when we create an application in VC#, talking about .net 3.5 in particular, the are comipled to CLR, what i want is that they should be compiled to EXE executable code that doesn't require .NET Framework Environment for them to run. Is it possible
I guess you're asking how to statically link the parts of the framework your application needs. Please see this link from Jon Skeet for info on how to do that: http://www.yoda.arachsys.com/csharp/faq/#framework.required
There are 3rd party products that do this. I know of no free ones.
Even if you get a third party product, I think it just packages the .NET runtime in there somehow. I don't know how else it would run.
Why don't you just create an installer that has the .NET framework as a requirement? It should check for it and install it if the user doesn't have it already.
you can use MONO's ahead of time compiler
Related
I was told that Microsoft has released reference source code for some .NET libraries (I'm especially interested in C# libraries). If it is true, I would like to download that code and use it with my VS, so I can browse the code by selecting
Go to Declaration
and
Go to Implementation
from context menu. It would be much better then just to see documentation in object browser.
So how do I get VS to work with it? Thank you.
Up-to-Date answer
All you need is this: http://referencesource.microsoft.com/
Here's an article on MSDN and you may also checkout the following article and this blog post also. This allows you to step through the framework source code while debugging your applications. Reflector is also a good tool for browsing through the compiled assemblies.
Here is reference source code for.NET from Microsoft that available for download.
Here is how to set up VS for debuging.
Darin said nearly everything. The only hint that is missing is the NetMassDownloader to get the whole source once if needed.
here you go: .net source code download link
good luck in compiling it so you can debug through it like it was one of your own projects. I don't know how big a project you've ever worked on, but this one's a big one and its not as simple as you would imagine...
The .net core, .net 5 and .net 6 runtime code can be found here:
https://github.com/dotnet/runtime
This repo contains the code to build the .NET runtime, libraries and shared host (dotnet) installers for all supported platforms, as well as the sources to .NET runtime and libraries.
I was wondering that is there any way to run application made in visual studio c# with out installing the .NET framework on client end.
One idea came to my mind may be it is crazy,that is the application that we make depends on the library files that we use in it for example System.Windows.Forms etc etc and
when ever we use some extra dll file it gets copy in the location where setup is installed in short instead of keeping the whole dot net frame work can we just specify the dependencies and export them?
Since you also need the runtime to be present, it's not that simple.
In short, (as #Mitch said), this is not possible.
No.
Windows 7 machines have .NET 3.5 installed as part of OS installation.
Well there's the Salamander .NET Linker, but it's not free.
The short answer to your question is no, this isn't possible.
However, depending on what your reasons are for not wanting to install the framework, you may find the .NET Framework Client Profile useful. This is a cutdown version of the main framework which removes libraries you may not need and therefore reduces the diskspace and resources it requires on the client machine.
Alternatively, maybe Silverlight could meet your needs - whilst the Silverlight runtime would need installing, this is again a cutdown version of the CLR and can be delivered through a browser.
What about using client profile feature of .net 4. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc656912.aspx
It is same like you want to open Microsoft Word 2007/2010 files with extension (.docx) with Microsoft Word 2003 that only provides files with extension (.doc). :):):)
How can I check what objects, tools, variables, anything... are used from .NET 2.0 in a C# application.
How can I get a C# application run without .NET 2.0 ?
UPDATE:
sorry, I didn't clarify enought. Here's my situation: I have developed a pretty simple application in C#: embeded browser which displayes static webpages with an option of searching inside of these html pages. I'm using simple textbox, buttons components for this.
The application will be distribuited for people wich have very old PCs, even with windows 95. I would like the app to be runable on it, or at least on win 98, without telling the people to install .NET 2.0, as the users don;t really have PC usage skills :) .
I'm using a dataGridView as well.
You can have a look at this : http://www.remotesoft.com/linker/
"The mini-deployment tool puts
together the minimum set of CLR
runtime files and dependent assemblies
that can be simply copied to a single
folder on a target machine, and your
application runs as if the whole
framework is installed. Since the
installation is isolated into a single
folder, there will be no conflicts
with future .NET installation. When
linking is used for the dependent
assemblies, it will further reduce the
file size."
You may need to clarify a bit more.. do you want the app to run without .Net at all? Or you want it to run in .Net 3.5 without .net 2.0 bits?
If its the latter, then simply don't reference assemblies that are compiled in .net 2.0 (check the properties on the reference you have added). If its the former, then its really not feasable. Yes its possible, but it means deploying parts of the framework with your app, but then, you'd be deploying all the bits, including the 2.0 bits.
Your're question really needs more information though, it doesn't make much sense currently. Sorry. =)
To make sure it runs without .NET 2.0, compile it with the .NET 1.1 compiler.
