This I think is related to my use of the nlog C++ API (and my question on the nlog forum is here); the purpose of my asking this question here is to get a wider audience to my problem and perhaps to also get some more general ideas behind the VB6 IDE's failure to build in my particular scenario.
Briefly, the problem that I am having is that I am having trouble building VB6 components which reference unmanaged C++ components which have calls to nlog's C\C++ API (which is defined in NLogC.DLL). The build problems are not occurring during compile time, they are occurring when the binary is being built which suggests to me that it's some kind of linker type problem? Don't know enough about how VB6 binaries are produced to tell. The VB6 binary is produced, but it is corrupted and crashes shortly after it is invoked.
Has anyone had any similar experiences with VB6 (doesn't have to be related to nlog or C++)?
edit: Thanks for all the responses to this rather obscure problem. Still no headway unfortunately; my findings since I posted this:
'Tweaking' the compile options doesn't appear to help in this problem.
Adding a reference to the nlog-enabled C++ component from a 'blank' VB6 project doesn't crash it or cause weird build problems. So it isn't a 'native' VB6 issue, possibly an issue with the interaction between nlog and the various components and 3rd party libraries used by other referenced components?
As for C++ calling conventions: the nlog-enabled C++ component is - as far as I can see - compliant to these conventions and indeed works fine when referenced by VB6 as long as it is not making any nlog API calls. Not sure if the nlogc.DLL itself is VB6 compliant but I would have thought that that is immaterial since the API calls are being made from the C++ component; VB6 shouldn't know or care about what the C++ component is referencing (that's as far as my understanding on this goes...)
edit2: I should also note that the error message obtained during build is: "Errors during load. Please refer to "xxx" for details". When I bring up the log file, all that there is in there is: "Cannot load control xxx". Interestingly, all references to that particular control disappears from that particular project resulting in compile errors if I were to try to build again.
Got around the problem by using NLog's COM interface (NLog.ComInterop.DLL) from my unmanaged C++ code. Not as easy to do as the C\C++ API but at least it doesn't crash my VB6 components.
I would try tweaking some of the Compile options found in the Project, Properties menu, Compile panel to see if they yield any additional hints as to what is going wrong.
For example if you compile the executable to p-code rather than native code does it still crash on startup.
What error message do you get when you run your compiled binary?
I doubt the compiler/linker is the problem: project references in a VB6 project are not linked into the final executable. A project reference in VB6 is actually a reference to a COM type library (which may or may not be embedded in a .dll or other binary file type). Project references primarily serve two purposes:
The IDE extracts type information from the referenced type libraries which it then displays in the Object Browser (and in the Intellisense drop-down)
At compile-time, the compiler extracts the type information stored in the referenced libraries, including the CLSID of each class that you instantiate, and embeds this data into the executable. This allows your executable to create instances of classes contained in the libraries that you referenced.
Note that the compiled binary doesn't link to any code in the referenced libraries, and it doesn't even contain the filenames of the referenced libraries. The final executable only contains the CLSID's and other type information that it needs to instantiate COM objects at run-time.
It is much more likely that the issue is with NLog, or with how you are calling it from your code, rather than something gone awry in the VB6 compile process.
If you think it might be a linker problem, this should crash it the same way:
create a new standard project (of any kind)
add a new module and copy the "declare"-statements into it
compile
If it doesn't crash it is something else.
It would help an exact description of the error or a screenshot of what going on.
One thing to check is wherever NLogC.DLL or the C++ DLL you built have the correct calling convention defined. Basically you can't have the DLL function names mangled or use anything but the STDCALL calling convention. If the C++ DLL has not been created with those two things in mind then it will fail to work with VB6.
MSDN Article on Calling convention.
"Cannot load control xxx" errors can be caused by .oca files which were created from a different version of an .ocx than currently used. If that is the case, deleting the .oca files helps.
Related
With the risk to fall into too specific question...
Given a C++ MFC (mixed, not shaked) project compiled with /CLR, I have 200 classes already defined.
When I add a new empty class to this project, an error raises when I compile and execute in debug mode.
An unhandled exception of type 'System.IO.FileLoadException' occurred
in Unknown Module.
Additional information: Could not load file or assembly 'ProjectA,
Version=0.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null' or one of its
dependencies. Could not find or load a type. (Exception from HRESULT:
0x80131522)
ProjectA is the name of the MFC project itself. There is no reference to any ProjectA assembly on project configuration, and there is no reference to another custom assembly.
