I have a project where there are files in a particular non-standard textual format. When these files are touched/modified, I want to run a certain custom compiler on them to generate XML, which is part of the output of the whole solution.
I'm considering creating a MSBuild task to do this. It will take as input the non-stadard file names and output the requisite XML files. The task will then be used in the other projects in the solution.
I want new developers on this project to have minimal setup. That means, I want to be able to take a clean copy of my solution directly from source control and have the build first build the custom task, then apply it as necessary to the other projects in the class.
I'm concerned that the build output of the project that builds the custom task needs to copy its output assembly to some known location so that the other projects can refer to it. What is the proper way of going about doing this?
You're about to walk into a mess here, because Visual Studio is going to lock the custom task Assembly when it's first used, thereby causing any further builds in Visual Studio (i.e. Build > Solution) to fail.
As #stijn commented, you should override the Build target and use another method of building the assembly with the custom task, e.g. using the Csc task or spawning another MSBuild.exe process (see answer to linked question).
The way I decided to go though was to create a separate solution, e.g. "Build Tools", containing the custom task assembly (among other tools), and required that it be built before anything else. I personally find the notion of checking-in prebuilt binaries of this source very unpalatable. If developers didn't want to build the Build Tools solution, they would copy the output from some nightly build.
Unfortunately there isn't an easy way of getting around "hardcoding" a known (relative) location. Using $(SolutionDir) usually works - just not if you try to run MSBuild on the project directly, instead of the solution (VS is a bit more intelligent when you open a project by itself).
Related
I have a solution where there is a dependency on 7zip's sfx. Out of desire to keep the entire solution (plus the sfx) managed and coordinated, I want to create a new project to house all the source files that is used by sfx, and when building, execute a command line that tells 7zip to build a sfx from the source files, and place into the output so that it can be then referenced by actual Visual Studio projects within the same solution.
I think I can figure the command line by using Build events and providing the appropriate macros to ensure that the 7zip's output is placed into the target folder with appropriate name so that it can be then correctly referenced by other VS projects. But what I am not sure about is what Visual Studio project I need to use or steps to take to tell Visual Studio that there isn't going to be any code to be compiled in this project and it just has to execute this script I give it.
The closest thing I can come up with is VS's Make project but I don't know if that is the right thing since this has nothing to do with Make at all.
So, what is the Visual Studio project template I need to use? If empty, then what configuration do I need to perform so that it won't try and look for some code files to compile but instead just execute scripts as part of the solution's build?
For now, it seems that using C++ Makefile Project works. I had to make few configurations:
1) I had to specify the project's "Configuration Type" as "Utility"
2) I used Pre-Build event and provided a command to invoke a batch file included in the project. The batch file then takes care of everything.
3) Normally, non C++ files are not considered for determining whether build is needed or if it's already up to date. To ensure that a new build is perform if the batch file or other key files are edited, I set the file's "File Type" to "MakeFile". Even though it isn't actually a Make file, it ensures that any edits made to the file will cause a new build.
The downsides I've found so far are:
1) C++ uses "Filters", not folders. Therefore, keeping the files in same directory structure is a big PITA. One can "include" files and get a one-to-one mapping between "Filters" and the actual directory structure on disk but it's annoying and tedious. Wish it was a C# project
2) I'm a bit wary about how it will detect new files or other changes for files that I didn't explicitly set to "MakeFile". I expect the source to be stable but I worry that when I realize I need a new file and add it, I might forget and not notice that the build is not correctly including the new file.
I'm not sure if this is the best method but this works for my purpose - having a project to manage external tools as part of bigger build process.
I have a build process (let's call it the "engine") that has been using a command line call to Visual Studio's devenv.exe to build a project. I have known for some time that VS is just building with MSBuild, so I finally got around to updating the engine to use MSBuild directly. However, I'm finding a strange anomaly with MSBuild.
For the sake of discussion, there's projects A, B, C, and D. Project A is the main project I'm building, a web app, that depends (through project references) on the other 3 projects. When built manually in VS, A\bin is populated with assemblies. When built in the engine with devenv.exe A\bin is again populated with the expected binaries. When built in the engine use MSBuild, A\bin contains nothing. However, B\Release\bin, C\Release\bin and D\Release\bin contain their binaries as they did using the former 2 build methods.
This happens with just a single project as well. The problem doesn't appear to be related to dependent projects.
I have attempted to explicitly set the MSBuild OutDir property, but it doesn't appear to have any affect.
I have run builds with diagnostic output on and can't see anything obvious (granted, there is a LOT there so it's possible I have yet to find something significant).
I've also been trying to figure out how to see the command line call to MSBuild that VS is making when run from devenv.exe but I can't seem to find it.
I have looked at several other SO posts (here and here) but they aren't the same problem.
