[AccessD] OT: Is My ASP Covered

Josh McFarlane darsant at gmail.com
Thu Dec 8 22:26:15 CST 2005


On 12/8/05, Bruen, Bruce <Bruce.Bruen at railcorp.nsw.gov.au> wrote:
> Guys,
>
> One of the "whole points" of .Net is that you can run different versions
> of code on the same machine.  i.e. It is supposed to get rid of dll
> hell.  This applies to itself as well.
>
> I have framework 1.0 1.1 and 2.0 all on the same machine.
>
> If you try to run a .net 1.1 app and you have removed the 1.1 framework
> then IT WONT RUN!  The "compiled" app (assembly) looks for the
> major.minor.?.? Revision of all its dependencies including mscorlb.dll
> If it finds major.minor.+x.? It will use that instead, but it wont run
> with major.+minor.?.? Or +major.?.?.? Versionsw
>
> Unclear?  If I publish a .net app that uses mscorlb.dll ver 1.1.4123.455
> and you have ver 1.1.5612 the app will run.
> If you have only ver 1.0.3123.8 then it wont run, similarly if you have
> only ver 2.0.124.62 then it wont run!
>
> I think maybe what is the crossed wire here is that THERE WAS A BETA
> VERSION OF .NET 2.0 out in the world recently.  When the public release
> of 2.0 occurred, the beta testers were told to remove the beta before
> trying to install the real 2.0
>
> Given that most stuff out there is 1.1 I would suggest you DON'T remove
> it!!

Given that there's 2.0 should be an upgrade from 1.1, wouldn't it make
sense to be able to run 1.1 apps on 2.0? But alas.

2.0 release candidates had compatibility issues with other .NET
(&1.1), not sure if they fixed that before the actual release though.

--
Josh McFarlane

"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding."
-Albert Einstein



More information about the AccessD mailing list