So BSP, how are things going building an APTCA version Castle? -- Roelof.
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Roelof Blom <[email protected]> wrote: > Using horn is easier, once you've got it setup. > > To get the latest released version of AR use > *horn -install:castle.activerecord -version:2.1.2 -mode:aptca* > > When it's done you can find the AR assemblies in > * > C:\hornget\.horn\ioc\castle.activerecord\Working-2.1.2\build\net-3.5\aptca > * > > -- Roelof. > > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 3:37 AM, Mauricio Scheffer < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> These would be the steps to build with horn: >> Install msysgit: http://code.google.com/p/msysgit/downloads/list >> Clone horn: git clone --depth 1 git://github.com/dagda1/horn_src.git >> Build horn by running hornbuild.bat >> Add c:\Program Files\Git\cmd to your path >> Run horn -install:castle.activerecord -mode:aptca >> >> On Feb 17, 8:50 pm, BSP <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Mauricio, >> > I don't currently have git on my home PC. >> > >> > Roelof, >> > Would this be an easier path to where I need to be? Install git and >> > grab this from horn rather than installing Nant and running the build >> > from the subversion repository? >> > >> > Thanks guys, >> > B >> > >> > On Feb 17, 6:40 am, Mauricio Scheffer <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > > Did you try horn? It already includes nant and it takes care of all >> > > dependencies, DLL copying, etc. >> > >> > > On Feb 17, 1:02 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?... >> > >> > read more ยป >> >> -- >> 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.
