Hi Gert, That has worked for all my projects. If I encounter other problems I'll just submit a patch to the config file :)
Thanks. Erik -----Original Message----- From: Gert Driesen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: woensdag 16 april 2008 20:22 To: 'Erik Renes'; nant-developers@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: RE: [nant-dev] FW: System.Data.OracleClient assembly no longer resolved(different behaviour 0.85 v 0.86b1) Eric, For .NET, we now use an explicit set of assemblies that we can automatically resolve to a full path. This set can be configured in the NAnt.exe.config file. I have now added the System.Data.OracleClient assembly. You can double-check the configuration file to make sure our list is complete now. Gert -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Renes Sent: woensdag 16 april 2008 18:33 To: nant-developers@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [nant-dev] FW: System.Data.OracleClient assembly no longer resolved(different behaviour 0.85 v 0.86b1) Hi all, When upgrading Nant to the latest version today, I noticed that a lot of my previously working build scripts were failing. Compile errors arose from the fact that System.Data.OracleClient.dll wasn't referenced. Further investigation showed that nant 0.85 resolves the following: <include name="System.Data.OracleClient.dll" /> To be: C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.4322\System.Data.OracleClient.dll 0.86 beta 1 fails to resolve the assembly. When pursuing this in code I found that Resolving assemblies in the Framework Directory had moved from AssemblyFileSet in NAnt.DotNet to FrameworkInfo in Nant.Core, also see: http://nant.cvs.sourceforge.net/nant/nant/src/NAnt.DotNet/Types/AssemblyFile Set.cs?r1=1.7&r2=1.8 When looking in FrameworkInfo, I found that the new code did not reflect the original code: http://nant.cvs.sourceforge.net/nant/nant/src/NAnt.Core/FrameworkInfo.cs?r1= 1.22&r2=1.23 (look for ResolveAssembly). Locally, I have added the original code in AssemblyFileSet again, this has successfully solved my problem. However, this means that there is either a bug in 0.86, or an intended change in behaviour. Given the CVS commit comments, I doubt this was an intentional change. Before reporting this as a bug, I would like to confirm whether or not this change in behaviour was intentional? If required, it would be possible for me to include a very small buildfile that shows the problem. Best regards, Erik Renes ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javao ne _______________________________________________ nant-developers mailing list nant-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ nant-developers mailing list nant-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
