Hi Jerek, I think for most people, log4net needs to be strong named as it is being used from assemblies that are also strong named.
In .NET you can not call into assemblies that are not strong named from assemblies that are. But some users may find that tool useful :) Mark -----Original Message----- From: Jaroslaw Kowalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 June 2006 13:58 To: Log4NET Dev Subject: Re: Strong name private key policy Hi! You can always use this tool to remove the strong name: http://www.nirsoft.net/dot_net_tools/strong_name_remove.html Since it's a command-line tool, you can even make it a part of your nightly build. P.S. Last time I checked, Tess was "she". -- Jarek http://www.nlog-project.org/ - A .NET Logging Library ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dag Christensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Log4NET Dev" <log4net-dev@logging.apache.org> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 2:56 PM Subject: SV: Strong name private key policy > > KB 324519 doesn't apply to .NET Framework 2.0 and KB 813833 recommends > "that you do not configure Indexing Service or antivirus applications to > monitor the ASP.NET temporary folder or the Web application folders, > regardless of whether your ASP.NET applications use strong-named > assemblies." > > A bit further down in the blog entry you linked to, Tess is asked if > this applies to 2.0 as well and he replies it does not - assemblies are > not loaded domain neutral in 2.0. > > So to me it seems this only applies to 1.x? > > Dag > > > -----Opprinnelig melding----- > Fra: Whitner, Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 22. juni 2006 14:00 > Til: Log4NET Dev > Emne: RE: Strong name private key policy > > Glenn, > > Please refer to the following articles - > > http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=324519 > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;813833 > http://blogs.msdn.com/tess/archive/2006/04/13/575361.aspx > > These all indicate that running ASP.NET applications with strong > named assemblies deployed to the bin folder is not supported in .NET 1.1 > or 2.0 as well as some of the symptoms might be experienced. > > Thanks, > Tom > > -----Original Message----- > From: GlennDoten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 10:19 PM > To: Log4NET Dev > Subject: Re: Strong name private key policy > > Not true, Tom. Just because an assembly is signed does not mean it must > be in the GAC to be used by ASPX. We run non-GACed, signed assemblies > with ASPX in production all the time. > > FYI > > On 6/21/06, Whitner, Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> We are facing a similar question with some internal code. We have >> decided, at least for now, to produce both strong named and non-strong > >> named binaries. Most agree that the strong named option is preferred. >> However, due to ASP.NET'sbehavior when loading strong named assemblies > >> (i.e. it requires the GAC), not all individuals can/will tolerate GAC >> installation on highly locked down server. Hence, having the > non-strong >> versions has become a necessity. >> >> - Tom > > ########################################### > > This message has been scanned by F-Secure Anti-Virus for Microsoft > Exchange. > For more information, connect to http://www.f-secure.com/ > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Please notify the sender by e-mail or telephone. We utilise an anti-virus system and therefore any files sent via e-mail will have been checked for known viruses. You are however advised to run your own virus check before opening any attachments received as we will not in any event accept any liability whatsoever once an e-mail and/or any attachment is received. Any views expressed by an individual within this e-mail do not necessarily reflect the views of Systems Union Group plc or any of its subsidiary companies.
