I'm working on a project where plugins are deployed in DLL's.
When deploying a DLL, it gets locked by the application. To update it I have to change the name of the DLL (since I can't overwrite the original), and update the app database to use the new version of the library.
I'd like to make this as automated as possible.
In AssemblyInfo, I've set the [assembly: AssemblyVersion("1.0.*")] to automatically increment.
I'm hoping that I can pull this version into the project properties Assembly Name, so that it automatically appends the version number to the generated DLL.
Is this possible at all with VS/C#?
Following Hans advice that the file renaming can't be done during the build, I've decided to rename the file after build.
In order to find the version number quickly for renaming, I've removed the AssemblyFileVersion line from the AssemblyInfo file. Which will set the file version to the version number. Automatically Update Assembly File Version
After building the DLL I can check the file properties, where the version number will be listed as File version under the details tab.
I'll copy the version number from here and append it to the DLL name.
I have a solution that includes several projects. A few are libs that are building dll's used in my main project in this solution.
My main project builds with output type console application.
This all works fine.
When i change the build output type to a class library (since i want to use this project as a plugin eventually). The project will still build, this time to a dll.
When i use this plugin in an application where i use it as a dll however, it will run up to a certain point where it's trying to load a type defined in an external dll (so NOT built by my solution) and throw the exception:
Could not load type 'externalinterface' from assembly 'externallib, version=3.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'.
The dll's are all in the correct folder,etc.
Also worth noting, the plugin is tested in another location than where i built it. The executable still works on this location, the dll/plugin does not. Same amount of dll's in their folders etc.
EDIT: I already used ILSpy (dll inspector) to open the actual dll that is being referenced (so externallib in the errormessage) and checked if 'externalinterface' was present and it is.
EDIT2: RESOLVED! The program that loaded my plugin was loading the same dll that caused the exception. The dll it loaded was of another version than the one i loaded.
Check whether the type externalinterface is present in the referred dll.
You didn't include the details of the exception the application is throwing. However, based on the message you gave, it appears your assembly does not have a strong name. If the application attempting to load your assembly as a plugin does have a strong name, then .NET will require all assemblies loaded by it also have a strong name, so you need to configure your assembly to have a strong name before continuing.
Maybe some supported dll's which is used by the 'externalinterface' is missing in the target machine. In the target machine, check is all the necessary dll's are present in the output folder.
Or blindly copy paste all the dlls in the output folder from the machine where the code is working to the target machine where you have the problem. After this, if the code is working in the target machine, then try to analyze which supporting dll you are missed to copy.
I'm attempting to implement a C++ DLL (of my own creation) that uses the Intel Performance Primitives in a C# forms application. I'm getting a "DLL Not Found Exception" when I attempt to run the program. One possible reason put forward in other posts on this site is that there are dependent DLLs that must be referenced and in fact after downloading DpendencyWalker I found that my DLL uses "IPPS-7.0.DLL".
My problem is that it is unclear to me how to reference these dependent DLLs. I've added the IPPS-7.0.DLL containing folder to referenced paths as well as added references to the "IntelCppOptPkg" and "IntelLibOptPgk" assemblies but this has not solved the problem.
So, am I correct in believing this is the problem? And if so, how does one reference a depedent DLL in managed code?
Thank you.
You don't reference them, they are not .NET assemblies. You just need to make sure that the DLL(s) get copied to your build directory. Easiest way to do that is with Project + Add Existing Item, select the DLL from wherever it was copied. Then select the added file and in the Properties window set Build Action = Content, Copy to Output Directory = Copy if newer. Checking-in the DLL(s) in source control is generally a good idea btw.
Managed code can not reference unmanaged dll the same way it references managed assemblies. Managed references actually change the meta data of your assembly:
The compiler records static
references in the assembly manifest's metadata at build time.
...
The preferred way to reference an assembly is to use a full reference,
including the assembly name, version, culture, and public key token
(if one exists).
Native dlls simply don't have this .NET meta data associated with them. They have to be copied manually in the Post Build step or during deployment. There is a workaround but I don't think it will work if your managed app is platform independent (Any CPU) and you have x86 and x64 versions of unmanaged dlls.
I have created a dll that will be used by multiple applications, and have created an installer package that installs it to the program files, as well as adds it to the Global Assembly Cache.
The dll itself uses log4net, and requires a xml file for the logging definitions.
