We just did a move from storing all files locally to a network drive. Problem is that is where my VS projects are also stored now. (No versioning system yet, working on that.) I know I heard of problems with doing this in the past, but never heard of a work-around. Is there a work around?
So my VS is installed locally. The files are on a network drive. How can I get this to work?
EDIT: I know what SHOULD be done, but is there a band-aid I can put on right now to fix this and maintain the network drive?
EDIT 2: I am sure I am not understanding something, but Bob King has the right idea. I'll work with the lead web developer when he gets back into the office to figure out a temporary solution until we get some sort of version control setup. Thanks for the ideas.
While we do use Source Control, we do also run all our projects from Network Drives (not shared directories, private directories on network drives). The network drives are backed up nightly, and also use Volume Shadow Copy, so if you need to revert to something before it made it's way to SC, then you can.
To get projects to run correctly with the right permission, follow these steps.
Basically, you've just got to map the shared directory to a drive, and then grant permission, based on that Url, to all code. Say you map to "N:\", then use "N:\*" as your Url pattern. It isn't obvious you need to wildcard, but you do.
The question is rather generic so I'll give an answer to one issue I was facing.
I run Visual Studio 2010 using a Parallels virtual machine on my Mac while keeping all my projects on the mac side via a network share. Visual Studio however wouldn't load the projects assembly files from there. Trying to set the rights using "caspol" alone didn't help in my case.
What finally worked for me to allow Visual Studio to load assemblies from a network share was to edit the file
"C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0\Common7\IDE\devenv.exe.config" (assuming a default installation).
in the xml "<runtime>" section you have to add
<loadFromRemoteSources enabled="true"/>
You may have to change the permissions on that file to allow write access. Save the file. Restart Visual Studio.
In the interests of actually answering the question, I copied this comment from jcarle.com:
Trusting Network Shares with Visual Studio 2010 / .NET Framework v4.0
January 20, 2011, 4:10 pm
If you are like me and you store all your code on a server, you will have likely learned about trusting a network share using CasPol.exe. However, when moving from Visual Studio 2008 (.NET Framework 2.0/3.0/3.5) over to Visual Studio 2010 (.NET Framework 4.0), you may find yourself scratching your head.
If you are used to using the Visual Studio Command Prompt to quickly get to CasPol, you may find that some of your projects will not seem to respect your new FullTrust settings. The reason is that, unless you are carefully paying attention, the Visual Studio Command Prompt defaults to adding the .NET Framework 4.0 folder to its path. If your project is still running under .NET Framework 2.0/3.0/3.5, it will require setting CasPol for those versions as well. Just a note, I have also personally had more success with using 1 as a code group instead of 1.2.
To trust a network share for all versions of the .NET Framework, simply call CasPol for each version using the full path as below:
C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\CasPol -m -ag 1 -url file://YourSharePath* FullTrust
C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v4.0.30319\CasPol -m -ag 1 -url file://YourSharePath* FullTrust
I would not recommend doing that if you have (or even if you don't have) multiple people who are working on the projects. You're just asking for trouble.
If you're the only one working on it, on the other hand, you'll avoid much of the trouble. Performance is going to out the window, though. As far as how to get it to work, you just open the solution file from VS. You'll likely run into security issues, but can correct that using CASPOL. As I said, though, performance is going to be terrible. Again, not recommended at all.
Do yourself and your team a favor and install SVN or some other form of source control and put the code in there ASAP.
EDIT: I'll partially retract my comments. Bob King explains below the reason they run VS projects from a network drive and it makes sense. I would say unless you're doing it for a specific reason like Bob, stay away from it. Otherwise, get your ducks in a row before setting up such a development environment.
So I was having a similar issue. Visual Studio wouldn't recognize a network location I had mapped for a drive letter for anything. The funny thing is, it worked for a day. I set up my project and began working on it and had no issues. Then, I shut down and the next day nothing works. I couldn't read/write files in code, output my executables or anything. My project is local but my output was intended to be thrown up on the network.
Anyways, the problem is probably about the administrator context but one way to fix it which I found while digging around online is to get Visual Studio to browse to the drive in question some how. There are plenty of ways to do this but VS will magically be able to recognize mapped drive letters. My solution is to go the the Debug Output Location in the Project Properties, click browse and go to my previously made output location on my network drive and Voila!!!
I wanted to put this up because I spent half a day trying to figure this out and figured it might save someone else some time. Thanks much and good luck!!!
Erik
I understand this is an older thread, but this was the best thread I found when looking to solve a similar issue I had visual studio 2013 on a virtual box (using Win 8.1) and the code on the host machine (Win 7). Although I could open the solution, I could not compile. All of the other answers on this relate to older software, so I am adding this answer to update this frequently found question with the solution that worked for me.
