Steve8x Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 Well maybe I'm just so in love with C++ that I wont mess around with VB(a downgrade) or even C#(because to me it looks kinda like VB) and I despise VB syntax... Yes but you do agree that VB teaches bad practices so thats something we can agree upon... But to anyone out there messing around with VB, DO WORRY IF THE PC ITS SUPPOSED TO RUN ON LACKS "MSVBVM60.DLL" mwhahahaha :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonlit Posted June 13, 2008 Share Posted June 13, 2008 You're not very good at this whole integration thing, are you? I'd suggest reading more, it might give you some idea of how much you'll be disliked if you continue posting like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Ewing Posted June 14, 2008 Share Posted June 14, 2008 The project is correctly building targeting 2.0. You can see this by looking at the versions of the referenced dlls. The fact it is using Csc.exe in the v3.5 folder does not mean it is not targeting the .NET *FRAMEWORK* 2.0. The version of C#, of the framework and of the runtime are independent. C# 2.0 (2005 timeframe) and 3.0 (2008 timeframe) both compile to run on the .NET 2.0 runtime and the .NET Framework 2.0, 3.0 and 3.5 all work with the .NET 2.0 runtime as well. The compiler that comes with the .NET Framework 3.5 would have various optimisations and bug fixes that means it's the best compiler to use. As the compiler that comes both with .NET Framework 2.0 and .NET Framework 3.5 compile to target the 2.0 runtime it can use the 3.5 compiler with all it's optimisations and bug fixes but instead reference the .NET Framework 2.0 dll's. I hope that makes sense :S The point of explaining all that is to point out that the problem is with the setup and deployment process, not the compilation process, just to narrow down the area you need to search for a problem. I'm not too familiar with the setup and deployment process, but I thought I'd post this now and then look so if anyone else reads this while I'm looking they too should have a clearer picture of where the problem is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krandor Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 ok well i have Visual Studio 2008, and everytime i compile/build a program i have a small.. issue. the (exe) works well in computers that have .net framework installed..but in others (computer who don't have .net framework) it displays an error saying you need to install .net frame work 2.0 blah blah.... well ive read that in visual studio 2008 you can compile it with the necessary files.. meaning the .exe would run stand alone with no support... does any one know how to do this? language is Visual Basic btw Before i shoot myself in the foot let me say that i haven't had extensive experience with 2008 yet. I still use 2005 for my .NET needs. But i would imagine that they wouldn't take out something as important as being able to include the framework you're using. In your publish settings you can set what 'packages' to include when the person goes to install your application. The installer will check to see if said packages are installed and then if not, install them. So, you could easily add in the Framework and then when people go to install it and don't have the framework, they'd be able to install it during the application install process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.