Error installing the Infragistics Wrapper


Author
Message
Edhy Rijo
E
StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)
Group: StrataFrame Users
Posts: 2.4K, Visits: 23K
I am using the SF Infragistics Wrapper and I am getting an error when try to install this assembly into the GAC using InstallAware.



When I build my installation package I don't get any error and the other SF assemblies are installed just fine. Of course I had to compiled the "MicroFour StrataFrame Infragistics Wrapper.dll" in order to use my version of Infragistics library.



In my computer works just fine, only when I build the installation setup and test under Vista and XP (32BITS).



I will appreciate if somebody can give me a hint on this one.

Edhy Rijo

Attachments
Replies
Edhy Rijo
E
StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)StrataFrame VIP (6.4K reputation)
Group: StrataFrame Users
Posts: 2.4K, Visits: 23K
Trent L. Taylor (05/26/2009)
[codesnippet]This is in no way what I was trying to suggest. That is why I was referring also to a "migration" as well. Migrations generally mean that there is a process to move forward. We have never been a company to stifle ourselves in this regard. We will move forward providing a clear path to move applications forward using new technologies that are available and coming down the pike.




Thanks, glad to hear that. As for 3.5 I will do some test in the following weeks, since now I have to move forward with my current project, but if I can make my SF/.NET applications run from a shared folder it will make my life a bit easier since I am more comfortable with having one single application to update instead of multiple workstations, even though there are a lot of pro/cons to both type of installations and their maintenance and I may be searching for an "old dog" here Tongue.

I am very concern on being able to lower the internal maintenance cost of my applications, and kind a like to build applications that will be maintenance free for the user in a sense of updating their current applications. For my VFP applications I had a very stable process using Stonefields tools and others and I am trying to get to that point with SF and DDT as well as other 3rd party tools.



On a second though, forget about everything we where talking here and bring us the SF Licensing Manager Tools instead Tongue sorry, just thinking out loud Hehe

Edhy Rijo

Trent Taylor
Trent Taylor
StrataFrame Developer (14K reputation)StrataFrame Developer (14K reputation)StrataFrame Developer (14K reputation)StrataFrame Developer (14K reputation)StrataFrame Developer (14K reputation)StrataFrame Developer (14K reputation)StrataFrame Developer (14K reputation)StrataFrame Developer (14K reputation)StrataFrame Developer (14K reputation)
Group: StrataFrame Developers
Posts: 6.6K, Visits: 7K
LOL....that is not the first time that has come up. We will consider it once we have the new SF version written and our the door.



FWIW, you will lose performance running an application from a network share....if you have the option of moving this to a local machine at some point you will be better served. There are other security risks outside of the .NET security that can come up...and if you run into a "by the book" IT person, you can have a fight on your hands. Just a few thoughts.
GO

Merge Selected

Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...




Threaded View
Threaded View
Edhy Rijo - 16 Years Ago
Edhy Rijo - 16 Years Ago
Trent L. Taylor - 16 Years Ago
Edhy Rijo - 16 Years Ago
Trent L. Taylor - 16 Years Ago
                         [quote][b]Trent L. Taylor (05/18/2009)[/b][hr]If you just place that...
Edhy Rijo - 16 Years Ago
                             You can actually put the assemblies in a different folder without the...
Trent L. Taylor - 16 Years Ago
                                 Thanks, definitely worth trying, I like to have my Application's...
Edhy Rijo - 16 Years Ago
                                 Can something like this be done to override an assembly being...
Greg McGuffey - 16 Years Ago
Keith Chisarik - 16 Years Ago
Trent L. Taylor - 16 Years Ago
Greg McGuffey - 16 Years Ago
Trent L. Taylor - 16 Years Ago
                         That's good news. I've had issues were I've upgraded SF for...
Greg McGuffey - 16 Years Ago
                             I also support the idea of having the assemblies located per...
Edhy Rijo - 16 Years Ago
                                 [codesnippet]I would like to see SF support for .NET 3.5 since 3.5...
Trent L. Taylor - 16 Years Ago
                                     [quote][b]Trent L. Taylor (05/26/2009)[/b][hr][codesnippet]I would...
Edhy Rijo - 16 Years Ago
                                         [codesnippet]This is a very important need for me since 99% of my...
Trent L. Taylor - 16 Years Ago
                                             [quote][b]Trent L. Taylor (05/26/2009)[/b][hr][codesnippet]This is in...
Edhy Rijo - 16 Years Ago
                                                 LOL....that is not the first time that has come up. We will consider...
Trent L. Taylor - 16 Years Ago

Similar Topics

Reading This Topic

Login

Explore
Messages
Mentions
Search