This project only have references to some .NET Framework assemblies, in order to allow that some of custom defined classes in the project can use CLR classes.
Then, the question is...
Do you know whether there is any limitation of class number on a MFC C++ project?
EDIT:
As I say in comments, in release mode the compilation succeed without errors.
Also, I clean, build, clean, close Visual Studio, reboot computer... and the problem still appears.
If I keep in 200 classes, there is no error. When I go to 201, the error appears.
Currently I'm trying to reproduce in a new default MFC project, adding classes till arrive to 200, to confirm that there is a real limitation.
EDIT 2: ERROR FIXED
Great. #MSX and #frymode show me how avoid the error with his comments.
In the Visual Studio development environment (source / source):
Open the project's Property Pages dialog box.
Click the C/C++ folder.
Click the Code Generation property page.
Modify the Enable String Pooling (/GF) property.
Thank you guys!
The /GF hack is a known workaround for this problem. It is however not a correct one, you are putting a band-aid on a heavily bleeding wound. Pretty important that you heal the problem instead of putting a patch on it, this heavily affects the way your program runs at runtime as well.
The problem maker is the <Module> class, an internal class that the C++/CLI compiler generates. You can see it with ildasm.exe or a good decompiler. This class is required as a home for declarations in your program that are not class members, valid in native C++ but not supported by the CLR. Which demands that every variable or function declaration is a member of a class. The C++/CLI compiler solves it by moving such a declaration into the <Module> class.
There is however a limit on the number of members in a class, they are represented in the metadata of the .NET assembly with a metadata token. An index into other tables. The upper byte identifies the table number, the lower bytes are the index in the table.
You exceeded that limit. This is bad.
A problem with the /clr compile option is that it works too well. It is capable of compiling any C++03 compliant native C++ code to MSIL. Such code will be just-in-time compiled to machine code by the jitter, just like normal managed code. It is however not verifiable code and it doesn't act like managed code at all, you can blow up your program with pointer fumbles just as easily. And above all, it is not code that's optimized with the native C++ back-end. Only the jitter optimizer has a shot at improving that code, it cannot do nearly the quality job that the native C++ optimizer can do, given that it runs with a hard upper limit on how much time it can spend on doing that job.
Have a look-see with a decompiler to see what ended up in that <Module> class. That's going to be overwheliming at first, you know you've got a big one right now. You fix this problem by spending more time segregating the code into the managed parts and the native parts. Where the native code should be compiled without /clr in effect. It is a per-source file setting, you can even switch back-and-forth in a single source code file with #pragma managed. The simplest way to segregate is by keeping your native code in its own library or DLL.
This link shows that there's no limit to the number of types you can have in a namespace (not a project). Considering, that a namespace can be split across different assemblies, you could, at least in theory, have an unlimited number of types. However, this post affirms that the maximum number of classes in a .DLL
is 16777215. Probably, you'll run out of memory before you reach that number of classes :)
Just for information: there seems to be a limit to the number of fields per class, though.
P.S.:
Here's the solution to your problem taken from this link
Open the project's Property Pages dialog box.
Click the C/C++ folder.
Click the Code Generation property page.
Modify the Enable String Pooling property.
I am attempting to add a Fakes assembly (in Visual Studio 2012 Ultimate) for an library that I reference in my code so that I can test independently of the libraries implementation. The the problem I'm having is that when I right click the referenced assembly and click "Add Fakes Assembly" I receive the message:
"Assembly not supported
Fakes does not support this assembly."
I've tried Googling this message but get 0 results if I put it in quotes and nothing relevant if I don't. I thought this was quite strange as you would expect someone else to have run into this issue at some point but anyway...
After giving up on searching for the message I tried searching for somewhere that might tell me what types of assembly Microsoft Fakes does support but this also proved fruitless.
I guess my question is: Does anyone know what types of assembly Microsoft Fakes does/doesn't support.
I've included some information about the assembly I'm referencing in case anyone knows why this one in particular isn't supported:
-Its a COM Interop assembly.
-Its an ActiveX component.
-It isn't strongly named.
Any leads at all would be greatly appreciated.
To be honest, the things you mentioned probably aren't the problem. It's entirely possible to fake Excel interop classes, for instance (not that you can use them!).
