I created a project on CefSharp, added Costyra.Fody to it and built it, but the exe file appears in the folder and there are a lot of libraries, etc. nearby. He doesn't want to work without them. How to create even a large but one exe file?
Related
When I build solution in Visual Studio (2022), it generates an EXE (or DLL if I chose a class library) just as expected, except it also generates some files, like PDB, and some CS files. I know what most of them do, but if I am making a software, which consists of multiple of these files, I wouldn't want or like some people looking at the application directory and find source files and/or source code and solutions. This makes me come up with a question: Would deleting every single file except the compiled EXE or DLL impact their usability, or is there any other circumstance(s) to avoid creating these files, like SLN or PDB?
Thanks in advance :)
I have not tried anything, because, I simply don't know how to prevent VS from creating these files, except compiled files.
The .pdb files are outputs of your compilation. You can suppress them with:
<DebugSymbols>false</DebugSymbols>
The other files, like .cs and .sln are inputs to your project. Deleting them will mean you cannot build your program any more. I don't understand why you would want them to be deleted. If they're appearing in your output directory, check that you don't have "Copy local" (CopyToOutputDirectory) set on those items in your project.
For the last two years I have been using Java and NetBeans, where all I need to do to add a new third party library to my project is throw in the .jar file and NetBeans does the rest.
Recently I have switch to C++ and Visual Studio and I am having a really hard time getting a project to compile using OpenGL, GLUT and GLEW due to 'Missing reference' errors.
Some tutorials tell me I need to download the projects for GLUT/GLEW and run them (that didn't work), some tutorials tell me I need to add a .dll file to my Win32 folder, others say just put the header files in the same directory as your project and some say I need to install these libraries in to Visual Studio itself, not just to my project.
None of these approaches have worked thus far.
All I want is for this one project to use these libraries. This is throwing a major spanner in the works for me at the moment, any help would be appreciated.
Sorry, I don't have an easy answer for you. I've been using OpenGL on Windows for years, and it can be a pain.
MS doesn't even (really) support OpenGL, the headers that come with Windows are the old 1.x ones - and they have no plans on changing that (they want to you use DX).
So, I would start small.
First, get a basically empty Win32 console "Hello World" app running.
Then, just add one component, like Glut.
Then, do the same - keeping it compiling / linking - incrementally add other components.
Wherever they tell you to put headers, libraries, DLLs, etc, it needs to be reflected in your project file. So:
add the location of the header files to "C/C++->Additional Include Directories"
add the .lib files to the "Linker->Input->Additional Dependencies"
(it still won't find them so) add the location of the .lib files to "Linker->General->Additional Library Directories"
With all that in place it should compile and link, but may not run still because it can't find the DLLs (that go along with the .lib files).
The shortest path to getting running might just be to dump the DLLs in the Windows/System32 folder. But in the long run that can be problematic as other apps may overwrite it (or see you as overwriting theirs).
What I do with specific DLLs is just load them explicitly in my application so I know for sure what DLL I'm getting (I don't do much Windows-specific GL, but when I did, I had my own \OpenGL directory with the versions of .h files, libs and DLLs I wanted).
Good Luck!
Oh, LoadLibrary() will load a DLL, etc.
I have got an old project, C++, 64 bits compiled on VS2008. The project is built using some Python scripts (SCONS). I have got to compile it in VS2010.
All is working pretty fine except one small detail: in VS2008 all output goes to Debug\Win64 or Release\Win64, where scripts are looking for it, while in VS2010 it goes to Debug\x64 or Release\x64.
I know that there are PLATFORM/PLATFORMNAME macros being used by VS. Anything I did trying to change these values is mighty ignored by VS, or, if I am changing it manually in vcxproj files, VS refuses to compile at all.
For some company-related reasons scripts could not be changed. So for now I just added to a batch file that runs the script some xcopy commands to copy all the files from\x64 to \win64 before the script starts. It's kind of working, but I would like to know about a more elegant solution.
