Hi Gert,

That has worked for all my projects. If I encounter other problems I'll just
submit a patch to the config file :)

Thanks.

Erik

-----Original Message-----
From: Gert Driesen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: woensdag 16 april 2008 20:22
To: 'Erik Renes'; nant-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: RE: [nant-dev] FW: System.Data.OracleClient assembly no longer
resolved(different behaviour 0.85 v 0.86b1)

Eric,

For .NET, we now use an explicit set of assemblies that we can automatically
resolve to a full path.

This set can be configured in the NAnt.exe.config file.

I have now added the System.Data.OracleClient assembly.

You can double-check the configuration file to make sure our list is
complete now.

Gert

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik
Renes
Sent: woensdag 16 april 2008 18:33
To: nant-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [nant-dev] FW: System.Data.OracleClient assembly no longer
resolved(different behaviour 0.85 v 0.86b1)

Hi all, 

When upgrading Nant to the latest version today, I noticed that a lot of my
previously working build scripts were failing. Compile errors arose from the
fact that System.Data.OracleClient.dll wasn't referenced.

Further investigation showed that nant 0.85 resolves the following: 
        <include name="System.Data.OracleClient.dll" /> To be:
 C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.4322\System.Data.OracleClient.dll

0.86 beta 1 fails to resolve the assembly.

When pursuing this in code I found that Resolving assemblies in the
Framework Directory had moved from AssemblyFileSet in NAnt.DotNet to
FrameworkInfo in Nant.Core, also see:
http://nant.cvs.sourceforge.net/nant/nant/src/NAnt.DotNet/Types/AssemblyFile
Set.cs?r1=1.7&r2=1.8

When looking in FrameworkInfo, I found that the new code did not reflect the
original code: 
http://nant.cvs.sourceforge.net/nant/nant/src/NAnt.Core/FrameworkInfo.cs?r1=
1.22&r2=1.23
(look for ResolveAssembly).

Locally, I have added the original code in AssemblyFileSet again, this has
successfully solved my problem. However, this means that there is either a
bug in 0.86, or an intended change in behaviour. Given the CVS commit
comments, I doubt this was an intentional change. 
Before reporting this as a bug, I would like to confirm whether or not this
change in behaviour was intentional?

If required, it would be possible for me to include a very small buildfile
that shows the problem.

Best regards,
Erik Renes


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss
this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javao
ne
_______________________________________________
nant-developers mailing list
nant-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
nant-developers mailing list
nant-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers

Reply via email to