VS 2005, compiling against .NET 1.1

[Paul Aspinall]

Hi
I have VS 2005, but some of the components I'm using (Infragistics
NetAdvantage 2005), have issues with .NET 2.0
For this reason, I'm being forced to compile against .NET 1.1

How do I do this?? Is it possible?? Is it supported to use VS 2005 with .NET
1.1??

Thanks

[Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]]

Paul,

Check the google archives for this group. I believe there is a post by
Jon Skeet that references how to do this (or it might be his blog). Mind
you, it is unsupported, but I think it is possible.

Hope this helps.
--
- Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]
- mv*@spam.guard.caspershouse.com

"Paul Aspinall" <pa**@aspy.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6b********************@fe3.news.blueyonder.co .uk...

Hi
I have VS 2005, but some of the components I'm using (Infragistics
NetAdvantage 2005), have issues with .NET 2.0
For this reason, I'm being forced to compile against .NET 1.1

How do I do this?? Is it possible?? Is it supported to use VS 2005 with
.NET 1.1??

Thanks

[Anders Norås]

> How do I do this?? Is it possible?? Is it supported to use VS 2005

with .NET 1.1??

No, Visual Studio 2005 targets .NET 2.0. However, a team at Microsoft are
working on MSBuild for Everett (Everett was the codename for Visual Studio
2003) which should enable Visual Studio 2005 to build .NET 1.1 projects.
Because of technical issues related to only one CLR being allowed per process,
and the architecture of Visual Studio, it is unlikly that Visual Studio 2005
will support designing Windows Forms and similar targeting .NET 1.1.

Anders Norås
http://dotnetjunkies.com/weblog/anoras/

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP] <mv*@spam.guard.caspershouse.com> wrote:

Check the google archives for this group. I believe there is a post by
Jon Skeet that references how to do this (or it might be his blog). Mind
you, it is unsupported, but I think it is possible.

It's certainly something I've looked at in theory - i.e. I've read
appropriate web pages :)

However, the really good news is that MS is going to produce something
to help us - unsupported etc, but great news nonetheless.

See http://blogs.msdn.com/clichten/archi...08/490541.aspx and
http://blogs.msdn.com/clichten/archive/2005/11.aspx

I don't know when it'll be out though...

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Mike]

"Anders Norås" <an**********@objectware.no> wrote in message
news:66*************************@news.microsoft.co m...

How do I do this?? Is it possible?? Is it supported to use VS 2005
with .NET 1.1?? No, Visual Studio 2005 targets .NET 2.0. However, a team at Microsoft are
working on MSBuild for Everett (Everett was the codename for Visual Studio
2003) which should enable Visual Studio 2005 to build .NET 1.1 projects.
Because of technical issues related to only one CLR being allowed per
process, and the architecture of Visual Studio, it is unlikly that Visual
Studio 2005 will support designing Windows Forms and similar targeting
.NET 1.1.

This is huge. I was just having similar issues.
I know what happens when you *assume*, but I thought it was a pretty
reasonable one that they'd be a compiler switch in 2005 to target 1.1.
I thought we could standardize on 2005, so we could have a consistent user
and programming interface to the dev. env., have one set of VS
add-in's/packages/visualizers, etc. What a shame for us to have to give up
on 05 for a while -- it's really not worth the hassle to have VS03 and VS05.
I'm surprised both that there's no 1.x switch, and that there's no automatic
cross-CLR proxy, whether it's in the same process or not. (As long as you
set a switch that says your willing to pay the price.)

What about other forms of interop? I assume I could use a remoting layer so
1.x and 2.x stay isolated, no?
But what about visual controls? If I write a Windows Forms control in 2.0,
and "Expose for COM interop" -- will this be a usable UI control in 1.x and
2.x??

thanks,
m

Anders Norås
http://dotnetjunkies.com/weblog/anoras/

[Anders Norås]

> This is huge. I was just having similar issues.

I know what happens when you *assume*, but I thought it was a pretty
reasonable one that they'd be a compiler switch in 2005 to target 1.1. Microsoft's John Rivard has a detail explainaiton of the issues related to
this on his blog. Read it at http://blogs.msdn.com/johnri/archive...29/498219.aspx
But what about visual controls? If I write a Windows Forms control in
2.0,
and "Expose for COM interop" -- will this be a usable UI control in
1.x and 2.x??

I can't see why this shouldn't work, after all you're not using the .NET
control directly, you're going through COM-interop.

Anders Norås
http://dotnetjunkies.com/weblog/anoras/

[Mike]

"Anders Norås" <an**********@objectware.no> wrote in message
news:66*************************@news.microsoft.co m...

This is huge. I was just having similar issues.
I know what happens when you *assume*, but I thought it was a pretty
reasonable one that they'd be a compiler switch in 2005 to target 1.1. Microsoft's John Rivard has a detail explainaiton of the issues related to
this on his blog. Read it at
http://blogs.msdn.com/johnri/archive...29/498219.aspx

But what about visual controls? If I write a Windows Forms control in
2.0,
and "Expose for COM interop" -- will this be a usable UI control in
1.x and 2.x??

I can't see why this shouldn't work, after all you're not using the .NET
control directly, you're going through COM-interop.

Seems like it should - but when I compiled a user control with 2005 and COM
interop, I didn't see it registered anywhere when I chose COM from Add
References. (Though things may not work as I'm thinking, or maybe I omited a
step?)
m

Anders Norås
http://dotnetjunkies.com/weblog/anoras/