Anyone have an idea of what this could be or where else I could look for an answer or more diagnostic information?
EDIT 1: The arguments pattern used for the call to MSBuild looks like this:
/nologo /target:Compile /property:Configuration=%%BUILDCONFIG%% /maxcpucount
/property:OutDir=%%OUTDIR%%\bin\ /verbosity:diag /detailedsummary "%%PROJPATH%%"
The lower half of that shows my attempt to force the output directory as well as the enhanced output to show more details of the process. Build engine code replaces with "%%TOKEN%%" items with the appropriate replacement values for the project being built.
EDIT 2: After more research and looking into suggested provided, I've decided to abandon the effort to use msbuild instead of devenv. It seems there is a lot more going on under the hood of devenv in preparation its own call to msbuild and I could likely break something else going on if I don't fully understand the entrance in msbuild. I did try to see if the call to msbuild from devenv is logged, but it doesn't seem to be. I've considered building a dummy msbuild app to just dump the command going into it and temporarily swap out the actual msbuild to generate this diagnostic information, but that's more effort than it's worth at this point. The performance gain isn't so great that it's worth pursuing further for now.
I would look at the Output path on the build tab of your project properties. There are more than few differences when using MSBuild and when using Visual Studio (Even from the command line). It could be you have A configured differently than B,C,D and synching A to the rest will make it work. Also, if you plan to build the projects individually, not as a solution make sure you don't use Solution Level macros that won't be available to the project file on it own.
You are supposed to set OutputPath instead of OutputDir.
Since you already used /verbosity:diag, why not redirect the output to a text file and carefully analyze where csc.exe (or another compiler in use) stores the binaries? That's quite simple and informative for you to learn how MSBuild works under the hood.
I have a script that will convert a text file into a resource file, so that I can have multiple language support by having text files for different languages converted into different resources. Once I run the script to get the resx file, I then have to run a custom build tool (as described here:Link to Code Project) in order to create the Designer.cs files to use the new files.
In keeping with the philosophy that I should be able to build the entire project with a single button click, how can I remove the step where I have to explicitly call the custom build tool in order to make the codebehind files?
I've tried automatically deleting the Designer.cs files as a pre-build step, since I would think that the custom build tool would automatically run if there were no Designer.cs files, but no dice.
So, I want my build script in Visual Studio/msbuild to do:
1) convert text to resx (done)
2) move resx files to appropriate directory (done)
3) create designer.cs files using a custom build tool (not done)
It's that last step...
Unfortunately I don't think there's an easy way of doing this. Custom Build Tools only run from within VS.NET - they don't run when you build your project using MSBuild from the command line.
In general, if you have the choice of writing a build tool as a Customer Build Tool or an MSBuild Task then choose the MSBuild Task every time as these Tasks will run in VS.NET and from the command line.
The designer.cs files for resources are there to support your coding. They give you the strongly typed access into the resource file. So, as long as you create your culture invariant resources in VS.NET (and let it create the .designer.cs files) then adding additional language support later (additional .resx files) should work fine.
If, however, your text files are your primary resource files, and you're adding new resource strings into these text files first, then you'll need to find another way of generating .cs files that allow you to code against those resources. If you HAD to, generating the .designer.cs file yourself (or somethign similar) wouldn't be that difficult. Using CodeDom or T4 you could create the helper class, using an existing .designer.cs file as a template.
There is a way to generate the *.Designer.cs for *.resx as part of the build process. There is a built-in MSBuild task GenerateResource, which basically a wrapper around the SDK tool resgen.exe. Here you can find an example how to use it.
Another thing you would find useful, if the generated *.Designer.cs version is not correct, basically, GenerateResource task is not calling the desired version of resgen.exe, setting property SdkToolsPath might help you.
Have you tried adding a Exec step in Before/AfterBuild step in your csproj? You have to manually edit the file for this, but that should solve your problem.
I'm not fully clear on if you want this done before or after the build. If you need it done sometime after Pass1/Pass2, you can hook into the targets directly. Try looking into Microsoft.Build.Common.Targets to get a feel for how to do this.
I know the ideal way to build projects is without requiring IDE based project files, since it theoretically causes all sort of trouble with automation and what not. But I've yet to work on a project that compiles on Windows that doesn't depend on the VisualStudio project (Ok, obviously some Open Source stuff gets done with Cygwin, but I'm being general here).
On the other hand if we just use VS to run a makefile, we loose all the benefits of the compile options window, and it becomes a pain to maintain the external makefile.
So how do people that use VS actually handle external makefiles? I have yet to find a painless system to do this...
Or in reality most people don't do this, although its preached as good practice?
Take a look at MSBuild!
MSBuild can work with the sln/csproj files from VS, so for simple projects you can just call them directly.
if you need more control, wrap the projects in your own build process, add your own tasks etc. - it is very extensible!
(I wanted to add a sample but this edior totally messed up the XML... sorry)
Ideally perhaps, in practice no.
Makefiles would be my preference as the build master, however, the developers spend all their time inside the visual studio IDE and when they make a change, it's to the vcproj file, not the makefile. So if I'm doing the global builds with makefiles, it's too easily put out of synch with the project/solution files in play by 8 or 10 others.
The only way I can stay in step with the whole team is to run devenv.exe on the solution files directly in my build process scripts.
There are very few makefiles in my builds, where there are they are in the pre-build or custom build sections or a separate utility project.
One possibility is to use CMake - you describe with a script how you project is to be built, and CMake generates the Visual Studio solution/project files for you.
And if you need to build your project from the command line, or in a continuous integration tool, you use CMake to generate a Makefile for NMake.
And if you project is a cross-platform one - you can run CMake to generate the makefiles for the toolchain of your choice.
A simple CMake script looks like this:
project(hello)
add_executable(hello hello.cpp)
Compare these two lines with a makefile or the way you setup a simple project in your favorite IDE.
In a nutshell CMake does not only cross-platform-enables your project it also makes it cross-IDE. If you like to just test your project with eclipse or KDevelop, or codeblocks, just run CMake to generate the corresponding project files.
Well, in practice it is no always so easy, but the CMake idea just rocks.
For example, if you consider using CMake with Visual Studio there is some tweaking required to obtain the familiar VS project feeling, main obstacle is to organize your header and source files, but it is possible - check the CMake wiki (and by writting a short script you might even simplify this task).
We use a NAnt script, which at the compile step calls MSBuild. Using NAnt allows us to perform both pre- and post-build tasks, such as setting version numbers to match source control revision numbers, collating code coverage information, assembling and zipping deployment sources. But still, at the heart of it, it's MSBuild that's actually doing the compiling.
You can integrate a NAnt build as a custom tool into the IDE, so that it can be used both on a build or continuous integration server and by the developers in the same way.
Personally, I use Rake to call msbuild on my solution or project. For regular development I use the IDE and all the benefits that provides.
Rake is set up so that I can just compile, compile and run tests or compile run tests and create deployable artifacts.
Once you have a build script it is really easy to start doing things like setting up continuous integration and using it to automate deployment.
You can also use most build tools from within the IDE if you follow these steps to set it up.
We use the devenv.exe (same exe that launches the IDE) to build our projects from the build scripts (or the command line). When specifying the /Build option the IDE is not displayed and everything is written back to the console (or the log file if you specify the /Out option)
See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/xee0c8y7(VS.80).aspx for more information
Example:
devenv.exe [solution-file-name] /Build [project-name] /Rebuild "Release|Win32" /Out solution.log
where "Release|Win32" is the configuration as defined in the solution and solution.log is the file that gets the compiler output (which is quite handy when you need to figure out what went wrong in the compile)
We have a program that parses the vcproj files and generates makefile fragments from that. (These include the list of files and the #defines, and there is some limited support for custom build steps.) These fragments are then included by a master makefile which does the usual GNU make stuff.
(This is all for one of the systems we target; its tools have no native support for Visual Studio.)
This didn't require a huge amount of work. A day to set it up, then maybe a day or two in total to beat out some problems that weren't obvious immediately. And it works fairly well: the compiler settings are controlled by the master makefile (no more fiddling with those tiny text boxes), and yet anybody can add new files and defines to the build in the usual way.
That said, the combinatorical problems inherent to Visual Studio's treatment of build configurations remain.
Why would you want to have project that "compiles on Windows that doesn't depend on the VisualStudio project"? You already have a solution file - you can just use it with console build.
I'd advise you to use msbuild with conjunction with makefile, nant or even simple batch file if your build system is not as convoluted as ours...
Is there something I'm missing?
How about this code?
