I use a machine where I don't have administrator rights. I've been able to run programs without admin rights by extracting the program's .zip file to a directory I have created on my desktop. However, I can't find such a .zip file for Visual Studio.
Is there a way to install Visual Studio Community Edition without administrator rights?
Practically no. Visual Studio (Express and above, excluding VS Code) consists of multiple components that must be installed as admin, and will be required for the app you're debugging to be available as system-wide component. It might be possible to use ThinApp or its equivalent, but ThinApp can't even work with VS 2010 and it was by far the best of its class.
A (resource intensive) alternative to get VS on any PC will be packaging a VM with VS installed, either creating one yourself or get a ready-made ones. VirtuaBox is available as portable fork if you can't even get Hyper-V tools installed. But this still require kernel drivers installation, which means at least one-time admin access. Depending on your internet connection & budget, it might be more practical to setup a VPS with VS installed, then remote there.
Basically, youre going to need to download an iso of windows, then download QEMU, and run it as invoker by doing that batch file thing (https://techcult.com/how-to-install-software-without-admin-rights/). Set it to anywhere, and then figure out how to boot it to QEMU cause I have absolutely no idea how (ive only done it with Kali Linux). and just install VC on there. Sorry about being so vague.
There is no way to install or use Visual Studio on Windows without admin rights. You can either use a different program to write your code in and then compile using a different compiler. Or use qemu (since it does not require admin rights) to run a windows virtual machine.
I have been able to successfully install a simple program using an Installer Project on Visual Studio Community 2017. However, I can't find out how to create a fully working deployable uninstaller for an end user.
The Installer Project was set up to only create an Application Folder (in C:\Program Files...) with the Program .exe, and nothing else. This it does successfully. I would like an installer because later I plan to make some registry keys upon installation.
To test uninstallation, I have run the original .exe file built by the Installer Project with the "Uninstall" option. This removes the Application Folder but does not remove the program from the Add/remove programs list in Windows - Leading me to believe there are other registry entries that have not been removed.
I have tried to uninstall purely from the Add/remove programs list, but then I get an error:
C:\WINDOWS\system32\msiexec.exe
"Windows cannot access the specified device, path, or file. You may not have the appropriate permissions to access the item."
In Visual Studio, I can click "Uninstall" from the Installer Project right-click menu which does successfully remove both the Application Folder and the Add/Remove Programs Item, but this is not a deployable solution.
Notes:
OS: Windows 10
Using Visual Studio 2017 Community
Looking at the application Folder, there is neither an install nor uninstall .exe file in it. The Installer Project .exe is only in the original build location, and I cannot find how to get a copy in the Application Folder (not sure if a copy there would work).
I have tried configuring the Installer Project as x86 and x64 with no change.
I have tried using both Debug and Release build configurations with no change.
From looking around, WiX seems to have more features and flexibility, but I haven't yet dug into that. Is there an easier solution?
Has this issue occurred to anyone else? My hopes were that Installer Projects were the simple way to learn and handle installation.
Looks like I jumped to conclusions in the comment above, however I think I found the issue: I cannot uninstall the program from the Windows Apps & Features window in System Settings, but uninstalling from Control Panel\Programs\Programs and Features works fine.
When typing in "Remove" using the windows start button, the default item that comes up is "Add or Remove Programs" in System settings (This looks like a Windows 10 thing). When you click that, it forwards you to the "Apps & features window. I am now learning that for some reason this has different functionality than the control panel window. Or maybe it has lower permissions, although I am the admin and only user of this computer...
Because it can be uninstalled from Control Panel, I think this would be the preferred solution. My assumptions about the other window in system settings was my real issue. I just wish the Apps & features window aligned its functionality/permissions with control panel.
I also learned that uninstall is successful when I run msiexec.ex /I{PACKAGEID} in cmd. Not sure how relevant this is, but documenting here.
Installs and uninstalls are transactional, they either work completely or roll back completely. If you do an uninstall but the entry remains in Add/Remove Programs then it's likely that the uninstall did not in fact work.
When you do the install, if it has a UAC elevation dialog then the install is running with elevation and installing files/registry entries to locations prohibited to limited users. Removing files from those locations also requires elevation. You haven't said exactly how your uninstall works, but most likely it requires elevation to succeed, and your program isn't running elevated. If your program uninstalls silently the uninstall will fail silently, so it's possible that your program isn't actually checking that the uninstall worked.
I'd also guess that your Visual Studio session may be running elevated so uninstall from there works fine.
Apart from privileges, an uninstall from a running installed program tends not to work very well because the uninstall process cannot remove your running program or its folder because it's in use. So while you could get it to work (with elevation) you might find that your program and its folder are left behind until the next reboot. If people really want to do this, one of the strategies is to copy an uninstall program to the temp folder and fire it off asynchronously, so everything can be removed.
Uninstalls from Add/Remove Programs&Features generally work fine. Without some context that error message doesn't mean much. It's not a message that comes out of Windows Installer, so it's perhaps coming out of a custom action. Otherwise it may be an issue specific to the test machine.
There is never an uninstall exe in a Windows Installer setup. When you remove a product the system just calls the Windows API to remove the product. Windows Installer is part of the Windows OS with API support for everything that needs doing. Only non-MSI setups require an install and uninstall exe to do anything.
None of these issues seem to be related to your choice of tool. They all create MSI files and if an MSI design is not optimal it doesn't matter what tool you use. There's nothing wrong with WiX, but to install literally a few files it's overkill compared to Visual Studio.
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 have a TeamCity build server with a couple of agents set up to build code on check in for several c++ projects. Now, we've run into some problems regarding handling dependencies on Windows SDK since
It's to large to check-in and still be able to work with the source
smoothly.
Several can't be installed at the same time without problems.
The easiest way to set up TeamCity agents is to just install the Windows SDK. However, installing two versions the Windows SDK is problematic since it seems to overwrite registry entries of previous installations. Another approach is to cherry-pick files from the installation and put it on an rsync-server or the like, but the Windows SDK installer seems to modify Visual Studio binaries, etc so that does not feel good either. I've also checked with microsoft and they strongly suggested against cherry-picking files from the SDK install.
How have you set up your c++ projects on TeamCity and what would you suggest in our situation?
If you make sure the versions of the SDK are installed in the same location on each machine that you use (both developer and build machine) then you can add a step to the start of your build scripts which sets the current SDK for use. You can do this either:
Using the registry settings (if you have only one build going at any time)
Using environment variables, which you reference in your project files for lib, bin etc.
I've seen this work pretty well before, although we we weren't using TeamCity.