Context Free Forums and Gallery

Guys, I have a request. Can you tell me where the dll's for the 2.1 went and what they're named? I remember than the former version could be run off a USB stick if it had the dll's in the same directory, but the new version won't take the old dll's(new versions, they must be), and the old one's went somewhere on my C disk, and I've no idea what they're called.

Or, just make CF completely portable?

I stopped including the DLLs in the installer because I found out that the new DLLs work best when installed in the WinSxS directory. The installer includes the Microsoft file vcredist_x86.exe, which installs the proper DLLs in the proper directory. So you could put the Context Free.exe file and vcredist_x86.exe on the USB drive and just run vcredist_x86.exe first. You only need to run it once and the DLLs will be installed.

No, I know what the redist does, but it installs to C, and those are often blocked for writing, or generally any installer programs might be blocked too.. Yes, I generally mean at work and at college >_>
Is it possible to drop the DLLs themselves with the executable(not the installer) in the same directory? Or this won't work anymore? And what are the name of the DLLs? Sorry to bother

You can drop the DLLs into the application directory, but you also have to drop in these files called 'manifests'. It is much more complicated now than it used to be because Microsoft doesn't want people to do this anymore. But I can update the Context Free 2.0 installer to be a stand-alone installer for Context Free 2.1.

MtnViewJohn wrote:But I can update the Context Free 2.0 installer to be a stand-alone installer for Context Free 2.1.

Err.. what do you mean by stand-alone? As in "Having the DLLs" there?
Anyway, if it's too much trouble then I don't think it matters, since apparently no one needs this except me

Seyen wrote:

MtnViewJohn wrote:But I can update the Context Free 2.0 installer to be a stand-alone installer for Context Free 2.1.

Err.. what do you mean by stand-alone? As in "Having the DLLs" there?
Anyway, if it's too much trouble then I don't think it matters, since apparently no one needs this except me

Yes, as in having all the DLLs in one directory that is not the system directory. This isn't very much trouble because I would just use the old installer script to create a separate installer. And it is useful because there are people on locked-down, corporate PCs that would have to request their IT department to install vcredist_x86.exe.

In one word, "Woot!"

OK. Try downloading and installing this. It works on my computer, but I already have the DLLs installed in the WinSxS directory so it is not a true test. This installer puts the DLLs in the application directory.

I'll tel you how it goes as soon as I get a chance

Ok, tried it, works! Thanks!

Great. I updated the download page to list both Windows installers.