Therefore when the installer is run, the following files get copied to the install directory within program files:
The main dll that I developed
- The Log4Net.dll
- the Log4Net.xml file
I am now experiencing a problem. I have created a test console application for experimentation. I have added my dll as a reference, and set the 'local copy' flag to false.
When I compile the test console exe however, I noticed that it has copied the log4net.dll and log4net.xml files to the bin directory. And when running the test console, it appears that it will only work if the log4net.dll is in the same directory as the exe. This is dispite the fact that the test console application does not use log4net, only the dll that was added as a reference does.
Is there some way to have it so that the log4net.dll & xml files used will be the ones that were installed to the program files, rather than any application needed to copy over local copies? The applications that will be using my dll will not be using log4net, only the dll that they are referencing uses it.
Many thanks
Don't install into the Global Assembly Cache! Even if your library dll is used by multiple applications each should have it's own local copy. Otherwise you get into a whole world of pain for saving a few KB of disk space.
Always copy the required dlls locally. If you are really sure that the application won't need it you can simply delete the unnessesary dlls later or don't include them in the installer. But if your application will call ANY reference there it will crash at runtime. So best option is to leave them there (after all they WERE referenced for a reason).
No, it's not possible (at least not without much efford) to have .Net load dlls from arbitrary locations on the disk. And it should be this way (look up DLL-hell if you want to know why).
I suspect your problem is the configuration. You must use fully qualified names if you want it to work from the GAC. As per the documentation at http://logging.apache.org/log4net/release/faq.html:
"When loading an assembly from the GAC the fully qualified assembly name, including the version, culture and public key must be specified. This is in the standard syntax supported by System.Type.GetType. See the next FAQ on how to get the version and public key for an assembly."
I managed to resolve this by adding Log4net.dll to the GAC as well. It will now run without needing a local copy the dll.
It does however require a local copy of the XML file, to correctly log.
Do you use ILMerge? Do you use ILMerge to merge multiple assemblies to ease deployment of dll's? Have you found problems with deployment/versioning in production after ILMerging assemblies together?
I'm looking for some advice in regards to using ILMerge to reduce deployment friction, if that is even possible.
I use ILMerge for almost all of my different applications. I have it integrated right into the release build process so what I end up with is one exe per application with no extra dll's.
You can't ILMerge any C++ assemblies that have native code.
You also can't ILMerge any assemblies that contain XAML for WPF (at least I haven't had any success with that). It complains at runtime that the resources cannot be located.
I did write a wrapper executable for ILMerge where I pass in the startup exe name for the project I want to merge, and an output exe name, and then it reflects the dependent assemblies and calls ILMerge with the appropriate command line parameters. It is much easier now when I add new assemblies to the project, I don't have to remember to update the build script.
Introduction
This post shows how to replace all .exe + .dll files with a single combined .exe. It also keeps the debugging .pdb file intact.
For Console Apps
Here is the basic Post Build String for Visual Studio 2010 SP1, using .NET 4.0. I am building a console .exe with all of the sub-.dll files included in it.
"$(SolutionDir)ILMerge\ILMerge.exe" /out:"$(TargetDir)$(TargetName).all.exe" "$(TargetDir)$(TargetName).exe" "$(TargetDir)*.dll" /target:exe /targetplatform:v4,C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\v4.0.30319 /wildcards
Basic hints
The output is a file "AssemblyName.all.exe" which combines all sub-dlls into one .exe.
Notice the ILMerge\ directory. You need to either copy the ILMerge utility into your solution directory (so you can distribute the source without having to worry about documenting the install of ILMerge), or change the this path to point to where ILMerge.exe resides.
Advanced hints
If you have problems with it not working, turn on Output, and select Show output from: Build. Check the exact command that Visual Studio actually generated, and check for errors.
Sample Build Script
This script replaces all .exe + .dll files with a single combined .exe. It also keeps the debugging .pdb file intact.
To use, paste this into your Post Build step, under the Build Events tab in a C# project, and make sure you adjust the path in the first line to point to ILMerge.exe:
rem Create a single .exe that combines the root .exe and all subassemblies.