Thanks,
fLot
Another solution that might work is to create a file system junction so that \Win64 and \x64 becomes two different names to the same physical folder. You have to create a junction for each configuration instead of copying the files but once created it should stick between builds and ensure the two folders have the same content. See Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_junction_point.
Suppose I have created an installation exe using NSIS. The exe is a compressed (7zip maybe) file that contains everything to install the application on a fresh machine, and that comprises big exe files (like .NET runtimes, mysql server installer, etc.). I have to send via the Internet the big exe file to another person.
To save time and bandwidth, I'd like to remove the contained big files; I can do that using 7zip to open and extract all the files in the original exe, delete the big ones, rezip using again 7zip. This works up now.
The other party will download the reduced zipped file, but then has to reintroduce the big files in some way, recreating the exe installer.
I don't know how to achieve that. I've tried with paquet builder with no success.
Is that possible?
I don't think it's possible. But I think I have another solution for you. Why don't you simply execute separate executables (like .NET runtime etc) from NSIS bundle? This way you don't need to include them into resulting bundle. Just tell the user to download them and put the into proper place. It would be easier than instructing them to assemble bundle from pieces, no?
I have a couple of different solutions, in which some projects may depend on output from projects in other solutions. To manage this, I've been copying dll files from the /bin/ folder in each project to a shared library location after build, and then copy/reference them from there to the dependent project.
However, as the library solution gets larger, this tends to become unmaintainable. Too much of my time is being spent traversing solution directories in Windows Explorer looking for /bin/ folders, and trying to figure out which one, or which ones, of the dll files from each one I need.
Is there any way to give Visual Studio a hint that I want all projects in a solution to have the same output directory? For example, a /bin/ folder directly under the solution folder, where all projects put their output.
If possible, I'd like to achieve this without hard-coded post-build events that copy the files, since that will fail if a project output changes file name, or adds another file. I'd rather like to change the location of the actual output directory - the location of $(OutDir), if you will.
I know you said you don't want to use post build events, but your reason as to why not intrigued me. It sounds like you might be hard coding the name of the .dll in your post build event. That can easily be avoided.
xcopy "$(TargetDir)*" "c:\common\" /Y
The * would just cause everything in your bin/Debug/ folder to get copied to your common folder. You could also just copy dlls if you want. Or, if you use $(TargetPath), you'll copy just the 1 dll that is the result of the project, and not any other related dependencies.
UPDATE
The way we do it is each projects entire bin folder is copied to a subfolder. Suppose you have 2 projects, WebUtil and HtmlParser, where WebUtil depends on HtmlParser. For both projects, use xcopy "$(TargetDir)*" "c:\common\$(ProjectName)" /Y. This will create c:\common\WebUtil\ and c:\common\HtmlParser. In WebUtil, add a reference to c:\common\HtmlParser\HtmlParser.dll. There will now be 2 copies of HtmlParser.dll in c:\common.
c:\common\HtmlParser\HtmlParser.dll // the most recent build.
c:\common\WebUtil\HtmlParser // what was the most recent build when WebUtil was built
This has all kinds of advantages. If you change the API of HtmlParser, WebUtil will continue to work, since it will have the older HtmlParser.dll until you try to rebuild WebUtil (at which point you'll get build errors because of the changed API).
Now, if a 3rd project got in the mix that depended on WebUtil, and you're using some part of WebUtil that exposes classes in HtmlParser, then you'll need to add a reference to both projects from your new project. When you add a reference to HtmlParser.dll, use the one in c:\common\WebUtil. You do this because you're only including it as a necessary requirement of WebUtil. Now you'll always have the version of HtmlParser.dll that matches your current version of WebUtil.dll.
I hope that makes sense. It can definitely be a tricky thing to manage. Just wait till you have to start pulling down all your dependencies using svn:externals =P
You can set the output directory in each project properties.
Right click on the project, select Properties
For C#, it is one of the Build property page, under Output, Output directory.
In VB.Net projects, it is on the Compile tab, in the textbox at the top.