common code changes.
As far as deployment, our build scripts are setup to build the code and copy only the files that have changed, including the assemblies, to our environments.
By default, you have a hardcoded version number in your project (1.0.0.0). As long as you don't change it, you can use all Filter builds with the Process assembly (it only knows it should use the 1.0.0.0 version). This is not the best solution, however, because how do you distinguish between various builds yourself?
Another option is use different versions of the Filter by the same Process. You should add an app.config file to the Process project, and include a bindingRedirect element (see the docs). Whenever the Runtime looks for a particular version of the Filter, it's "redirected" to a version indicated in the config. Unfortunately, this means that although you don't have to update the Process assembly, you'll have to update the config file with the new version.
Whenever you encounter versioning problems, you can use Fuslogvw.exe (fusion log viewer) to troubleshoot these.
Have fun!
ulu