Along these lines, and I suspect this *is* a stupid question... If a third party expects to load COM objects by GUID, but we don't have access to the registry to register our components, can we still have a .NET interop object conjured up in its place? It seems to go against everything that is right and good (if there is any in the COM world), but I figured I'd see if anyone had brilliant ideas.
-----Original Message----- From: Discussion of advanced .NET topics. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Provencher Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 12:00 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] FW: compiling dlls into executables Maybe not so dumb! Take a look at Registration-Free COM Interop. You may be able to package them as binary resources, extract to a temp directory at run time as needed, without registering them in COM's global registration space. >> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:48:39 -0500 >> From: Alex Smotritsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: FW: compiling dlls into executables >> >> Scratch that, that was a dumb question. >> >> >> >> From: Alex Smotritsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 6:16 PM >> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED] DEVELOP. COM >> ([email protected])' >> Subject: compiling dlls into executables >> If I have a c# (1.0 framework) console or windows service app (exe) >> that is >> interoping with some com dlls, can I compile those dlls into the exe >> so that >> I can distribute just an exe to end users? =================================== This list is hosted by DevelopMentorR http://www.develop.com View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com =================================== This list is hosted by DevelopMentor® http://www.develop.com View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com
