Re: Framework 1.0 application looking for 1.1 dll

From: DanB (agentkc_at_kc.rr.com)
Date: 01/06/05 

Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 06:52:50 -0600

Thanks Amit,

    The references you included prompted me to take a look at my config
file. As you suspected it only had 1.1 runtime as an option. Which is
curious since I thought 1.1 was uninstalled on my development machine.
    You also suggested that I upgrade to 1.1. I am a bit confused. Since I
have VB Dot Net 2002 version I thought it would only work with 1.0 Maybe
you were suggesting that I upgrade to VB Dot 2003 in order to use 1.1 Or is
there a way to incorporate VB 2002 and 1.1 together?
    Thanks for you assistance.

Dan

"Amit Bahree" <amit@NOSPAMthepentagon.com> wrote in message
news:41DC7215.5060200@NOSPAMthepentagon.com...
> Dan,
> Seems like you compiled against the v1.1 as opposed to v1.0 of the
> framework. There are many reasons for upgrading to v1.1 (such as loads of
> bug-fixes). Lets, assume installing v1.1 is not an option or some reason
> you want to run it on v1.0, the easiest option is to create a config file
> and point it to the right version.
>
> Remember for an unconfigured windows app (i.e. apps that do not carry a
> configuration file or at least the supportedRuntime element in their
> configuration files) execute with the version of the Framework that was
> used to build the application, provided that version of the Framework is
> installed on the local system. (The version of the Framework with which
> the application was built is contained in the header of the application
> .exe file.) When that version of the Framework is not available, the CLR
> uses a later version of the Framework in its place. In other words, an
> unconfigured application built with Framework 1.0 executes with 1.0 on a
> system that has both 1.0 and 1.1 installed. That same application executes
> with the 1.1 Framework on a system with only the 1.1 Framework installed.
> It is strongly recommended that applications be configured to support all
> versions of the Framework that are considered compatible, to provide for
> scenarios where one particular version may be available on the target
> machine.
>
> You can fix this two ways, one as mentioned earlier install v1.1 of the
> framework. Two create the correct app config file (e.g. below).
> <configuration>
> <startup>
> <supportedRuntime version="v1.1.4322" />
> <supportedRuntime version="v1.0.3705" />
> </startup>
> </configuration>
>
> I would recommend reading the Side-by-Side Execution model[1] of .NET.
>
> hth,
> Amit.
> www.desigeek.com
>
> [1] - http://tinyurl.com/3xtbd
>
>
> Dan B wrote:
>> I wrote a windows application in VB Dot Net 2002. So that's Framework
>> 1.0 right?
>>
>> It ran fine on several computers but then I tweaked it and rebuilt it and
>> now I have the following exception when the application starts
>>
>> C:\Windows\Microsoft.Net\Framework\v1.1.4322\mscorwks.dll could not be
>> loaded.
>>
>> The thing is on my development computer it does not give me the error.
>> But maybe the reason for is that at one time I had both 1.0 and 1.1
>> installed on the development box.
>>
>> I've looked through the dependencies and can't find any components that
>> needing anything from Framework 1.1 .
>>
>> Help ! Anybody got any ideas?
>>
>> Dan

Relevant Pages

  • RE: .net framework version, visual studio 03
    ... You can use a config file to direct the runtime to use a particular version ... framework using an older version of VB.net, ... I think you only have to switch one reference for each project, ... When compiling the release, I did the switch. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb)
  • Re: .Net Framework 2.0
    ... standalone application using a Config file works very well and that will ... may be other applications running in the host process so you couldn't just ... override the use of the .NET framework. ... > version of the CLR is loaded to work around the behavioral differences. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.clr)
  • RE: App.Config: using doctype and entity blocks
    ... Block Framework, ... Framework for the manipulation of the App.Config is included as part of the ... fuslogvw reports that the XML config file is not formatted correctly. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.general)
  • Re: Latest patch parses 1.1 pages with 2.0
    ... It reports 1.1. ... The properties for the root site in the MMC plugin show the .Net version as ... Version Information: Microsoft .NET Framework Version:2.0.50727.832; ... Now I could fix the config file to run happily under 2.0, ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet)
  • Re: Framework 1.0 application looking for 1.1 dll
    ... There are many reasons for upgrading to v1.1 (such as loads ... assume installing v1.1 is not an option or some ... configuration files) execute with the version of the Framework that was ... Two create the correct app config file. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework)