see screenshot for the express version:
I have an Azure function (in Visual Studio), that triggers correctly an Service Bus event. In its run-method I want to call a method in a custom assembly. This works ok, until I use any method that uses Dynamics CRM assemblies. (I have tried both the assemblies from the downloadable sdk and the nuget package. I get the exact dll it asks for in the error message.
As soon as I call the my method I get the error below. I can run this exact method from a console app. (my custom assembly is a standard (not core) class library...
Additional information: Could not load file or assembly 'Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk, Version=8.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35' or one of its dependencies. The system cannot find the file specified.
This is not an answer, but rather an advice to anyone getting this problem (and its also a rant).
Avoid Azure functions at all cost and use "web jobs" instead when you can. After doing this with webjobs it was as simple as it should be, I have spent a week with different Azure-function-related problems
Cons with Azure functions:
Dynamic crappy scripting language (.csx), which gives you mysterious runtime error messages refering wrong places
Lock-in to azure platform
The usage on the browser editor is a joke unless its a really simple method and the error messages there comes up over and over again in least most annoying way (second to popups) and make you spread out your code
Pros:
Maybe you get a pad on the head from your MS-indoctinated architect for using the latest technologies so he might be able to squeeze in the word "Microservices" on some powerpoint presentation.
Related
I am upgrading a .NET Framework application to .NET Core 3 and have run into an issue:
My application has two assemblies, let's call them Alpha (an executable) and Beta (a library). Both are .NET Core 3 projects in the same solution, but Alpha does not directly reference Beta. Beta references a 3rd-party Nuget package Charlie (a .NET Standard 1.1 library).
Alpha loads Beta dynamically using Assembly.LoadFile(#"Path\To\Beta.dll"). This works fine, and Alpha is able to call into Beta (using reflection) successfully, except that an exception is thrown once it automatically tries to load the Charlie assembly as needed by Beta:
System.IO.FileNotFoundException: 'Could not load file or assembly 'Charlie, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=XXXXXXXXXXXXXX'. The system cannot find the file specified.'
This worked fine in .NET Framework but seems to not work in .NET Core. Both Beta and Charlie are copied into Alpha's output folder.
Adding Beta as a reference to Alpha makes it work, but I'd prefer not to do that since Alpha has no business directly calling anything in Beta (except for a couple well-defined methods invoked via reflection).
How can I fix this, without adding Beta or Charlie as a dependency of Alpha?
It turns out that if I load the Beta assembly using Assembly.LoadFrom instead of Assembly.LoadFile then it works, but I don't understand why. If someone can post an explanation of why, then I'll happily accept and upvote your answer.
As Suzanne Cook explained in her blog post about LoadFrom vs LoadFile:
LoadFrom() goes through Fusion and can be redirected to another
assembly at a different path but with that same identity if one is
already loaded in the LoadFrom context.
LoadFile() doesn't bind
through Fusion at all - the loader just goes ahead and loads exactly*
what the caller requested. It doesn't use either the Load or the
LoadFrom context.
So, LoadFrom() usually gives you what you asked for, but not
necessarily. LoadFile() is for those who really, really want exactly
what is requested. (*However, starting in v2, policy will be applied
to both LoadFrom() and LoadFile(), so LoadFile() won't necessarily be
exactly what was requested. Also, starting in v2, if an assembly with
its identity is in the GAC, the GAC copy will be used instead. Use
ReflectionOnlyLoadFrom() to load exactly what you want - but, note
that assemblies loaded that way can't be executed.)
LoadFile() has a catch. Since it doesn't use a binding context, its
dependencies aren't automatically found in its directory. If they
aren't available in the Load context, you would have to subscribe to
the AssemblyResolve event in order to bind to them.
You can find out which binding context suites you here.
When trying to open an older solution in VS2017 there is an old Unit Test project that is giving me a problem when building.
I keep getting the following error when building this test project:
Could not load file or assembly 'file:///C:\Projects\MyProj\Test\DAL\UnitTestProj\Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.UnitTestFramework.dll' or one of its dependencies. The system cannot find the file specified.
I checked the project's references and it appears to be referencing Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.UnitTestFramework.dll. Additionally there are no code errors. How could I ever figure out if it is one of its dependencies that it can't find?
I had a similar issue (with the additional message The "BuildShadowTask" task failed unexpectedly) with a project originally developed with VS2010, and got to spend the last few hours learning about yet another legacy facet of the build process.