Here's what I did; Made a registry entry to be able to use a UNC path as the current directory.
WARNING: Using Registry Editor incorrectly can cause serious, system-wide problems that may require you to reinstall Windows NT to correct them. Microsoft cannot guarantee that any problems resulting from the use of Registry Editor can be solved. Use this tool at your own risk.
Under the registry path:
HKEY_CURRENT_USER
\Software
\Microsoft
\Command Processor
add the value DisableUNCCheck REG_DWORD and set the value to 0 x 1 (Hex).
WARNING: If you enable this feature and start a Console that has a current directory of an UNC name, start applications from that Console, and then close the Console, it could cause problems in the applications started from that Console.
Found this information at link: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/156276
How about we rephrase this into a question that everyone can answer? I have the exact same problem as the initial poster.
I have a copy of VB 2008 (recently upgraded from VB6). If I store my solutions on the backed up network drive, then it won't run a single thing ever. It gives "partially trusted caller" errors for accessing a module, even when "allowpartiallytrustedcallers" is set in the assembly. If I store the files on my (not backed up) C:, then it will run wonderfully, until I put it on the share drive for everyone to use, and I'm back to my same problem.
This isn't a big request. I just want to be able to put a solution and executable on the share drive and run it without an absurd amount of nonsense about security. I shouldn't have to cram all my work into form files.
-Edit: I found the problem with why it was ignoring the AllowPartialllyTrustedCallers command. I'm trying to reference ADODB, which doesn't allow partially trusted. So, no network executable can access a database? What does Microsoft have against intranets anyway?
I was facing the same issue just recently so this answer is more for the sake of keeping track of my own knowledge. Anyway, should soumeone find it useful, below is the issue and the solution.
Issue:
NET 4.0 projects, SVN repo, checkout folders are on local drives, referenced assemblies are build by build server and available on a network drive. Visual studio on W7 is is able to add the reference but unable to build projects.
Solution:
Since NET 4.0 does not automatically provide a sandbox anymore for network assemblies, you have to make those full-trusted via machine.config update. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd409252.aspx
I had a similar problem with opening Visual Studio projects on a network drive, and I fixed it by creating a symbolic link on my local C:\ drive that points to the UNC directory
e.g.
mklink /D "C:\Users\Self\Documents" "\\domain.net\users\self\My Documents"
then you can just open the project using the C:\Users\Self\Documents\ path, instead of the UNC path
(You have to be careful, because Visual Studio will automatically redirect you to the '\\domain.net..' path if you double click the symlink when you're browsing for the project. I had to copy paste the 'C:\Users\' path to get it to open with the drive letter path)
Don't do it. If you have source control (versioning), you do not want your files on a network drive. It totally bypasses all you want to achieve by using source control, because once your files are on a network drive, anyone can modify them .... even while you're currently building your project. Ka-boooom!
PS: this sounds like a typical case of over-engineering to me.
Are you having any specific problems?
If you allow more than one person to open the solution, your first problem will be that the .NCB file (Intellisense) will be locked exclusively and only one user will be able to browse the class tree. And of course you have the potential for one user's changes to overwrite the other user's changes.
You should be warned that some feature in Visual Studio will refuse to work with network drive.
For example, mdf file of SQL Express user instance must be located in local drive.
For another example, if you use UNC path, you have to make sure they are short enought.
i found this helpful while trying use vc11 with parallels which run on mac:
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/toolsforwinapps/thread/2ffdcb01-c511-4961-834b-afd5f2fbb8e1, and specifically:
1) You can switch from local debugging to remote debugging and set the machine name as 'localhost'. This will do a remote deployment on your local machine (thus not using the project's directory). You don't need to install the Remote Debugger tools, nor start msvsmon for this to work on localhost.
In case this helps anyone else, I had to do the steps outlined here to add the network share location to Windows intranet zone. In particular, I was having trouble with Visual Studio hanging on load when opening a solution on a network share (i.e. using VMware Fusion and opening a solution from my Mac's hard drive). I also had problems with PostSharp running in this scenario.
If i understand you correctly, your Visual Studio project files are stored on the network drive and you are running them from there. This is what I do and don't have any problems. You will need to make sure that you have set the security policy. You can use Caspol to do this, or via the control panel-admin tools menu.
"How can I get this to work?"
You have a couple choices:
Choice A:
1. Move all files back to your local hard drive
2. Implement some type of backup software on your machine
3. Test said backup solution
4. keep on coding
Choice B:
1. Get a copy of one of the FREE source control products and implement it.
2. Make sure it's being backed up
3. Test it
Choice C:
Use one of the many ONLINE source control repositories available. Google, SourceForge, CodePlex, something.
Well, my question would be why you are asking this. Is it not working when you are storing it on a network drive? I haven't tried this myself, and one problem I could envision would be that .NET code running from a network drive (ie. from the bin\Debug directory, also located on the network drive) would be running in a sandbox mode, unless you mess around with CASPOL (or use 3.5 SP1 which I hear has removed that obstacle).
If you have specific problems, ask about them. Never ask "Why is doing X not working?".
You're not saying if you're just one person or multiple persons accessing the same remote drive, but I'm assuming you're just one for each network directory. Is this correct? If not, no, there is no band-aid. Get version control, move the files back to a local disk.
We've just switched to using google test for unit testing due to deficiencies in our previous framework.
In Visual Studio, I have a solution with multiple projects. Each project contains unit tests using google test for a specific class (or collection of linked classes) within our application. We only use VS for managing and running google tests and reference the test classes found elsewhere.
When I want to run all tests, I set startup projects to multiple, then press ctrl-f5. This pops ups 1 console window per project with the standard google test output. This is great! I have to click a key to close each of the output windows, though. It sure would be nice to integrate into "Test Explorer" within VS2013 express.
I've found this script runner:
https://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/9dd47c21-97a6-4369-b326-c562678066f0.
It appears to be exactly what I want, but apparently express editions don't allow extensions? (I'm new the land of visual studio.) Anyway, we're using express instead of a different version because we're commercial. My fallback solution is spending the money on a full version of VS. However, I'd much rather find a free solution so I don't have to justify purchase, then deal with licensing visual studio for every new person that joins the group.
Has anyone figured out a solution to this?
Our team also tried using "Google Test Runner" extension. The
integration with VS Test Explorer was great but we did not like
the fact that we could not see gmock warnings. This means that
some tests can pass with warnings and you will simply let that
slip by and create problems in the future. The same problem
exists when trying to use XML output generated by gmock.
Since viewing output in console is a poor option, we've decided to
parse the output of executable that runs the tests and display them
in a browser. To this end, we've modified the project so that it directs
its output to a file ( "> test_output.txt" in Debugging -> Command
Arguments) and modified the main function to parse the output,
insert it into a html file template, save this html file and then open
it in default browser using:
ShellExecute(NULL, NULL, "test_output.html", "", "", SW_SHOW);
This also enabled us to make some customizations to the way results
are displayed using javascript.
You can use this approach in you case by creating a simple project which
will run last in the list of multiple startup projects, parse the output
of other executables and display it in a browser. I know this solution has
its drawbacks, but it is (in my opinion) better than ignoring warnings.
I saw some code on codeproject like this and this. but both are not compatible with the new security policy of internet explorer add-ons, when i insert then on registry they show up on the IE add-ons list, but with the "incompatible" status. Some can show me a working example for IE11 add-on? or can show me what i need to change? (i already disabled the security mode, but even with that i couldn't make it work) there is something to do with EPM (Enhanced Protected Mode)?
Have you used regsvr32.exe to register your BHO? I have IE 11 and used your second link as a boilerplate project, and I have no problems getting the dll to work in IE (besides having problems with working with the IE api - but that's not relevant).
What I did to get the BHO to work:
Have IE 11
Have Visual Studio 2015
Download the project from codeproject, doubleclick the solution
Convert it to the new format and download the dependencies (VS asked me to convert it, and I didn't have VisualC++ for Visual Studio or something)
Build it in release (I haven't actually tried debug)
Execute regsvr32.exe in an admin command prompt
Start IE and enable the BHO when IE asks you to
That's basically everything I did, and I didn't get an error on the way.
EDIT: Oops, sorry for necroing this. That was not my intention.
This ought to be simple, but seems to be anything but.
I wish to create an installer that can be used by those using group policies to install products. I do not know then if this must be an MSI, or an EXE. Can an EXE install be installed via a group policy? I chatted with another Wix novice who seemed to think it was a bad idea to have an install that was a plain MSI file.
My product uses the Visual C++ 2010 redistributables. I do not wish to use merge modules. Both this and this link give some of the disadvantages of using them. I object to 1) installing things that the user has not consented to, and 2) not having a control panel uninstall item with a version number that users can inspect and see if they have the latest version of. Thus, I am not interested in responses consisting of people lecturing me on why I ought to use merge modules. If what I am asking for is truly IMPOSSIBLE without merge modules, then please explain why.
I do not know if it is necessary to use a bootstrapper to kick off an EXE install. I gather that it is, but it seems bizarre for me, for an MSI with such involved tables and descriptions, not to be able to kick of a mere EXE, ON THE CONDITION that the redistributable is not installed already.
