You'll need to NAnt to build the sources, no way around it. Download it from here http://nant.sourceforge.net/nightly/latest/nant-bin.zip, unzip and optionally add the bin folder to your path.
Let me known how things go. -- Roelof. On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 5:02 AM, BSP <[email protected]> wrote: > Gave it a shot Roelof. Got all of the SVN trunks pulled down and the > directory structure set up. Step 5 is where I go sideways because I > don't have NAnt. Tried the build.cmd in the buildscript directory, but > I get an MSBuild error "Only one project can be specified." I even > opened up the solution in the src directory in DevSutdio and tried to > build. Get a bunch of Warnings as Errors ... varying things are not > CLS-compliant in one both of the log projects in the solution. > Probably not a huge issue since I did get a clean Core build, but I'm > not sure exactly how to specify the build options needed ... the -D > options from the command line tools ... so the build of Core I got > probably wouldn't work anyway. > > So, I now come to a question ... do I need to install Nant to run the > build from the command line? I'd really rather not keep loading more > and more software on my computer just to be able to build this one > thing. I normally don't delve this far off into OSS land, and loading > up all of the OS build toolsets for this one project wouldn't be my > first choice as a solution to my problem. > > I appreciate your help and I'll continue to monitor the group for any > updates. > > Cheers, > B > > > > On Feb 16, 8:36 am, BSP <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for the reply Roelof. I'll give this a go tonight after work > > and post my results here. > > Regards, > > B > > > > On Feb 16, 2:54 am, Roelof Blom <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > To build Windsor with APTCA you'll need to jump through the following > hoops: > > > > > 1. svn cohttps://svn.castleproject.org/svn/castle/Core/trunkCore > > > 2. svn cohttps:// > svn.castleproject.org/svn/Castle/DynamicProxy/trunkDynamicProxy > > > 3. svn co > > > > https://svn.castleproject.org/svn/Castle/InversionOfControl/trunkInve... > > > 4. cd Core > > > 5. nant -D:assembly.allow-partially-trusted-callers=true > > > -D:common.run-tests=false -D:project.config=release > > > 6. copy /y build\net-3.5\release\Castle.Core.* > > > ..\DynamicProxy\lib\net-3.5 > > > 7. copy /y build\net-3.5\release\Castle.Core.* > > > ..\InversionOfControl\lib\net-3.5 > > > 8. copy /y build\net-3.5\release\Castle.Services.* > > > ..\InversionOfControl\lib\net-3.5 > > > 9. cd ..\DynamicProxy > > > 10. nant -D:assembly.allow-partially-trusted-callers=true > > > -D:common.run-tests=false -D:project.config=release > > > 11. copy /y build\net-3.5\release\Castle.DynamicProxy2.* > > > ..\InversionOfControl\lib\net-3.5 > > > 12. cd ..\InversionOfControl > > > 13. nant -D:assembly.allow-partially-trusted-callers=true > > > -D:common.run-tests=false -D:project.config=release > > > > > You can find the APTCA assemblies in > > > InversionOfControl\build\net-3.5\release. > > > Please let me know if this worked for you. > > > > > I am the first to agree that this is a lot work, and back before we > split > > > the trunk into individual projects, with binary instead of source > > > dependencies, this used to be a lot easier. I don't know if hornget > > > <http://code.google.com/p/hornget/>has a mode to build with APTCA. > > > > > -- Roelof. > > > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 7:43 AM, BSP <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Thanks for the reply Hammett. > > > > > > Thing is, it's just frustrating to get jazzed about something, then > > > > not be able to put it into play. I'm fairly stoked about MVC and I > can > > > > do it without IoC, but I'd really rather not. I'm sure the > > > > implications of running medium vs. full trust are significant, but as > > > > far as I can tell from my blog browsing the last few days after work, > > > > there seem to be a large number of providers running under medium > > > > trust. I'm personally using godaddy (for now ... but probably not for > > > > long) and it seems there are many others. At least now I know one > more > > > > thing to ask about when I'm shopping other hosts. > > > > > > As for my current situation, it seems it would be better for someone > > > > familiar with the project to run a stable build with the partial > trust > > > > setting rather than having someone completely unfamiliar with the > code > > > > base trying to fire one off. I know the idea behind OS it to get > > > > people involved, but I just pulled down around 150 MB of code and > dlls > > > > that I've never seen before and ran a build process that I obviously > > > > don't know how to diagnose problems with. It seems too that with the > > > > amount of dialog I've read on it, there are going to be people (like > > > > me) that don't know what they are doing flubbing the build in growing > > > > numbers. And the MS MVC dlls that I had to bin deploy seem fine ... > so > > > > I assume they are ok with medium trust. > > > > > > And, I'm not trying to bag on the contributors. Castle seems pretty > > > > top notch and introduces a cool new way to do things. But, a partial > > > > trust build would sure hit the spot. :) > > > > > > Anyway, I'll keep an eye on this chain and hopefully have some free > > > > time this week to try and get a good build going with the appropriate > > > > flags. It's just a really time consuming process ... > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > B > > > > > > On Feb 16, 12:18 am, hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I