There is a good chance that you are dealing with private accessor files (.accessor), which were deprecated in VS2012 (original source). This was foreshadowed in an announcement from the VS2010 team that they were no longer working on these features.
There is also a chance you're just dealing with erroneous refs to the wrong version of UnitTestFramework, but a NuGet restore should fix this. If not, see this GitHub thread for a possible fix (manually change the ref to the public folder), or move to the new MSTest.TestAdapter and MSTest.TestFramework packages (see MSDN support thread).
Solutions
A. Edit the unit test .csproj and change the item Include references from Shadow => None:
<Shadow Include="Test References\namespace.accessor" /> to
<None Include="Test References\namespace.accessor" />
B. Better yet, simply delete all the .accessor files from the unit test project's Test References folder.
Ideally, you would also rewrite your unit tests to remove references to private methods, either by re-architecting to separate concerns or by changing properties to internal and using "friend" with the InternalsVisibleToAttribute.
For those who need to continue supporting testing of private methods for some reason, the same post provides the following suggestions to the logical question "What is available for me then?":
For those who wish to continue testing internal APIs, you have three options:
Use the Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting.PrivateObject class to assist in accessing internal and private APIs in your code. This is found in the Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.UnitTestFramework.dll assembly.
Create a reflection framework that would be able to reflect off your code to access internal or private APIs.
If the code you are trying to access is internal, you may be able to access your APIs using the InternalsVisibleToAttribute so your test code can have access to the internal APIs.
However, there is not any good replacement for Code Generation for the new features added by the lanugage teams. You may create the TestMethod stubs and then remove the internal code. You only need to keep the stub itself.
Further reading / sources that helped me piece this together:
VS 2005 ASP.NET explanation of accessors
2008 blog article explaining how to work around this for build servers
MSDN forum thread with discussion on accessor purposes, implementations, and workarounds. Start about 1/3 down.
MSDN BaseShadow docs
MSDN PrivateObject class
Right click the project references folder. Add reference > Assemblies > extensions. Check Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.UnitTestFramework 10.1, and uncheck any older version.
This is related to Visual studio Enterprise 2015, add new load test was failing: and spiting as "Unable to find assembly 'Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.LoadTest, Version=14.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a"
Due to Assembly installed in public assemblies shows as version 10.0.0.0 which is missed in GAC,
GAC had only 10.1.0.0. Once GAC updated with 10.0.0.0 and restart VS 2015. should resolve the issue similar to this.
Some more detail for better reasoning, System Assembly path and project path
DLL path
......\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 14.0\Common7\IDE\PublicAssemblies\Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.UnitTestFramework.dll
.CSProj reference version
I had a same issue while I was upgrading project to .Net4.8 in Visual studio 2022 earlier we were using Visual studio 2017.
Error:
The "BuildShadowTask" task could not be loaded from the assembly ***\Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.BuildShadowsTask.dll. Could not load file or assembly 'file:///***Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.BuildShadowsTask.dll' or one of its dependencies.
Solution : I removed ".accessor" files from project as that is being used for accessing private methods(most probably accessor is depricated). Then we used "PrivateObject" class for accessing private members in UnitTest.
Later we updated Unit Test case. Code references could be found from below articles.
Unit test private methods?
Unit Testing: Exposing Private Members
I had a similar issue (compile project in server Jenkins)
Solution:
Include VS.QualityTools.UnitTestFramework to reference project, whit Pakage Manager:
PM>NuGet\Install-Package VS.QualityTools.UnitTestFramework -Version 15.0.27323.2
https://www.nuget.org/packages/VS.QualityTools.UnitTestFramework
Try to fully uninstall Visual Studio 2017 (not repair). Then download the latest version and install it. Remember to check if MSBuild is added to installation files. Remember to delete folder inside Documents: Documents\Visual Studio 2017. In my case, this simple solution fixed all errors.
I want to make a "properties style web form" that shows the application version for various .NET applications.
If I know the URL e.g. /someapp/default.aspx is it possible via reflection to execute that page and figure out the assembly version?
It's quite easy to find the executing assembly version, but without modifying the other application, is it possible?
Both the property page and the other application is running on the same server and in the same application pool.
Update: I've had some luck with
var url = "~/SomeApp/default.aspx";
var appType = System.Web.Compilation.BuildManager.GetCompiledType(url);
But navigating appType to find the assembly file version is not the same everytime.
