Re: Deploy app without .net frx - C# Discussion Boards

How to assign value to textbox after it get focused in mshtml

30-Aug-09 14:22

Well thats encouraging ...

Mohsen Esmailpour30-Aug-09 3:34

Mohsen Esmailpour

30-Aug-09 3:34

hi.
i have webpage that contain textbox. here is textbox code:

<input name="cardtxt1" maxlength="4" id="cardtxt1" tabindex="1" class="txtform" onpaste="doNotPaste()" onfocus="getName(this);documentFocus('cardtxt1');" onkeypress="return check_KeyPress(this,2,'0123456789')" onkeydown="noCTRL(event);" onkeyup="nextTab(this, false);" autocomplete="off" style="width: 32px;" type="text">

and i want set textbox value by this command:

HTMLInputElement card = (HTMLInputElement)doc.all.item("cardtxt1", 0); 
card1.value = Value;

but my problem is after DocumentCompleted there is no value in textbox. value assigned to textbox before it get focused and when textbox get focused value will be cleared in textbox. how can i assign value to textbox after it get focused ?
or can i remove focus on textbox ?

Deploy app without .net frx

tukhoi30-Aug-09 3:31

30-Aug-09 3:31

I'm get in stuck of deployment an desktop application. My app was compiled against .net 3.5. On machine that doesn't have .net 3.5, the setup has to download .net 3.5 before install the app. The problem is download .net 3.5 take close to an hour, then user might cancel installation process.

I already compiled my app against .net 3.5 client profile, but it still take 5-10 minutes to download and still let users go away.

I dont know if there's a way to embed .net class library into my desktop app, so it could run without .net frx, or could we compile the app into native code?

Please help me if you have answer Smile | :)

Thanks.

PIEBALDconsult30-Aug-09 3:58

30-Aug-09 3:58

No. Just mention it in the documentation or download site or whatever so that potential users know that .net is required before they download your app.

Most Windows systems already have it, so I wouldn't be especially concerned.

tukhoi30-Aug-09 5:09

30-Aug-09 5:09

Almost user have .net 1.1 or 2.0. Since my app used .net 3.5, they have to have close to 1 hour to download .net 3.5 which will let users go away...

PIEBALDconsult30-Aug-09 5:35

30-Aug-09 5:35

But that's really none of your concern.

tukhoi30-Aug-09 5:36

30-Aug-09 5:36

It's absolutely my concern Smile | :)

Luc Pattyn30-Aug-09 6:34

Luc Pattyn

30-Aug-09 6:34

AFAIK Windows Vista and Windows 7 have all versions of .NET up to 3.5 preinstalled; as 3.5 is a pure superset of 2.0 (and much larger), if you don't really need the new stuff (such as WPF), it could be advantageous to build against 2.0 as this has even better chances of being present (on XP and older), and when not will download faster. I build against 2.0 unless I really need one of the extensions...

Smile | :)

Luc Pattyn

Badger | [badger,badger,badger,badger...]

Have a look at my entry for the lean-and-mean competition; please provide comments, feedback, discussion, and don’t forget to vote for it! Thank you.

PIEBALDconsult30-Aug-09 10:30

30-Aug-09 10:30

Indeed, build against the lowest version you can.
Don't use the latest features unless they offer a real benefit.

tukhoi30-Aug-09 17:35

30-Aug-09 17:35

Thank guys.

Bad news is i used WPF, then i could compile against .net 3.0 or 3.5. 3.0 is as fat as 3.5, then i compiled against .net 3.5 client profile.

However, it also took close to 10 mins to download .net 3.5 client profile, then i'm looking for better solution...

stancrm30-Aug-09 7:50

stancrm

30-Aug-09 7:50

The options are only :

1. Release your software together with .NET Framework, so the user can install it directly.
2. If you don't want .NET Framework, write your code in C++.
3. There is a tool to make .NET EXE to native code, and it is very expensive.

So.. I prefer the first one. It is cheap and easy.

Or read this :
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms994395.aspx[^]

PIEBALDconsult30-Aug-09 10:26

Wrapping up Deployment in 1 Single Setup.exe

30-Aug-09 10:26

No, it really isn't; stop looking for problems where none exist.

UBX30-Aug-09 1:38

30-Aug-09 1:38

Hey !

I was wondering if anyone knows how to wrap up a deployment ( files .. msi, setup.exe etc etc ) into one single setup.exe. ???

Is there a 3rd party product that does this or some code that I could make use of ??

Any ideas ??

Thanks in advance ..

Henry Minute30-Aug-09 1:48

Henry Minute

30-Aug-09 1:48

Surely it is the other way round. Everything gets wrapped up into one *.msi file.

Henry Minute

Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain
Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?"
“I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”

tukhoi30-Aug-09 3:23

30-Aug-09 3:23

You can write some piece of code to zip both msi and setup.exe file into one zip file, then make an executable zip file.

I myself used ICSharpCode.SharpZipLib to zip file, then use ChilkatZipSE to do the next job.

Henry Minute30-Aug-09 3:33

Henry Minute

30-Aug-09 3:33

That is interesting.
Could you explain the logic of that, because surely you don't need a Setup.exe, if you have an *.msi installer.

tukhoi30-Aug-09 3:43

30-Aug-09 3:43

The msi file got everything, but we still need setup.exe to as a boot trapper to detect prerequisites (.net frx, windows installer, ...).

So user should run setup.exe to perform checking prerequisites, then setup.exe call msi file to begin installation process.

Henry Minute30-Aug-09 3:47

Henry Minute

30-Aug-09 3:47

OK, thanks. Smile | :)

UBX30-Aug-09 4:03

30-Aug-09 4:03

Thanks !!! Not sure if I will do it that way but thanks .

Eddy Vluggen30-Aug-09 3:34

Eddy Vluggen

30-Aug-09 3:34

UBX wrote:
I was wondering if anyone knows how to wrap up a deployment ( files .. msi, setup.exe etc etc ) into one single setup.exe. ???

So you already have built a deployment package?

UBX wrote:
Any ideas ??

Zip it up and include it as a resource to a new C#-project. Let the application unzip the resources again, and use the Proces class to launch the executable of the installation-package.

I are Troll Smile | :)

UBX30-Aug-09 4:05