I have a C# project that I have created in Visual Studio Express 2010. This program uses a 3rd party C# class that relies on/calls a C++ dll. I just copied the filename.dll into the bin/debug and bin/release folders of the project folder, and the application ran fine.
I am under the assumption that I can copy the release executable for the project to another computer and run it as long as the filename.dll is in the same directory as the executable. However, trying this on another computer with correct frameworks installed, etc. the program crashes with a system.dllnotfoundexception.
Strangely, my friend reports that the program runs on his computer with Visual Studio installed, but not the one without, though I have not actually seen this.
What could be causing this? And how can I get the release executable to run on another machine?
Thanks for any replies!
-Chase
Make sure you have the Visual C++ runtime installed (VS2005,VS2008,VS2010).
If your c++ dll is build by visual studio it may depends on the CRT, two things to check here :
If it depends on the release or debug CRT. Microsoft don't give you the right to distribute the debug version except for debugging purposes so it could be a problem.
Witch version it depends on
The last version from vs2010 could be copied in the same directory as the executable (msvcp100.dll for c++ msvcr100.dll for C)
Previous versions needed to be installed as side-by-side assemblies so running their setup was mandatory (Some versions like the VS2005 one are included in framework install but others like the VS2005 SP1 one need to be installed separately)
In any case the best way to debug such problems is to install Dependency Walker (free) on the computer having problems and let it tell you what dll is missing.
The easiest (albeit maybe not the "best") solution to this problem is adding a Setup project to your solution. A setup project will help you find any dependencies, and make them available during install.
The steps you need to take are the following:
Add a Setup project to your solution (found in Add project.../Setup templates)
Right-click the project, choose "Add/Project output..." and add the startup project of your program.
Right-click the project and choose "View/Custom actions".
Right-click the root node, select "Add Custom Action..." and from "Application Folder" add "Primary output from [your project name here]".
Now when you compile, an .msi installer is created. Run this installer on the other computer, and your program will be installed and runnable. To uninstall, run the installer again, or remove the program from "Add/Remove programs" under Control panel.
Related
This is my first time trying to make a deployable program. After creating a nice little WPF XAML app that runs (i.e. I can run the executable in the bin folder), I am trying to wrap it in a setup program.
After following multiple directions online for both WiX and "Microsoft Visual Studio Installer Projects". Both make installer packages, but they are only targeting the dll file from the WPF XAML output when I as for the "Primary Output". It seems this is stemming from the build of the WPF project.
How do I adjust the primary output of the build process so it is included in the setup program?
Screenshot of build output specifying the dll as the output file:
To add more details:
This could be one wpf(.net core) application instead of one wpf(.net framework). See the Output window in Elton's screenshot we can find the output is xx.dll instead of xx.exe.
If we create a Installer project in this solution, right-click the Installer project=>Add=>Project Output=>Primary output to contain the WPF's output in installer project, only the xx.dll is considered as wpf's output, but not xx.exe.
So after building the Installer project in VS, double-click the setup.exe(installer project's output), the wpf.exe is not well installed.
On top of Lance answer. You can add the publish items to your outputs near your main Primary Output.
1- Right-click on project and select Add => Project Output.
2- Choose your target project and select Publish Items from the list with your configuration.
3- Now you have another Output in your Application Folder.
Done. with every Batch Build you have your publish directory copied to application folder.
My Visual Studio 2019 WPF app is setting a dll as the output when it
should be an exe.
I'm sure you're using a WPF(.net core) project cause yesterday I happened to reproduce same situation in my machine. As for the cause of the issue, if you're interested in it, you may get some help from this issue. For .net core 2.2 and earlier, if we build a console(.net core) project, we'll get a xx.dll as output by default(Use dotnet xx.dll to run that).
But for .net core 3.0, I found this situation changes. Now if we build a Console(.net core) or WPF(.net core), apart from the xx.dll, we'll also get an xx.exe now. And I checked the Updated date of Installer Project and the Release date of WPF(.net core), the latest update of the Installer project is much earlier than the release of WPF(.net core), I guess maybe this is the cause? I'm not certainly sure how Installer Project recognize the output of one WPF project, but I suggest you can post this issue in DC forum , if it gets enough votes, the team will consider a fix.
