Strong Name Assemby

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris
  • Start date Start date
C

Chris

I have a strong named assembly. It installs fine on my XP Pro Machine via
the .net configuration tool. When I use the same tool to install it on a
W2003 machine it says it isn't strongly named.
As I don't have vs.net. Ihave been compliling my vb file as a module and
then using al.exe to sign it with a strong name. It seems to work on my
machine. When I copy the dll to the 2003 machine it doesn't. Does it need
any additional files than the dll. Also the W2003 machine is .net v2 whereas
my machine is .net v1. Any ideas? Regards, Chris.
 
Chris said:
I have a strong named assembly. It installs fine on my XP Pro Machine
via the .net configuration tool. When I use the same tool to install
it on a W2003 machine it says it isn't strongly named.
As I don't have vs.net. Ihave been compliling my vb file as a module
and then using al.exe to sign it with a strong name.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why you think you need VS.NET to sign the assembly.
You use the <AssemblyKeyFile> attribute in the code (or in v2.0, the
/keyfile switch) to indicate the location of the file containing the
key. That way you do not have to compile the code as a module, you can
compile it as an assembly.
It seems to work
on my machine. When I copy the dll to the 2003 machine it doesn't.
Does it need any additional files than the dll. Also the W2003
machine is .net v2 whereas my machine is .net v1. Any ideas? Regards,
Click to expand...

Well, if you create an assembly with al, around the module, then you
need to deploy all the files to your W2003 machine, so that will mean at
least two files (the assembly file that contains the manifest and the
module). I suspect that this is why the installation fails. My Fusion
workshop shows the details, in C#.

Richard
 
Back
Top