CAT | .Net Framework
14
Determining the .NET target version of a dll or .exe assembly
No comments · Posted by lizet in .Net Framework
It’s been a while since I blogged. It’s good to be back.
I switched job descriptions and became an application architect, which means, I get to decide how solutions are designed…and if the solutions won’t work, the blame goes on me :-p
Now seriously, I was reviewing old posts and realized WordPress didn’t make a good job at keeping my old code snippets from Blogger 
, the formatting is way off and you can hardly see the code properly. Oh well.
Today we had a deployment issue, one of our projects was compiled to the wrong target framework. When we compared properties and sizes we realized this was not the ordinary dll size, but how could we determine the actual target framework?
The windows explorer properties or the IIS properties are of no use in this case, giving you only the build number.
There are actually two main options with two utilities distributed on the SDK to determine the target framework of a dll or exe:
- ILDASM.exe
- CorFlags.exe
ILDASM.exe to determine framework version
and if you want to use CorFlags.exe:
CorFlags.exe determining target framework version of a dll
Happy coding 
L.
No tags
30
IIS 6.0 does not serve aspx pages out of the box
No comments · Posted by lizet in .NET, .Net Framework, ASP.NET
I have used ASP.NET for quite some time. I have probably always been lucky that the infrastructure or deployment person always enabled aspx on IIS for me. I use a Windows XP with IIS 5 sometimes or Vista with IIS 7. They do serve aspx pages by default, on XP once the .NET framework is downloaded and installed, there is nothing else to tweak.
On Friday afternoon, I had to deploy to an IIS 6 box on windows 2003, to my surprise, it didn’t serve any of the aspx pages. Even a small Hello World project on an simple label. I missed the happy hour with my colleagues and went home completely puzzle. Why? ASP.NET was already available when Windows 2003 saw the light. To my surprise there was nothing on the event log.
The answer came a few hours later and after few Google queries:
IIS 6.0: ASP.NET Is Not Automatically Installed on Windows Server 2003
1. Open IIS Manager, expand the master server node (that is, the Servername node), and then select the Web service extensions node.
2. In the right pane of IIS Manager, right-click the extension that you want to enable. In this example, this is Active Server Pages.
3. Click to select the Allow check box.
Add a New Web Service Extension to IIS 6.0
To permit IIS to serve content that requires a specific ISAPI or CGI extension that is not already listed in the Web service extensions list, follow these steps:
1.Open IIS Manager, expand the master server node, and then select the Web service extensions node.
2.In the right pane of the IIS Manager, click Add a new Web service extension under Tasks.
3.In the Extension name box, type a friendly name for the extension that you want to add (for example, FrontPage Server Extensions).
4.In the Required files box, click Add, and then select the path and the name of the file that will handle requests for the specific extension. After you select the path and the file name, click OK.
5. If the extension must be enabled immediately, click to select the Set extension status to allowed check box.
6. Click OK to save your changes.
Hopefully Mono will run seamless on Apache one of these days…
No tags
4
Yet another complaint on the .NET Framework versioning
No comments · Posted by lizet in .Net Framework, CLR
It just doesn’t make sense that in order to add up functionality to the 2.0 framework without touching the runtime, yet another framework version is created and deployed in a different folder. It is extremely confusing as to what will be the implications. Let’s say I have an existing 2.0 application and I want to take advantage of the WinFX in order to add/implement workflows. Do I have first to start worrying about how to migrate my current application from 2.0 to 3.0 or the classes we currently use from the 2.0 framework are still valid under the 3.0, amen of the new WinFX additions. Why not just adding a new namespace and new assembly for this piece, if it is dependent on the 2.0 framework but won’t replace it????
Migrating from 1.0 to 1.1 caused some pain, more pain (necessary evil IMHO) to migrate from 1.1 to 2.0. Do we have another migration at sight, or it would be just an add up?
It would be worth to have an article published on MSDN about the cause of this decision.
WinFX 3.0 Renamed .NET Framework 3.0
….
I found the article on MSDN, it still won’t explain why the versioning convention. As some bloggers have already discussed, having a Framework 3.0 and CLR 2.0 doesn’t make much sense when they precisely state “…because .NET Framework 3.0 is an additive release”
Deploying Microsoft .NET Framework Version 3.0
No tags