Here're my workarounds which may help:
1.Use Add=>File instead of Add=>Primary Output:
Build the WPF project in release mode, navigate to the output path and copy that path. Then right-click Installer project=>Add=>Files to enter that path. Choose all files in output folder and click open:
Right-click the assembly file and choose Find in Editor:
Right-click the xx.exe=>Create a shortcut. Then move the shortcut to User's Desktop folder and set the AlwaysCreate property to be true.
After that, build the installer project and install that xx.msi or setup.exe in my machine, I'll get a shortcut in desktop, double-click it will run the wpf(core) application.
2.See this blog, we can use command like dotnet publish -r xxx -p:PublishSingleFile=true to get a single-file executable which is self-extracting and contains all dependencies (including native) that are required to run your app. In this situation, you don't need a Installer project to deploy your project. The single executable is enough. Hint from Lex Li in this issue.
Hope it helps :-)
I have completed my program and would like to send that program in its compiled state to other pc's.
I understand that in the Debug folder there is the programName.exe file, which when I open it on the PC I created it with - it opens.
But if I send that .exe file to other pc's, it crashes or simply doesnt run!
Is there a way for others to see and use my program without installing visual studio?
I have asked this question before on another programming website with not much help, this is the link that they showed me, which i then followed:
http://www.dreamincode.net/forums/topic/58021-deploying-a-c%23-application-visual-studio-setup-project/#-application-visual-studio-setup-project/
The installer installs the program, but there is no files with it to open!
Other machines won't need to have Visual Studio installed - but they will need the appropriate version of .NET, depending on what you built against. If you target the "client" profile, the .NET distribution is fairly small.
You could build a setup project which kicks off the .NET framework installation if necessary, but it's likely to be quite a lot of work - in many cases it's probably simpler just to tell people what they need to install first, particularly if this is for personal use or friends/family.
There are most likely other DLLs that your project is dependent on that do not get copied over when only transporting that .exe file. You COULD just copy those over as well.
However, the best practice is to add a new Project under Setup for a Installer. It should detect those dependencies. Then the other users will just have to run the setup.exe that gets created (but you have to include the other folders and files that get generated). Open up the File System Editor tab of the Installer project. Then inside the Application Folder, I right click on "Primary output from [Main Project] (Active)", then select "Create Shortcut to ..." and drop the Shortcut into the Program Files and User Desktop folders on the left.
For something simple, the other DLLs should be fine.
Create the MSI Installer project for your application.
Copy your project output as input of MSI Installer.
.Exe is depends on .msi file, so when you click the .exe must verify the msi file existed in same directory.
Verify the .Net framework and Installation 3.0 before run the .exe or .Msi file.
The easiest approach would be:
1: Right click on your Solution Explorer and add a new project. The new project would be a Setup project, which would be under Other Projects -> Setup and Deployment -> Visual Studio installer and then choose Setup Project from the right side.
2: Add all your bin folder files to Application folder and then build your solution.
3: It will create a file with .msi extension. You can distribute that to anyone you want and they wouldn't need any VS.
I swear the more Microsoft "evolves" Visual Studio, the more ignorant the entire process becomes.
I have a Windows Service with 3 class libraries in it. I went into the properties for each class library and set the platform target to x64. I did this same thing to the Windows Service as well as to the Test Console project I added to verify everything.
I can run the console application on my Windows 2008 R2 x64 server with no issues but the stupid installer keeps bombing out and telling me that I have a bad image. I did ensure that I had set the target platform of the installer to x64.
I have no idea idea was this stupid thing would be bombing out and would really appreciate any insights. I do reference other DLLs and those might be x86 but I thought if the main libraries were set properly that things would work...
I have finally figured this out – it has NOTHING to do with architecture, references or any other nonsense and everything to do with the installer itself. As this article explains – the Visual Studio Installer, by default, uses a 32 bit DLL and that is what causes the failures.
To overcome this problem, simply follow these steps:
Make sure that you go into the Properties ⇒ Build tab for every project and set the Target Platform to x64
Click on the name of your Installation project and then Properties and ensure that the Target Platform is x64
Build your solution – if the solution does not compile, right click and Unload Project and then Load Porject for those projects whose references fail.
