Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. POBuilding C++ projects that targets framework 3.5 but produces assemblies targeting framework 4.0
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p><strong>Background</strong></p> <p>We have a C++ solution that has been moved from VS2005 to VS2010 where the project files were targeting the .net framework 3.5 but since moving over to VS2010, all of the project files were showing that they were targeting the.net framework 4.0. I have since changed the .vcxproj files manually so that they are targeting the .net framework 3.5, using the method described in the Community Content on this <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff770576.aspx" rel="nofollow noreferrer">link</a></p> <p><strong>The Problem</strong></p> <p>When I build these project files, manually or via an automated build, the output assemblies are still targeting the .net framework 4.0. I can tell this by using various methods described <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3460982/determine-net-framework-version-for-dll">here</a>. I also know that this is the case as I build and run the installer for this application. Once the application has been installed (which then shows as a service), I try to start the service on the target machine. This service will not start on a machine without the .net framework 4.0 installed. If 4.0 is then installed, the service will start, so this is another test that I can run that shows me that the application has a dependency on .net framework 4.0 which it should not.</p> <p><strong>The Aim</strong></p> <p>Ideally, I need to build this application so that the outputs are targeting the .net framework 3.5 instead of 4.0 so that it will actually run as it is supposed to! I have tried to use the 3.5 version of MSBuild as described in one of the answers given for this question <a href="http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-CA/tfsbuild/thread/d7ef885d-49d3-4160-ae73-ee52b5c1dbbb" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a> but got the same error that is described underneath that post.</p> <p>Can anyone help with this? It's proving to be a right pain and I've been banging my head against the wall for over a week trying to get this sorted!</p> <p>Thanks again in advance</p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload