How can I deploy a C# Visual Studio 2005 project so that I can run the application in another system? My project has a few dependencies and files that have to be integrated while deploying the project.
What is the best way to handle this?
You need to know what dependencies you have.
you need to have .Net framework installed
you have to explicitly install all dependencies that you used from the GAC on your target machine (some 3rd party components)
and then you just need to copy files from your \bin\Release folder
install all services, etc. if you have any
In the simplest cases only copying files should be enough.
Have you looked into ClickOnce deployment?
It's far from perfect, but for projects without a huge amount of overhead, it's generally good enough.
What kind of project?
Assuming it's a regular winforms application, just copy everything from either the obj\debug or obj\release directory to the new computer. Then run your executable
You can right click on the project file in visual studio and publish to a different location. This will build the site and copy it to the specified directory.
Also, if you need to do anything extra during the build, you can specify custom build actions on the build tab of the project's properties.
EDIT: now that I see you added that it's a windows application my answer doesn't matter. I'd try adding a setup and deployment project in visual studio to handle installing/deploying your windows application.
You more or less have three options (maybe 4?) as I see it.
Windows Installer
ClickOnce
Just distribute
the exe itself
In your particular case I would suggest ClickOnce as long as the project is not massive with too many dependencies.
For other alternatives.
The right answer depends on many criteria.
The simplest way to deploy is by copying files. Just put your .exe, the dependent .dll's, and the .config file in a directory and copy it onto the target machine. It's simple, but there are many restrictions to this approach:
It assumes that the target machine has the right version of the .NET framework installed
It assumes a certain technical competence on the part of the person installing the software.
The installation won't do basic things like create start menu items.
Publishing the program for ClickOnce deployment addresses a lot of these issues, but it's got its own set of limitations. I haven't used it much, so there are probably more than these, though these alone are pretty significant:
Programs are installed into the ClickOnce cache, not the Program Files directory.
If your program does anything outside of the ClickOnce sandbox, you have to deal with security elevation and code signing.
You can create a VS Setup and Deployment project and build an .msi file to install the program. The most obvious drawback to this is that it's complicated: .msi files can do many, many things, and the Setup and Deployment object model is complex, with documentation that is, let us say, fanciful. But there are things you can do with .msi installation that you can't readily do with other approaches, including (and certainly not limited to):
Cleanly uninstall the program through Add/Remove Programs.
Provide an actual UI for installation that lets the user decide where to put the program.
Support scripted installation via MSIEXEC.
Install components besides the program, e.g. databases, COM objects, etc.
Put components in the target machine's GAC.
Related
I have a WPF application that is going to be installed on several client PCs. I'm using InstallShield Express Edition as the deployment tool for that.
I've created a different project(DLL) to keep track of the software installations. Basically is a stand-alone C# project that reads, writes and does some validation checking in the Windows Registries, and can be integrated in other WPF applications (this project/DLL is going to be useful for other Apps).
What I want to do is to create an .EXE file to register the installation. This .EXE is not used in the main WPF application, but uses the .DLL that I've just talked about above.
I've managed to do that by creating a different solution with a single Console Application project, and referencing the necessary DLL's.
But what I really want is to create it as project within my Main App Solution, and when I do that no .EXE file is generated other than the Main App executable.
Is there anything I can do to get the 2 .EXE files (Main App and InstallationRegistration) or is the way I'm currently using the only way?
This is more a nuisance than a problem, but still... it will be a better way to keep track of this small module in all the different Applications I've developed.
Thanks
Are you saying the Console EXE is not created as part of the build/run of the solution?
Or the Console EXE is not created as part of the InstallShield deployment project?
If you are referring to building Console EXE as part of the build/run of the solution:
Generally, when you hit F5, Visual Studio builds only those projects you designate as Startup and their dependencies.
You will have to explicitly build that Console App or the Entire Solution.
You can designate it as one of your Startup projects if you want it to be built everytime you hit F5; or specify it as a dependency of the MainApp project (that's a bit of a cheat but it gets the job done).
After trying for a few different ways I got to that DUH!!! moment.
What happened is that VS was creating both .EXE files for the Main App and the Console Application, only with each one is in their respective Debug/Release Folder
For Example:
Main App -> C:\Projects\MyApp\MyAppUI\bin\Debug\MyAppUI.exe
Intallation Control.EXE -> C:\Projects\MyApp\InstControl\bin\Debug\InstControl.exe
NOTE: C:\Projects\MyApp is the solution folder.