Go here and download and install the 7.0 INstaller SDK
Go into the C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SDKs\Windows\v7.0A\Bin folder and install Orca by double-clicking on the Orca.Msi file
Run Orca and open your project's MSI folder
Select the Binary table
Double click the cell [Binary Data] for the record InstallUtil
Make sure "Read binary from filename" is selected
Click the Browse button Browse to C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\v4.0.30319
Select InstallUtilLib.dll
Click the Open button and then the OK button
That is it - save your MSI file in Orca and then deploy it – the x64 installation should work without any further issues.
I just ran into this issue myself, in Visual Studio 2017, building an installer for an x64 version of an application that's been x86 for a long time.
I don't doubt that Ken's answer is definitive, but it occurred to me that as the Custom Actions are called by the installer, not by the installed application, there is no need, in my case at least, for the project containing the Custom Actions to have the same bitness as the rest of the application, as its classes are never instantiated by the application itself.
So I changed the platform for that project alone back to x86, and rebuilt the installer.
It all 'just worked'.
This depends, of course, on having Custom Actions that are completely isolated from the rest of the solution. Quite a relief not to have to use Orca however.
This error happened to me installing a .Net 4.5+ service to a 64-bit machine.
The installer was set to x64
The service project build platform was set to x64
Installation fails with a BadImageFormatException.
For me, the solution was to go to the service project properties, and change the build platform to "Any CPU", and also uncheck the "Prefer 32bit" checkbox that was checked by default (see also what does it mean).
I have a Visual Studio 2010 solution that contains 3 projects: a dll project, an executable project, and the Installer project.
I am working on the dll and the executable concurrently. The executable is simply a front end for the library. While developing the two in Visual Studio I simply added a reference to the dll project from within the executable and it works fine.
What I'm having trouble with is the deployment. Ideally the dll would be compiled and installed in a subdirectory of the executable. Using the "Visual Studio Installer - Setup Wizard" project template for my installer doesn't seem to be giving me the options I need.
Am I going about this wrong by developing my backend and frontend in different projects? What steps should I take to deploy the compiled dll along with the executable? I may be going about this all wrong, so please help me understand a better methodology if this seems backwards. For all the programming I learned in college, no one ever went over what I do when I actually want to deploy my software.
Since the DLL project is explicitly referenced from the EXE project, it is automatically copied in the EXE's build folder (i.e. bin\Debug or bin\Release) and is considered part of EXE project's "primary output". As a consequence, you only need to reference the EXE from your setup project.
The installed DLL will be in the same folder as EXE. Why would you want to install the DLL in a different folder on the user's machine if it is not there on the development machine? If you are loading it dynamically and using reflection, then don't reference it from EXE, but do reference it from the setup project, which then gives you the power to set whatever target folder you want.
This is what you need to do.
On your Solution create new Project > Other project Types > Click Setup and Deployment
On The Application Folder > right click > Then Add your front end Application > Build.
Check this
Regards
I programmed an hour-sheet application and now I would like to publish it so people can install and run it.
I've tried the publish function of visual studio 2008 but this gives me a clickOnce application/installer that's really confusing, but it works when I run it, but when I export the installer to another pc it installs it crashes at the end of the install.
so I tried just coping the installed files but then the program crashes at startup.
Is there a simple way to compile the application to a simple standalone executable or maybe containing a separate folder containing the resources (images/classes)?
You can copy the executable from bin\Release and it should work.
If it uses any DLLs that are not part of the .Net framework itself, you'll also need to copy those. (Set Copy Local to true in the properties for each reference)
If it uses any other files, you'll need to copy them to the right place or embed them in the EXE or a DLL.
I would add Setup Project to your solution which will create a setup.exe.
Here's some of the links:
http://www.dreamincode.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=58021
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms235317.aspx
This will make sure that the dlls and assemblies are deployed to appropriate place when you install your software. It will also make sure that it gets rids of files when you uninstall it.
you can find your .exe here Projectpath\bin\Debug you have to give .config file too