If it is necessary to use a bootstrapper, I would like to know if anyone can find a complete example, with both bootstrapper and Wix code, for an example of a product install; ideally, together with the command lines necessary to compile them, for such a common case as installing a VC++ 2010 (or possibly 2012) program, together with its redistributable - with the latter being installed as the EXE.
I have found this to be straight-forward and easy to do in Inno Setup Pascal - except for the Group Policy part. I have found anything but COMPLETE examples and/or straightforward explanations to accomplish this using a Microsoft installer. No matter what Microsoft says, I would consider such an installer to be best practices. My code is not managed, and I would like to support XP. Thus, a bootstrapper that requires some .net to already be installed would only add another unsolved layer of complexity to the problem. One that statically links to a .net library might not be too bad, if it did not create very much overhead. My MSI install seems to work pretty well. I did not realize that installing a vcredist_x86.exe would be a problem with such an elusive solution. I do not have Visual Studio. I am using the Qt framework, and have Visual Studio installed only to compile my application. If you have a bootstrapper solution, please specify which bootstrapper you are using. Ideally, the same idea could be extended to more than one prerequisite, and the same coding pattern could be used. If there were a way to use a merge module or additional MSI so that the redistributable would have its own control panel entry, that could be acceptable.
Brownie points for suggesting a mailing list, forum or well-populated chat channel to talk about Wix that does not require one to receive a lot of unnecessary mailing list traffic.
Group Policies by default don't allow EXEs to be installed. I did read about some admins that repackage EXEs into MSIs to deploy them via GPO but that is rather hacky. There is also the possibility to script the deployment - GPOs support script execution, machine or user level.
You can't embed an MSI within another MSI either because only one installation can execute at any time (Windows Installer design).
I don't know how you will be providing your product to your customers but vcredist_x86.exe (I am trying this with the v100 version) uncompresses into the root folder and generates an msi and a cab (vc_red.msi and vc_red.cab) among other files. If you provide these to your customers they can add them to the same GPO used to deploy your product.
I am currectly finishing my project in C++ and i'm looking for a way to create my own C++ installer file
which will create the project dll's and exe files into a specific path
what is the easier way to learn how to do it?
There are several ways to build an installer. While you can of course always make one yourself, you should google for something like "create an installer". Some prebuilt solutions include "InstallShield", or the ".msi" file format, which you can create on your own using something like "Advanced Installer".
Of course, if you want your users to build your project from source, then you need a makefile and to make sure you bundle all the libraries. There are also kits like autotools to do that for you.
If you use VS 2010, Installshield LE would suffice as it is integrated into VS 2010.
If you have access to Installshield IDE, there is nothing better available for your packaging needs.
There are two ways of packaging:
a) The LEGACY way
b) The Windows Installer way, Basic MSI is the keyword here.
The LEGACY way involves creating your own scripts for:
a) Installing the files to their locations
b) Writing registry entries, if needed
c) Registering COM components, if needed
d) Creating shortcuts etc...
Tools that can be used for LEGACY approach are:
a) NSIS - very good and has a scripting language of its own.
b) Installshield - has a project type called Installscript Project. Installscript is the scripting language to be used.
The Windows Installer way is a bit hard comapred to the LEGACY way.
One has to learn the basics of MSI technology which can be daunting.
The package created has .msi as extension. This file is a database that the developer configures and the Windows Installer takes care of all other things. This is called TRANSACTIONAL installation procedure.
Even the UI presented during install is configured in the Database using tables like Dialog, Controls etc...
Tools that can be used for Windows Installer approach are:
a) Installshield - has a project type called Basic MSI
b) Wix - Opensource and xml based. You configure appropriately named xml files and various utilities in the Wix package will help you to create an MSI package.
First after completing your project click save. Second click on file tab,Add,New Project.
In new Project Click other Project types , Setup and Deployment and in that You can click InstallShield LE or Visual Studio Installer.
Hope this Helped you
I always recommend NSIS. You might also investigate HM Nis Edit - it's an IDE for NSIS that has a useful wizard feature. It will generate an installer script for you which you can further customize. The documentation is extensive.
can't believe no one mentioned install creator pro(there is also a free version with a branded message that displays after installing). Its feature set is pretty limited, though it has options for writing registry values and specifying custom paths to %AppData% or any other place you may want to install some files. it also has an optional wizard interface, and with each step you have the oppurtunity to preview each individual page.
the paid version offers the option for adding serial number/registration to your program. i've never tried it so i'm not sure how effective it may be. its also quite and expensive little program, but i would recommend it atleast to the beginner or someone who is more concerned with maintaining the codebase of their program and less concerned with how fancy and decorated their installer program is.
i know its been a long time since this was posted but for future reference this program is far easier for any beginner to creating installation packages for the first time