But if you take a look at what thing's don't support fakes, such as sealed classes, which don't allow stubs because stubs require inheritance, and some reflection classes which restrict shims, it's clear that some classes will have neither, thereby allowing a dll to have no fakeable components. Not much you can do there.
Additionally, Shims cannot be used on all types from the .NET base class library mscorlib and System. says MSDN.
I have to maintain an old VB 6 ActiveX DLL called by another third-party program for which I have no sources. This DLL works and compiles fine against the API of said program for about 6 years and 3 major versions.
But now when I try to compile the DLL against a new major version the mentioned error occurs. It seems the error occurs before "my" code is called so there´s no use debugging or logging. The only remedy was to compile w/o binary compatibility which is no real option. My Google search turned up quite some people with the same problem but no solution.
Does anybody here know how to fix this issue ?
I finally figure out how to diagnose VB6 error 32801 in a systemic way.
My theory is When the VB6 compiler is creating a project or binary compatible library, the compiler decompiles the type information from the referenced library. Error 32801 occurs the source code's type information is not the same as the referenced library.
There is a tool called OLEView. This tool can decompile the COM type information into an IDL text. What I do is decompile the referenced library in to IDL and take the last good build of the failing library. Most times it is a build server version but the build does not work on a developer workstation. Decompile the last good build. Use a text comparison tool, like WINMerge, and find the differences between the type libraries. The differences make it easy to track down the problem.
Depending on the difference will determine how to correct. Mitigation can be done by either correcting the reference DLL, or by source code correction, or source code references.
It sounds like one of the types in the interfaces defined in your new DLL is different from one in the previous DLL. I'm deducing you use types defined in the third party program in your public interfaces of your DLL. It sounds to me like the third party has changed the definition of one of the types but kept the name and GUIDs the same. You could use something like OLE/COM Object viewer to check whether that's true. If it is true then you can complain to the publisher of the 3rd party program. Do you have enough political power to succeed?
Bruce McKinney, the guru who wrote Hardcore Visual Basic 6, ran into the same issue with a structure in a type library, where he changed some of the member types. The only fix he could find was (essentially) to break binary compatibility - and that's after some correspondence with the VB6 compiler team, who he knew fairly well. I don't think anyone else could do better.
There is a discussion about this error on devx.com that seems to indicate that the problem stemmed from Microsoft's Scripting Runtime (scrrun.dll).
FileSystemObject compatibility Unexpected error (32810)
Does your DLL reference that library? If so, can you remove the reference (e.g., replace FileSystemObject functionality with intrinsic VB file handling functions and/or API calls).
Are any of the files associated with the core project being compiled marked as Read-Only (i.e. not checked out of SourceSafe or similar repository)?
*.exp
*.vbw
*.lib
---------------------------
Microsoft Visual Basic
---------------------------
Unexpected error (32810)
---------------------------
OK Помощ
---------------------------
This the message I was getting trying to reference in VBIDE an old OCX that has been recompiled recently.
After somewhat long research the offending lines of code causing this error appeared to be
Property Get MouseActivate() As BookmarkEnum
Just changed this to
Property Get MouseActivate() As Boolean
. . . and the error was gone.
BookmarkEnum is an enum from ADO. Our build server is Server 2003 and my dev machine is Win10. The project references ADO 2.8 but apparently this typelib has some differences on Server 2003 vs Win10
Which headers should I not use if I don't want my program to be linked with any of msvc*.dll ?
At the moment my application uses:
kernel32
user32
shell32
msvcp90
msvcr90
I want to get rid of the bottom two files. I don't mind if I will have to rewrite certain aspects of the program.
Because I know if you code in C and then link it won't link any msvc's
I believe you have to change the way the CRT is linked into your program. I think for that you have to change the C++->Code Generation->Runtime-Library to the static version. This is for Visual Studio 2005, don't know about newer versions.
Those libraries contain the C++ runtime - heap management and other stuff hard to get rid from.
You could link the C++ statically instead - use "C++ -> Code Generation -> Runtime Library" setting. Then you will not need those .dll files. However this is not the recommended way - if a vulnerability is found in the C++ runtime you'll have to recompile and reship your program.
Static link is the right answer. A related bit of advice is to use depends.exe to see what functions your exe is actually hitting in the dependent dlls. Those dependencies might be due to explicit use on your part or due to CRT implementation that you don't explicitly invoke.
Whats the easiest way to find out what programming language an application was written in?
I would like to know if its vb or c++ or delphi or .net etc from the program exe file.
Try PEiD
of course if they used a packer, some unpacking will need to be done first :)
Start it up and check what run-time DLLs it uses with Process Explorer.
If that doesn't make it immediately obvious, search the web for references to those DLLs.
Most disassemblers (including Olly I think) can easily show you the text contained in an EXE or DLL, and that can also sometimes give a clue. Delphi types are often prefixed with T as in TMyClass.
If it's a small executable with no DLL references and no text you might be SOL. At that point you'd need to look for idioms of particular compilers, and it would be mostly guesswork.
There is an art to detecting what language a program was written in. It is possible but there are no hard and fast rules. It takes a lot of experience (and it also leads to the question "Why would you want to..." but here are a few ideas on how to go about it.
What you're looking for is a "signature". The signature could be a certain string that is included by the compiler, a reference to an API that is quite common in the programming tool being used, or even a style of programing that is common to the tools being used, visible in the strings contained in the application.
In addition, there are styles to how an application is deployed: various configuration files found in the deployment directory, dlls and assemblies and even images, directories or icons.
Java applications wrapped in a self-launching executable will contain references to java libs, and will likely have certain libraries or files included in the same directory that indicate that it's java.
As indicated in other answers a managed assembly will show certain signs as well: you can open it in Reflector etc. While it is correct that c# and VB are "interchangable" once compiled, it is not true that they are identical. If you use Reflector to disassemble VB code you will quite often see that the assembly references the Microsoft.VisualBasic.dll assembly. You'll be able to tell the difference between Mono applications because they will most likely contain references to the mono assemblies.
Many compilers assemble and link code in certain ways, and leave footprints behind. For example, examining a window executable using "strings: tab in Process Explorer, you'll see a lot of strings. Using these you may be able to determine programming styles, methods called, error or trace methods withint the exe.
An example is that compilers use different mechanisms for localization: Microsoft stores localized strings in XML files or resource files. Other compilers will use a different tactic.
Another example is c++ name mangling. The CodeWarrior compiler uses a different algorithm to mangle the names of the member variables and functions of a call than Visual Studio.
I suppose you could write a book on the subject of accurately determining the lineage of any executable. This subject would probably be called "programming archeology".
You could try using Depends to see what runtime dependancies it has, which might give some clues.
The easiest way is to ask the developer of the program. It does not require any knowledge and utility programs.
Determine Delphi Application
Use eda_preview270.exe (from here) or some other spy tool and check the window class names. If they read like TButton or TfrmBlubb, it's a VCL app. If there is an "Afx" in them, it's probably MFC.
Compiled languages (by this I mean no scripting languages, or Java, .NET, etc.) are compiled into CPU assembly instructions, which is essentially a one-way conversion. It is not usually possible to determine which language a program was written in. However, using a dependency walker, you could potentially determine which runtime library the program was loading (if any) and therefore determine which language it used (e.g. MS Visual C++ 9 uses msvcr90.dll).
you can check is that a .net assembly or not by trying to open with ildasm.exe tool
PE Detective works best for me.
In general, you can't.
If you can load it into Reflector, you know it is a managed assembly.
That's a good question. There isn't any general way to tell, but I bet most compilers and libraries leave a mark in the resulting EXE file. If you wanted to spend a lot of time on it, you could gather a bunch of EXEs written in known languages and scan for common strings. I would image you'd find some.
Dependancy Walker, which someone else mentioned would be a good way to look for telltale dependencies, like versions of MSVCRT, etc
i'd try running the .exe thru a 'strings' program to get assorted hints.
If I remember correctly PE Explorer Disassembler gives some information about compiler that creates given not .net and java binary, for .net use Reflector or ILDAsm tool
The easiest way that I found (at least in computer games) was to look in the "redist" folder nested within the game's main folder. It might be obvious to some of you that are more experienced in programming yourself, but the specific purpose of the MSI in this folder is to allow the setup.exe file to automatically install the prerequisites for the game itself.
For example:
In Empire Total War, there is an MSI called "vcredist_x86-sp1.exe". This indicates that the game/program was written in Microsoft's "Visual C 2005" in the .NET Framework (usually).
In fact, if you open the MSI/EXE, the installer should immediately indicate the language it's written in and which version.
The reason I'm familiar is because I code in C# and VB in the .NET Framework and we auto-install the prerequisites for our business app.
Hope this helps!