[IronPython] Problem with Creating Executable using SharpDevelop

[Simon Dahlbacka]

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Dave Fugate <dfugate at microsoft.com> wrote:

> On a related note, I strongly suspect we'll be using different assembly
> version numbers for IronPython 2.6.0/2.6.1/etc...
>
>
Can't you update AssemblyFileVersion and leave AssemblyVersion or is there a
problem with that too?


>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com [mailto:
> users-bounces at lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Michael Foord
> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 4:00 AM
> To: Discussion of IronPython
> Subject: Re: [IronPython] Problem with Creating Executable using
> SharpDevelop
>
> Jeff Hardy wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Michael
> > Foord<fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Are there issues around assembly versions and the GAC? I'm thinking
> >> particularly of where newer versions of IronPython are released as
> drop-in
> >> replacements so the version numbers are not updated. If a previous
> version
> >> is in the GAC isn't there a likelihood that an application that ships
> with a
> >> newer version will still load the GAC'd older version... ?
> >>
> >> My *impression* was that adding stuff to the GAC was a recipe for DLL
> hell
> >> and therefore it was better left to individual users rather than being
> >> automatic on installation. This opinion may be ill-informed however...
> >>
> >
> > You just have to be *really* careful with you assembly versions, and
> > what kinds of changes cause a rev of version numbers. However, I don't
> > think it should be the default, but it would be nice to have the
> > option during installation. I think gacutil is only included in the
> > SDK anyway.
> >
> >
>
> Right. I think the issue of version numbering is tricky, which is why
> I'm nervous about IronPython being GAC'd.
>
> As an example, the IronPython 2.0.1 and 2.0 assemblies have the same
> version numbers - and I understand why and don't disagree with this
> decision - but the net result is that Resolver One required 2.0.1 and
> would probably fail if the user has 2.0 in the GAC.
>
> I certainly wouldn't object to it being an installer option, but it
> would still make me nervous... :-)
>
> Having minor IronPython versions have new assembly versions would
> probably help - but with the disadvantage that they are no longer
> drop-in replacements.
>
>
> Michael
>
> > - Jeff
> > _______________________________________________
> > Users mailing list
> > Users at lists.ironpython.com
> > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
> >
>
>
> --
> http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
> http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/ironpython-users/attachments/20090714/da53cbda/attachment.html>