Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option

2004-01-09 Thread Claus Brod
Brandon Manchester wrote: To answer your question from yesterday, you can place Publisher Policy information in each clients machine.config as opposed to each app.config. Actually the will only work "stand alone" if it's placed in the machine.config. If you place it in the app.config you must redi

Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option

2004-01-09 Thread Brandon Manchester
However, I would not bother with a publisher policy if I were installing the assembly local I would just put it in the GAC. HTH Brandon -Original Message- From: J. Merrill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 6:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOT

Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option

2004-01-09 Thread Claus Brod
Hi all, thanks a lot for the discussion so far! When you said you didn't want to install into the GAC, I had assumed that >you wanted to leave the assemblies on a publicly available network drive. >If you're going to put them on each user's C: drive, what's the advantage >to putting it in c:\prog

Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option

2004-01-09 Thread Ross Diesel
ary 2004 02:08 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option I'm pretty sure you're out of luck and that things just won't work the way you're wanting. The GAC is there for a reason - so people can bind to your assembly no matt

Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option

2004-01-08 Thread philip sayers
#x27; production one, which version is the current 'testing' one, etc... -Original Message- From: Moderated discussion of advanced .NET topics. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Claus Brod Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 4:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ADVANC

Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option

2004-01-08 Thread Walter Wu
]> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 4:23 PM Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option > Brandon Manchester wrote: > > In your client's app.config file you can add an section > > that can specify things like binding redirects (for versionin

Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option

2004-01-08 Thread J. Merrill
At 04:23 PM 1/8/2004, Claus Brod wrote >Brandon Manchester wrote: >>In your client's app.config file you can add an section >>that can specify things like binding redirects (for versioning), codebases, >>and probing information. > >True, but that would require changes in the config files of all cl

Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option

2004-01-08 Thread Adam Sills
I'm pretty sure you're out of luck and that things just won't work the way you're wanting. The GAC is there for a reason - so people can bind to your assembly no matter where they are. Probing path configuration changes in the client won't work as they require subdirectories and not absolute direct

Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option

2004-01-08 Thread Claus Brod
Brandon Manchester wrote: In your client's app.config file you can add an section that can specify things like binding redirects (for versioning), codebases, and probing information. True, but that would require changes in the config files of all clients, wouldn't it? Our application doesn't neces

Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option

2004-01-08 Thread Brandon Manchester
pguide/htm l/cpconspecifyingassemblyslocation.asp HTH. Brandon -Original Message- From: Claus Brod [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 11:43 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option Hi, I'

[ADVANCED-DOTNET] Trying to avoid the GAC using the /codebase option

2004-01-07 Thread Claus Brod
Hi, I'm working on an application which consists of both managed and unmanaged parts. The app itself is huge (fileset is several hundreds of megabytes on disk), so I don't really want to push it to the GAC just to make it available as an assembly for other .NET clients to consume. Instead, I'm loo