public TRunner CleanOutput()
{
ScriptExecutionEnvironment.LogTaskStarted("Cleaning solution outputs");
solution.ForEachProject(
delegate (VSProjectInfo projectInfo)
{
string projectOutputPath = GetProjectOutputPath(projectInfo.ProjectName);
if (projectOutputPath == null)
return;
projectOutputPath = Path.Combine(projectInfo.ProjectDirectoryPath, projectOutputPath);
DeleteDirectory(projectOutputPath, false);
string projectObjPath = String.Format(
CultureInfo.InvariantCulture,
#"{0}\obj\{1}",
projectInfo.ProjectName,
buildConfiguration);
projectObjPath = Path.Combine(productRootDir, projectObjPath);
DeleteDirectory(projectObjPath, false);
});
ScriptExecutionEnvironment.LogTaskFinished();
return ReturnThisTRunner();
}
public TRunner CompileSolution()
{
ScriptExecutionEnvironment.LogTaskStarted ("Compiling the solution");
ProgramRunner
.AddArgument(MakePathFromRootDir(productId) + ".sln")
.AddArgument("/p:Configuration={0}", buildConfiguration)
.AddArgument("/p:Platform=Any CPU")
.AddArgument("/consoleloggerparameters:NoSummary")
.Run(#"C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v3.5\msbuild.exe");
ScriptExecutionEnvironment.LogTaskFinished ();
return ReturnThisTRunner ();
}
You can find the rest of it here: http://code.google.com/p/projectpilot/source/browse/trunk/Flubu/Builds/BuildRunner.cs
I haven't tried it myself yet, but Microsoft has a Make implementation called NMake which seems to have a Visual Studio integration:
NMake
Creating NMake Projects
Visual Studio since VS2005, uses "msbuild" to define and run builds. When you fiddle with project settings in the Visual Studio designer - let's say you turn XML doc generation on or off, or you add a new dependency, or you add a new project or Assembly reference - Visual Studio will update the .csproj (or .vbproj, etc) file, which is an msbuild file.
Like Java's ant or Nant before it, msbuild uses an XML schema to describe the project and build. It is run from VS when you do a "F6" build, and you can also run it from the command line, without ever opening VS or running devenv.exe.
So, use the VS tool for development and command-line msbuild for automated builds - same build, and same project structure.
Let's say you have a class library project that has any number of supplemental files that also need to be included with the compiled assembly (e.g. simple text files or even a legacy unmanaged DLL that's wrapped by the assembly as an interop layer). While embedding the supplemental files into the assembly itself is relatively straightforward, we have situations where this is not possible or just undesirable. We need to have them as "sidecar" files (i.e. files alongside the assembly, potentially in subdirectories relative to the assembly)
Adding those files to the project with an appropriate value for "Copy to Output Directory" specified appears to be sufficient for projects that are completely self-contained within a solution. But if a separate project in another solution adds a reference to the assembly, it does not automatically pickup its sidecar files. Is there a way in the project to somehow mark the resulting assembly such that anything referencing the assembly will also know it needs to include the associated sidecar files? How do you do this?
You can use al.exe, but there also appears to be a C# compiler option. You want to create a multifile assembly using the /linkresource C# compiler option. Instructions are here, but the command is similar to this:
csc /linkresource:N.dll /t:library A.cs
Where N.dll is a native DLL that will go wherever the managed assembly goes (including into the GAC.) There's a very clear description at the link I provided.
Have you tried creating a setup for your solution ? There's an option of including sidecar files targeting to application installation directory.
Another option would be to include the sidecar files in the Assembly resources and un-wrap them to disk when run for the first time.
What if you create a merge module containing the library plus its dependencies? Your installer will then need to reference this module, but you will ensure all of the necessary files will be present.
Unfortunately there doesn't appear to be a lot of built-in support in Visual Studio for this, although I can definitely see the use case.
If you use Subversion for your source control, then you could link in an external reference as an externals definition. This would bring in the source code, and you'd be making a reference to the necessary assembly as a project reference instead of a DLL reference, and then the copy to output directory rules would come into play.
If that's not possible, another solution would be to include commands in the pre/post-build events of your in-solution project to copy the most up-to-date sidecar files from the remote assembly on a build. Of course this comes with the caveat that it doesn't set itself up automatically when you include the DLL in your project; you have to take manual steps to set it up.
I deal with this some time ago. Its a common problem.
You can create some postbuild actions:
http://www.codingday.com/execute-batch-commands-before-or-after-compilation-using-pre-build-or-post-build-events/
Hope this helps... :)
It appears to me that you're using the wrong type of reference. There are two types of references- Reference and ProjectReference. Reference is an explicit reference to a specific assembly. ProjectReference is a reference to another project (say .csproj).
What you're looking for is ProjectReference. VS and the default MSBuild targets are setup to do CopyLocal. If you set CopyToOutputPath true for your "sidecar" files, any ProjectReferences to this project now will also pull in the same files.
I'm not sure if you can to ProjectReferences across solutions in the IDE. I deal a lot with MSBuild where sln files are not relevant and this is how I deal with it.
What we did in our project is that we created as separate build file to do all those stuffs.
In your build file you can have tags to build your main solution, then add tags to copy files you need after build.
NAnt is also your option, but right now I'm happy using Rake as my build/debug automation.
Since this cannot be integrated within Visual Studio, what I'm doing is I create a task (either in MSBuild, NAnt or Rake), that executes vsjitdebugger.exe in the end to attach it to my Visual Studio when debugging.
These are just my styles for now, you can maybe create your own style.