But this seems like not a good idea. I'd recommend revisiting your requirements.
Win98 wasn't shipped with .NET. Using .NET v1.1 won't get you much more platform penetration than .NET 2.0, if any.
IT looks like windows 98 supports the .net framework. See this answer for details:
OS Compatibility for various .NET Framework versions
You cannot run a .NET application (i.e., that uses the CLR) if you haven't installed the corresponding .NET Framework binaries (i.e., that contains the CLR) directly or indirectly.
Period.
I want to develop a small utility for windows and I prefer doing that in c# because it is easier (I'm a java developer).
The utility will be available for download by many people and I assume some of them will not have the .net framework installed (is this assumption correct, say I target win xp and above?)
My question is: can a c# application be compiled in a way that it will not require the .net framework installed?
Normally, you will need the .NET Framework being installed on the target system. There is no simple way around that.
However, certain third-party tools such as Xenocode or Salamander allow you to create stand-alone applications. See this related question:
Is there some way to compile a .NET application to native code?
As these solutions are not straight-forward and require commercial products I would recommend you to create a simple Visual Studio Setup and Deployment project. In the properties of the project you should include the .NET Framework as a pre-requisite. The setup.exe created will then automatically download and install the .NET Framework prior to installing your application.
No, it will need the .Net framework installed. Note though that you will need only the redistributable version, not the SDK.
A minor aside - but in this scenario, consider developing the utility in Silverlight - it has a much smaller footprint and is supported on a number of operating systems. This might allow you to get the coverage including people who don't already have .NET.
If you need "normal" .NET, then "Client Profile" is perhaps an option.
You can probably also include the .net framework installer in your application.
In a related question, Can you compile C# without using the .Net framework?, it's mentioned you could do this using mkbundle from mono. I haven't tried it myself so I can't comment on if it's the way you should go, but you may want to consider it.
Is it possible to force the C# compiler to pull all the referenced calls out of the framework and pack them into dlls or even a single executable?
I like writing quick 'one-off' applications with C#, however I don't want to have to install the whole framework on the target machine once it's ready to go.
You ask a loaded question. C# is merely a language and does not require the .NET Framework. The process of compiling it requires a compiler, which may or may not itself take a dependency on the .NET Framework (Microsoft's C# compiler does not -- it is written in native code). Your program will need to reference some assembly where types, classes, and methods can be found for your use. You can remove system.dll and mscorlib.dll from your references list and reference your own assemblies. So you can avoid dependencies on the .NET Framework if you really work at it. But in the end, unless you have a C# compiler that compiles programs to native code you still have a dependency on the CLR.
That's a very technical way of saying... almost nothing. But it answers your question. :) More practically useful however is how to get your C# programs to run with a minimum of dependencies. mkbundle from mono will actually let you compile it all into an .exe with virtually no dependencies.
But if you want to stick with the Microsoft .NET Framework, you can achieve a much lighter footprint and faster install of the dependencies you commonly need by using the Client profile of .NET 3.5 SP1. You can read about it here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc656912.aspx
Look at mkbundle using Mono.
It is now possible to compile C# to native code using Microsoft .NET Native:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn584397(v=vs.110).aspx
It automatically compiles the release version of apps that are written in managed code (C# or Visual Basic) and that target the .NET Framework and Windows 10 to native code.
...
For users of your apps, .NET Native offers these advantages:
•Fast execution times
•Consistently speedy startup times
•Low deployment and update costs
•Optimized app memory usage
This only works with Visual Studio .NET 2015.
Take a look at the .NET client profile.
This will allow you to package a minimum install on the client machine.. which will later be updated by windows update to the full framework.
This depends, of course, on your app only using libraries that are contained in the client profile ...
Some info here: http://blogs.windowsclient.net/trickster92/archive/2008/05/21/introducing-the-net-framework-client-profile.aspx
It's said it is possible, using 3rd-party tools such as http://www.remotesoft.com/linker/
Not possible. Your "compiled" C# application is a language which the .Net CLR interprets (should have said JITed, Reads the IL, compiles to native code, and then invokes the compiled native code) at runtime.
FYI .net 2.0 is a standard install on xp SP2 and vista, so you won't be paying that much of a penalty.
You could look into mono, but this still involves running some kind of framework on your target machine.
This dependency which unfortunately frequently breaks or is missing in the real world is a big reason why C# has not had a wider adoption. On the flip side most development does have dependencies.. look at C++ & Java for example.
I don't think we will really get away from these dependency issues anytime soon, so I recommend that if you want to use C#, that you make a wrapper for installation which checks for the .net framework version dependency you need, and if missing notify the user that they need this to run your app.
Some C# features are bound to interfaces of the .NET framework.
For example:
yield return requires the IEnumerable interface
using (x) {} requires the IDisposable interface