hear you, but it's not a simple solution. It wont matter if us > aptca > > > > > all our code, our dependencies (and their dependencies) also need > to > > > > > do it. Security is pervasive thing and so far OSS projects dont > seem > > > > > to be paying much attention to it. aptca has a big security > > > > > implication, that's why I think the castle team doesnt provide a > > > > > ready-to-use build with it. > > > > > > > The simplest solution is security transparency, but even that is > > > > > complicated in .net 3.5. In v4.0 things got simplified and I'm > hoping > > > > > castle team will make an effort to adopt it and persuade others to > do > > > > > the same, as to lower the amount of hassle it creates for our > users. > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 10:02 PM, BSP <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Guys, I'm trying to learn MS MVC. I bought Steve Sanderson's book > Pro > > > > > > MVC which praises Castle throughout most of the book. It is all > slick > > > > > > and works well on my local machine. I've really enjoyed learning > the > > > > > > basics of IoC. Problem: As soon as I try to deploy to a medium > trust > > > > > > environment, no go. > > > > > > > > I've spent the last two days trying to figure out a way to get > this > > > > > > going. I've read countless posts, googled till I can google no > more, > > > > > > and all signs point to a full rebuild of the Castle project. Now, > > > > > > frankly, that's more than I bargained for with the purchase of > the > > > > > > book, but I like the technology and I'm a developer ... I know > how to > > > > > > use SVN ... what the hey right? The link I originally found on > this > > > > > > group here (http://tinyurl.com/yhj5yga) posted by 'Roelof' > pointed me > > > > > > to an SVN location. I grabbed the code, ran the build command and > it > > > > > > all blowed up on the same error the above poster is having. So > now I'm > > > > > > really getting frustrated. I really don't have the time to debug > the > > > > > > reasons I can't grab a large base of code off the net and get it > to > > > > > > build on my crappy home Vista box. I'm sure the reasons are many > and > > > > > > varied. Mark, from above, has made it farther than I could in a > week. > > > > > > > > So, my question is this. Would it be at all possible to get > someone > > > > > > involved in this project to create a medium trust build and post > it to > > > > > > the project site? It seems to be a fairly common request. > > > > > > > > You'd be hooking all of us > medium-trust-crappy-host-service-provider- > > > > > > having-slugs up and we'd really owe you one. > > > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > > > B > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 10:51 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> What's the best way to check whether APTCA is being applied? > > > > > > > >> So far I've been testing for it through trial and error as I'm > not > > > > > >> aware of a better way... > > > > > > > >> If I use a build without the > -D:assembly.allow-partially-trusted- > > > > > >> callers=true argument when I try to use active record in medium > trust > > > > > >> I get a SecurityException at: > > > > > > > >> IConfigurationSource source = > ActiveRecordSectionHandler.Instance; > > > > > > > >> With the allow-partially-trusted-callers=true it makes it to the > line > > > > > >> in ActiveRecordStarter.cs that I referenced in my earlier post. > > > > > > > >> I've tried adding [assembly: > AllowPartiallyTrustedCallersAttribute] to > > > > > >> the ActiveRecordModelBuilder.cs file but when I try to compile > it, I > > > > > >> receive the compile error: > > > > > > > >> CS0579: Duplicate 'AllowPartiallyTrustedCallersAttribute' > > > > > > > >> Thanks in advance, > > > > > >> Mark > > > > > > > >> On Feb 15, 7:56 pm, hammett <[email protected]> wrote:> Could > you > > > > check whether the APTCA is being applied to the > > > > > >> > castle.activerecord.dll? > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Mark < > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > I've gone through and built Castle.Core, > Castle.ActiveRecord, and > > > > > >> > > Castle.DynamicProxy with > > > > > > > >> > -- > > > > > >> > Cheers, > > > > > >> > hammetthttp://hammett.castleproject.org/ > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the > Google > > > > Groups "Castle Project Users" group. > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to > > > > [email protected]. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > [email protected]<castle-project-users%[email protected]> > <castle-project-users%2bun[email protected]> > > > > . > > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// > > > > groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en. > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > hammetthttp://hammett.castleproject.org/-Hidequoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > -- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > > > "Castle Project Users" group. > > > > To post to this group, send email to > [email protected] > > > > . > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > [email protected]<castle-project-users%[email protected]> > <castle-project-users%2bun[email protected]> > > > > . > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en.- Hide > quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Castle Project Users" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > . > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<castle-project-users%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en.