Without modifying the web application to expose the version number through some URL-based retrieval (a simple page GET being the easy, obvious one), you're going to need to find a way to figure out where the DLL for the web application is from the URL.
If you can know the DLL's location, either by some convention (e.g. /appX/ is always at D:\Sites\appX\bin\appX.dll) or some configuration (you manually enter where each URL base's DLL is in a database), then you can retrieve that DLL's assembly version using the following code:
Assembly assembly = Assembly.LoadFrom("MyAssembly.dll");
Version ver = assembly.GetName().Version;
Code taken from this question.
Edit:
I've had a little look around, and there are some APIs to inspect the IIS configuration, so this is certainly a route to explore if you're trying to get from the URL to the assembly location. This question has an example of getting the physical path from the application/site name, for example. Microsoft.Web.Administration is the assembly to explore.
The ASP.NET engine streams nothing but HTML, javascript, etc.. to the client. There is nothing left of the assembly that gets passed in the response that can show what version of .net/asp.net that the application is running unless the developer on the server side adds it.
That said, you can gather some information from a utility at http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph that will give you some server information. Not down to the assembly version, but this is as close as I believe you are going to get.
You may implement custom HttpModule, put it to the bin folder of each application that you wish to monitor and append register this module in web.config files. In this module for example you should handle request, retrieve all required information and put it to response cookie.
I have several DNN modules that I wish to update silently, using the portal's built-in module upgrade facilities called from a separate application, in this case a Windows service. I was able to make it all work with version 4.3 of the portal by modifying the DNN source in key areas to allow DotNetNuke.dll to function outside of a web application. I'm now trying to do the same thing with the 4.9.0 source code and I'm having problems.
Everything works fine until DNN tries to read from the database. I have my Windows service project, the DNN library project, and several other related projects loaded in one VS solution (the additional projects are the same ones that are in the main solution file provided with the DNN source). I call PaInstaller.Install in my service to update each module. Execution gets to reflection.vb and then it tries to create a DotNetNuke.Data.SqlDataProvider object based on the type name. It raises an exception when calling System.Web.Compilation.BuildManager.GetType. The exception says:
Could not load type 'DotNetNuke.Data.SqlDataProvider' from assembly 'System.Web, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a'
I read this to mean it simply couldn't locate the DotNetNuke.SqlDataProvider.dll assembly. What's strange is that assembly is in the Bin folder for the DNN library project, and I also have it in the folder where my Windows service is running. The actual SqlDataProvider project is also loaded in the solution. I can't for the life of me understand why the runtime environment can't locate the assembly.
Has anyone tried something like this before, or know what could cause an assembly not to be found while stepping through the DNN source? Am I better off using something other than BuildManager.GetType to get an instance of the SQL provider type?
Chris,
Honestly depending on your needs, I would look at doing this a different way, as this is going to be very fragile with each DNN upgrade that happens in the future.
I'd look more towards using the "bulk install" option that DNN already has. Have your service upload the module zips to the /install/modules folder, then from there, call /install/install.aspx?mode=installresources and you are done!
If you need a third party solution to parse the results, have your windows service go through and pull the HTML response and parse it to validate success.
I've a simple, if not primitive, C++/CLI .NET 2.0 class library. It is used in order to wrap some C++ legacy code for the Web Service. The following facts appear to be true:
Primitive C# test program calls class library and it works.
If class library does not refer to any modules of our code base, it works as well as part of the web service. That is, I load the web service and invoke the methods and receive proper response.
The same moment I replace the copied and pasted code by the calls from our code base libraries, the Web Service stops to load. I get System.IO.FileNotFoundException message.
The problem: I cannot find any place where the file name that couldn't be found is written.
I googled it and gave some permissions to some ASP.NET user on my computer. I copied all the DLLs of our libraries into the same directory where web service is installed. I searched in IIS logs, event logs, etc - no where could I find the name of the module that prevents the web service from coming up.
Any help on the matter would be greatly appreciated.
Boris
Make sure all the dependent DLLs are in the path (Path meaning not the directory where your assembly is, because ASP.net copies your assembly away into a temporary folder, but rather a directory that's included in the System path environment variable).
What calls are you replacing? Could it be the original code gracefully handles missing files (which may not even be important) and yours does not?
Add same rights to the iusr-account that you did to the asp.net-account.