Skip to main content

ASP.NET vNext - Deploying your own version of .NET Framework

In this post we will talk about a new feature of .NET, that will allow us to deploy the .NET CLR with the application itself. No more .NET installation and versioning problems… or not
The new version promises us that we will be able to include in the application package all .NET dependencies that we are using. This mean that we can run our application on machines where we don’t have .NET installed. When we create our build, the package will contains also all the .NET resources needed.
For example the client will not need any more to install the .NET framework. This is great, because there were cases when we had to install .NET 4.0 and also .NET 4.5 on different machines because of the dependencies.
In the same time, the client will have locally only .NET components that he is using. For example we don’t need WCF or WF components installed on his machine if the application don’t use it. The deployment and setup step will be simpler and we will not use need any more to consume client storage space with the full stack of .NET framework.
Another nice thing is related to versioning. We don’t need to care anymore what version of .NET the client have on the machine. We can directly include .NET component directly in it. In this way the CLR versioning is becoming simpler, clean and in self-hosting.
In this beautiful story people could see a problem. Let’s assume that you are developing a 5 different applications for an enterprise client. He will need to install all of them on his machine. Because each application will come with his own .NET dependencies you could have theoretically the same .NET components duplicated (with the same version). On the other hand, the storage is pretty cheap, the size of .NET framework is not very big and on top of this, you include only the .NET components that you are using. Because of this you will not have a 1.6 GB of .NET stuff there, you can have only 200 MB or less.
I would say that you have a lot of advantages using this way of deployment. The cost of storage is pretty low and the .NET footprint is extremely low. Keep in mind that you have all the dependencies in your own project and you can update them independently.
Our application folder will have all the CLR and .NET framework similar with a NuGet packages. You can even specify for each sub package of   .NET framework what version you want. For example we could have Microsoft.Asp.Net.MVC version and Microsoft.AspNet.Hosting
In conclusion we could say that we will have more flexibility than we had until now, our life will be easier. I expect on real application, especially in the one that are big to have problems with versioning, updating and things like this. But, no blockers and in the end we gain a lot from this feature.


  1. Nice, but I'm wondering when a bug or security exploit is discovered in one .NET Framework version, how will the admin (or Windows Update) patch all these self-contained versions of .NET quickly.. :) (if they are scattered on various folders and not side-by-side in GAC)

    1. In the same way you make an update for a NuGet package (EF for example).
      They are only in the alpha version. I can bet that they will come with a solution for this problem.

    2. Can a domain admin push an update to an assembly (DLL) to 100 client workstations using NuGet only?

      If each application will have it's own 'private' copy of a certain .NET Framework version (not in GAC), the application vendor will be responsible to update it, unless somehow the admin will have a built-in way to discover all applications that have a certain .NET version..


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How to check in AngularJS if a service was register or not

There are cases when you need to check in a service or a controller was register in AngularJS.
For example a valid use case is when you have the same implementation running on multiple application. In this case, you may want to intercept the HTTP provider and add a custom step there. This step don’t needs to run on all the application, only in the one where the service exist and register.
A solution for this case would be to have a flag in the configuration that specify this. In the core you would have an IF that would check the value of this flag.
Another solution is to check if a specific service was register in AngularJS or not. If the service was register that you would execute your own logic.
To check if a service was register or not in AngularJS container you need to call the ‘has’ method of ‘inhector’. It will return TRUE if the service was register.
if ($injector.has('httpInterceptorService')) { $httpProvider.interceptors.push('httpInterceptorService&#…

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine:
threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration:

TeamCity.NET 4.51EF 6.0.2VS2013
It seems that there …

Entity Framework (EF) TransactionScope vs Database.BeginTransaction

In today blog post we will talk a little about a new feature that is available on EF6+ related to Transactions.
Until now, when we had to use transaction we used ‘TransactionScope’. It works great and I would say that is something that is now in our blood.
using (var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Required)) { using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection("...")) { conn.Open(); SqlCommand sqlCommand = new SqlCommand(); sqlCommand.Connection = conn; sqlCommand.CommandText = ... sqlCommand.ExecuteNonQuery(); ... } scope.Complete(); } Starting with EF6.0 we have a new way to work with transactions. The new approach is based on Database.BeginTransaction(), Database.Rollback(), Database.Commit(). Yes, no more TransactionScope.
In the followi…