Re: Package and deploy in .NET
- From: "sloan" <sloan@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:15:03 -0500
You don't necessarily have to include it, but they have to have it.
There's no free lunch.
If you want to run a .Net 2.0 application, the client machine has to have
the framework (2.0).
They can either:
1. Have it already.
2. Install it from windows update or microsoft.com
3. You provide it.
Pick your poison.
"-xx-" <khmer_lovers@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:u9NoeKwHHHA.924@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi,the
I have an application written in C# .NET 2005 using .NET framework v2.0,
execute file is only 500KB and it used two third party DLLs, all added upto
to round about 1MB.
My question is when i distribute my application to friends do i have to
include .NET framework v2.0 as part to of the setup. I don't really want
include .NET framework v2.0 because it increases my final executableinstall
file dramatically. From 1.5MB to 25MB because the framework v2 is 22+MB.
Is there anyway i can get my application running on my friends machine
without installing the full version of .NET framework v2. I want the
absolute mimimum because my application doesn't use much of the .net
controls anyway, mostly console and back up processing.
Looking forward hearing from you all.
Regards
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Package and deploy in .NET
- From: Tee
- Re: Package and deploy in .NET
- References:
- Package and deploy in .NET
- From: -xx-
- Package and deploy in .NET
- Prev by Date: Re: Temporarily give the current user Local Admin rights
- Next by Date: Re: Is file is being used
- Previous by thread: Package and deploy in .NET
- Next by thread: Re: Package and deploy in .NET
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading