Side by side in .NET

Question

4.00/5 (2 votes)

See more:

I should know this, but have just got myself very confused. Situation:

I have a project which references two external assemblies, A and B, both version 1. Then I receive a new version of A (v2) which has taken advantage of a new version of B (v2). Unfortunately, the markers of B have not made v2 backward compatible with v1, and my project expects v1.

So my project wants B v.1 but uses A v.2 which wants b v.2. There are no strong names. What are my options?

Posted 29-Jul-11 5:09am

Rob Philpott

Add a Solution

Comments

Rob Philpott 29-Jul-11 11:49am

(Suppose one very good option bearing the day and time in mind is to forget about this until Monday and go and drink some Belgian finest...)

3 solutions

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

Abhinav S · Answer 1 · 2011-07-29T06:38:00

Solution 2

I found this[^] to be an interesting read. Should give you an alternate way of using two versions of the same dll.

Posted 29-Jul-11 6:38am

Abhinav S

Not Active · Answer 2 · 2011-07-29T06:15:00

Solution 1

I'm not sure if this will work for unsigned assemblies, never had the need to try it http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/eftw1fys.aspx[^]

If it doesn't work you may want to look into singing the assemblies
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/xc31ft41.aspx[^]

Posted 29-Jul-11 6:15am

Not Active

Comments

Rob Philpott 29-Jul-11 12:23pm

I think that's only for strong named assemblies, which they aren't. And I'm pretty sure you can't do side-by-side without strong names in which case my luck has run out. Thanks for you response!

Philippe Mori · Answer 3 · 2011-07-29T13:19:00

Solution 3

Your application should typically use it private version of each DLL (except maybe for those that are installed in the GAC).

Thus your application would uses v1 of each assembly since you ship them with your executable.

Since both A and B have new versions (v2), then if you want to use A v.2., you should upgrade tour project to also uses B v.2 which will avoid the problem, reduce the number of DLLs (thus the memory usage and load time).

By the way, I think this is a lot hypothetical... as generally each maker would only depends on itself (and the .NET framework).

Most of the time both version should be compatible or only a few adjustment would be required.

Posted 29-Jul-11 13:19pm

Philippe Mori

Comments

[no name] 30-Jul-11 8:29am

This did nothing to answer the question that was asked.

Philippe Mori 30-Jul-11 9:42am

Well maybe... But I neverless think that this alternative is preferable.

If we do think that the original poster should not do what he ask for, then I think it is legitimate to provide a solution that suggest to not do it and explain why.

Since A want to use the new version of B, the best thing to do is to also use the new version of B from the application.

If the maker of A was able to upgrade it product to use the new version of B, then the maker of the application, if he is somehow competent, should probably be able to do so himself.

Often making an effort to upgrade our code (if necessary) would make more sense than to blindly want to stay with the obsolete version of A.

It will also be as hard to prove that a solution with 2 versions has less problem that an updated application.