It kinda makes sense they are on their own folder, but on the other hand, there should be an option in VS to choose where we want to send all the solution's .EXE
Hope it helps someone in the future.
By default, all intermediate compilation artifacts are placed in the obj folder under a given project in the solution (so far I am not aware this can be changed).
For project outputs they are, by default, put under bin\Debug or bin\Release depending on your Build Configuration.
This can however be changed from the Project's Properties; specifically the Build tab has an "Output path" option for you to specify the build output location.
This has to be done on a per project basis but I generally create a SolutionDir\bin folder under the Solution root and direct all project output paths to SolutionDir\bin\Debug or SolutionDir\bin\Release as the case may be. This has the added advantage or reducing the total size of SolutionDir by avoiding multiple copies of output assemblies in large solutions with complex interdependencies between projects.
Does this help?
i created an application using c# language. this application is doing a task like report generation.i am using that application exe file directly to run the application.i never installed that application in my system. without installation of that application, i can use it in my system.then why people are installing a software/application in systems.please clarify me. so that i can differentiate the MSI installation and direct use of exe file.
Install in cs jargon means guided setup, so what you do is already, basically, installing. Installing may involve much more complicated steps than simple copy/paste of bin directory or unzipping in some folder. installation process may contain the below processes:
Controlling user license
Registry key control
Database creation
Com components registration
....
and much more.
But the core concept remains the same: guided setup of all necessary components of your program to run it properly. So, if the only thing your program needs is a binaries folder, copy/paste is your install.
What you are doing is called an "xcopy" deployment. It was all the rage when .NET came out but it has serious limitations.
Windows Installer (MSI) is a windows platform service / SDK that aimed to create a declarative framework for consistent installer behavior. Simply put instead of learning how to write script to automate install/uninstall (and making a lot of mistakes along the way) you leverage MSI to tell it I have a product named X with feature Y that has these files Z in these directories along with a shortcut and some registry entries and let MSI do the rest for you.
I've wrapped up version 1 of my desktop application and it's ready for deployment.
Just to test things out, I grabbed the contents of the /debug folder and copies that into a folder of the target machine and the application works.
I'm sure this is not the correct way to do this.
I've created a Visual Studio Installer project and created that as well. My question is, do I have to set something similar to ASP.Net's debug=false, when deploying an application?
Thanks for the suggestions.
There are several deployment options of .NET applications. Your approach is often called "xcopy deployment" and is a simple copy of all included files.
Typically you don't copy the content from the debug folder. Instead you change the "Solutions Configuration" combo in Visual Studio from debug to release, compile the application and copy the files from the "Release" folder instead.
When creating a release build of your application the compiler applies more optimizations to the code to create a more efficient executable.
There are other methods of deployment. Here are some that creates different kinds of installers
ClickOnce (Right click on your project in solution explorer and choose "Publish")
Installer project (creates an MSI installer)
WiX (creates MSI installers too, is more cumbersome than an installer project, but more flexible
etc.
The benefit of creating an installer is that it is usually simpler for an end user to run an installer than it is to copy a loose bunch of files. An installer can automatically create an icon on the start menu, make sure the correct version of .NET framework is installed etc.
If you only want to run your application on one or at most a few computers it is probably not worth the extra work of creating an installer.
I would do the following when creating a "release candidate" of your app:
Create a branch or tag in your source control repository identifying a particular build as the source of the release candidate. A branch is nice because it allows you to make changes necessary to release the source that you don't want in your dev environment.
Set up the Release build configuration of your app. Among other things, yes, this does ensure the DEBUG compile constant is not set, so anything that is conditionally compiled based on that constant will not be. Default behavior is also to optimize the code (faster runtime, not debuggable) and to not generate PDBs.
Build the installer. Ideally, the output of the installer should go somewhere else than the main output of the primary project.
Run the installer (doing so from its build location is fine). It should execute with no errors, and produce what you expect.
"Smoke test" the application as installed. Basically, run through some basic operations that do not modify the data layer it works against, that will verify there are no major problems with the app possibly caused by a missing DLL or incorrect connection strings/app settings.
Copy the installer to a thumb drive of sufficient size, and try the same installation and smoke test on a "virgin" computer that does not have VS installed. Ideally, it should mimic the environment of the target machines as closely as possible.
For one, you shouldn't be deploying the Debug assmeblies. You should build in Release mode. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/wx0123s5.aspx
I've never used the Installer projects, but I tend to stay more towards web and console stuff. Hopefully someone else will have a more detailed post :)
Use a Setup and Deployment project. This way your application will make sure user's have required libraries. It will also download the required .net version if it is not installed.