"$(SolutionDir)ILMerge\ILMerge.exe" /out:"$(TargetDir)$(TargetName).all.exe" "$(TargetDir)$(TargetName).exe" "$(TargetDir)*.dll" /target:exe /targetplatform:v4,C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\v4.0.30319 /wildcards
rem Remove all subassemblies.
del *.dll
rem Remove all .pdb files (except the new, combined pdb we just created).
ren "$(TargetDir)$(TargetName).all.pdb" "$(TargetName).all.pdb.temp"
del *.pdb
ren "$(TargetDir)$(TargetName).all.pdb.temp" "$(TargetName).all.pdb"
rem Delete the original, non-combined .exe.
del "$(TargetDir)$(TargetName).exe"
rem Rename the combined .exe and .pdb to the original project name we started with.
ren "$(TargetDir)$(TargetName).all.pdb" "$(TargetName).pdb"
ren "$(TargetDir)$(TargetName).all.exe" "$(TargetName).exe"
exit 0
We use ILMerge on the Microsoft application blocks - instead of 12 seperate DLL files, we have a single file that we can upload to our client areas, plus the file system structure is alot neater.
After merging the files, I had to edit the visual studio project list, remove the 12 seperate assmeblies and add the single file as a reference, otherwise it would complain that it couldnt find the specific assembly. Im not too sure how this would work on post deployment though, could be worth giving it a try.
I know this is an old question, but we not only use ILMerge to reduce the number of dependencies but also to internalise the "internal" dependencies (eg automapper, restsharp, etc) that are used by the utility. This means they are completely abstracted away, and the project using the merged utility doesn't need to know about them. This again reduces the required references in the project, and allows it to use / update its own version of the same external library if required.
We use ILMerge on quite a few projects. The Web Service Software Factory, for example produces something like 8 assemblies as its output. We merge all of those DLLs into a single DLL so that the service host will only have to reference one DLL.
It makes life somewhat easier, but it's not a big deal either.
We had the same problem with combining WPF dependencies .... ILMerge doesn't appear to deal with these. Costura.Fody worked perfectly for us however and took about 5 minutes to get going... a very good experience.
Just install with Nuget (selecting the correct default project in the Package Manager Console). It introduces itself into the target project and the default settings worked immediately for us.
It merges the all DLLs marked "Copy Local" = true and produces a merged .EXE (alongside the standard output), which is nicely compressed in size (much less than the total output size).
The license is MIT as so you can modify/distribute as required.
https://github.com/Fody/Costura/
Note that for windows GUI programs (eg WinForms) you'll want to use the /target:winexe switch. The /target:exe switch creates a merged console application.
I'm just starting out using ILMerge as part of my CI build to combine a lot of finely grained WCF contracts into a single library. It works very well, however the new merged lib can't easily co-exist with its component libraries, or other libs that depend on those component libraries.
If, in a new project, you reference both your ILMerged lib and also a legacy library that depends on one of the inputs you gave to ILMerge, you'll find that you can't pass any type from the ILMerged lib to any method in the legacy library without doing some sort of type mapping (e.g. automapper or manual mapping). This is because once everything's compiled, the types are effectively qualified with an assembly name.
The names will also collide but you can fix that using extern alias.
My advice would be to avoid including in your merged assembly any publicly available lib that your merged assembly exposes (e.g. via a return type, method/constructor parameter, field, property, generic...) unless you know for sure that the user of your merged assembly does not and will never depend on the free-standing version of the same library.
We ran into problems when merging DLLs that have resources in the same namespace. In the merging process one of the resource namespaces was renamed and thus the resources couldn't be located. Maybe we're just doing something wrong there, still investigating the issue.
We just started using ILMerge in our solutions that are redistributed and used in our other projects and so far so good. Everything seems to work okay. We even obfuscated the packaged assembly directly.
We are considering doing the same with the MS Enterprise Library assemblies.
The only real issue I see with it is versioning of individual assemblies from the package.
I recently had issue where I had ilmerged assembly in the assembly i had some classes these were being called via reflection in Umbraco opensource CMS.
The information to make the call via reflection was taken from db table that had assembly name and namespace of class that implemented and interface. The issue was that the reflection call would fail when dll was il merged however if dll was separate it all worked fine. I think issue may be similar to the one longeasy is having?
It seems to me like the #1 ILMerge Best Practice is Don't Use ILMerge. Instead, use SmartAssembly. One reason for this is that the #2 ILMerge Best Practice is to always run PEVerify after you do an ILMerge, because ILMerge does not guarantee it will correctly merge assemblies into a valid executable.
Other ILMerge disadvantages:
when merging, it strips XML Comments (if I cared about this, I would use an obfuscation tool)
it doesn't correctly handle creating a corresponding .pdb file
Another tool worth paying attention to is Mono.Cecil and the Mono.Linker [2] tool.
[2]: http:// www.mono-project.com/Linker