And always release the "release" version and not the debug version. Copy/Paste from debug folder will not work in call the cases and its not the right way to release an application.
Also, if you don't want someone reverse engineering your code, you might want to use Dotfuscate.
What exactly is needed for someone to use my C# windows application in executable form? I do know that .NET framework has to be installed on the computer, but I heard there is much more. And is there any way to spread the application besides doing installable form via "Publish"? I mean, which project files are needed? Only exe file, or these pdb and manifest files too? Do they have to be from bin/debug or bin/Release, or makes no difference? (I know files created with this application are saved in "debug") Because I need to show my program (as exe) to certain person with .NET framework...
You only really need the .NET framework, unless you've used third party components.
If you use a Package and Deployment project in your solution it will automatically generate a .msi file for you with everything that your app needs to be installed.
You need .pdb files if you want file and line number detail in any exceptions thrown by your app. If you're selling the app as a product, don't include them as that information poses a security risk. If it's an internal app, then consider including them in your package and deployment project, because it's useful information to get with exception logs.
For runtime etc, .NET should be enough. Or with some tools (like as is used via MonoTouch and some others), not even that.
For the application, just the exe is necessary, but there can be lots of other required files - a config file perhaps, or maybe supporting non-CLR dlls (third party dlls perhaps).
For deployment, you can just use the exe etc (xcopy deployment), or ClickOnce (.application), or an installer (.exe / .msi).
The best option is to give them the files from your bin/release folder.
PDB files (which you should only find in your debug folder) contain the symbols for debugging your application, so you don't need to give them those.
There are other options such as ClickOnce deployment or an MSI, but it sounds like you just need to temporarily show this to only one individual, so it won't be worth it to go down this path.
In short, as long as the user has the correct version of the .NET framework installed on their machine, and you give them all of the relevant files from your bin/release folder (the EXE file, any additional DLLs that your application references, and any miscellaneous files like an app.config file), they should be able to run it just fine.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 11 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
What are the specific differences between .msi and setup.exe file?
I am working on an installer for a new version of my project (C#).
Previously, I've used Inno Setup to create .exe files for installing my projects on other computers in the workplace. While reading through some tutorials, though, I came across Windows Installer XML, which uses XML files to build a .msi installer.
My project will be available on a network share that all the employees have access to so they can install the software (I'm currently working on an update checker as well)
What are the major differences between .exe and .msi installers? Why would I want to chose one over the other? Would either make more sense given my specific environment?
I found some of the information at this question, but there was not a lot of information.
I wouldn't use WiX for a new project. I'd use an 'Installer Project' in Visual Studio to build an MSI. An installer project is much, much easier to put together.
Many exe installers are actually stubs or containers that hold an MSI, btw.
I guess you've checked out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Installer?
MSI's give administrators the ability to restrict installs, rebase installs, change or add custom actions, automate installs/reinstalls/uninstalls, standard logging and switches. It just really integrates into a corporate IT environment ( http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb742606.aspx ).
A custom installer may have many of those features, but that would depend on the installer package.
Most EXE installers available today are simply stubs to verify that the target machine has just enough support to launch an MSI stored within the EXE. They do basic windows version checking and Windows Installer version checking, then essentially invoke msiexec and let Windows Installer handle the rest.
For a very basic installation, the Installer Project in Visual Studio can get you by, but for just about any kind of real customization or tweaking you'll need a real MSI editor. We use WiX and love it - but it's a bear to learn. If you've got the cash you can invest in InstallShield - but that has it's own set of quirks.
MSI is configurable while EXE is not. I know this doesn't answer your question directly, but I thought I should point towards the ClickOnce technology.
MSDN: See example here.
Simply stated, a ClickOnce application
is any Windows Presentation
Foundation, Windows Forms, or console
application published using ClickOnce
technology. You can publish a
ClickOnce application in three
different ways: from a Web page, from
a network file share, or from media
such as a CD-ROM. A ClickOnce
application can be installed on an end
user's computer and run locally even
when the computer is offline, or it
can be run in an online-only mode
without permanently installing
anything on the end user's computer.
For more information, see Choosing a
ClickOnce Deployment Strategy.
IndigoRose's MSI factory is extremely powerful and much, much cheaper than InstallShield.
It uses WiX internally and allows you to modify the XML files in any way you like. The bootstrapper (.exe, if you add one) has a powerful scripting engine based on Lua to do... well anything.