0

Can someone give me an example of how I can create an exe file with no dependencies from a console app project?

I know that in bin/debug I will have the exe file after compiling my code. I would like to know how can i make an exe that will run on every computer without the need to install Visual Studio (or any other dependency: eg .net framework) on that particular computer. Is it possible?

Is there a better way to create .exe files that run on every computer?

Blorgbeard
  • 101,031
  • 48
  • 228
  • 272
elisa
  • 743
  • 2
  • 13
  • 31
  • You don't need to install visual studio to run the .exe! You do need the .net framework, but it's almost certainly installed by default these days – Blorgbeard Apr 01 '11 at 09:14
  • You should build in release mode rather than debug if you want to distribute the app. Use the version in bin\release. – AntonyW Apr 01 '11 at 09:18
  • It's fascinating how often people want to run .NET applications on machines without the .NET Framework installed. Here are a couple of related questions: [Running .net based application without .NET Framework](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/953146/running-net-based-application-without-net-framework), [how to run a winform Exe in normal Pc not having .net frame work installed.](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5176898/how-to-run-a-winform-exe-in-normal-pc-not-having-net-frame-work-installed). A search will turn up tons more duplicates. The *real* answer is to use a setup program. – Cody Gray - on strike Apr 01 '11 at 09:25

6 Answers6

2

The user doesn't have to install Visual Studio in order to use an app built in C#. They do have to have the .NET framework installed, however.

Modern versions of Windows have come with .NET preinstalled for a while, and they've been part of Windows update, too - obviously the earlier the version of .NET you target, the more computers you're likely to be able to run on. I expect that targeting .NET 2.0 should give pretty good coverage, although that way you miss the goodies from LINQ etc.

While there are "native" compilers for .NET, I don't know of any mainstream ones... the Mono AOT is probably the closest to mainstream, but I haven't used it myself.

Jon Skeet
  • 1,421,763
  • 867
  • 9,128
  • 9,194
  • and if i want an exe that will need no dependency? – elisa Apr 01 '11 at 09:16
  • 1
    @elisa, then your application won't run. The fact that you have chosen to develop a .NET application you already have a dependency of the .NET framework. – Darin Dimitrov Apr 01 '11 at 09:16
  • how can i create by my own an exe file? is there a way? i would like to see what exactly the exe contain. – elisa Apr 01 '11 at 09:17
  • 1
    @elisa: I've edited my answer - but basically if you don't want *any* dependencies, you'd probably be best off not writing in C# to start with. – Jon Skeet Apr 01 '11 at 09:17
  • i see. do you have any ideea of what to use? – elisa Apr 01 '11 at 09:20
  • @elisa: No, as I have no context of what you're trying to build. C and C++ are popular options though. – Jon Skeet Apr 01 '11 at 09:22
  • @elisa: Why do you feel like you need an application that can run without a dependency on the .NET Framework? C and C++ applications still frequently require run-time libraries on Windows. The better option is to create a setup program that handles all of this automatically. – Cody Gray - on strike Apr 01 '11 at 09:28
0

If you write it c# the machines you need will need .net on.

Only way to write apps that dont is either, to investigate specialised packaging tools that will install and take the bits of .net you need with it, or, write a native app

BugFinder
  • 17,474
  • 4
  • 36
  • 51
0

You will need at least the compiler to produce an executable.

mathieu
  • 30,974
  • 4
  • 64
  • 90
0

You have two options to create a windows application (an exe):

  • Managed .NET applications: You don't need VS in the target machine but you need de .NET runtime. You can include it making an installation package or just include the url for your users to install it manually.
  • Native applications: They run in any Windows computer but are harder to develop. Typically you have to use C/C++ instead of C#/.NET.
ggarber
  • 8,300
  • 5
  • 27
  • 32
  • Mostly. C and C++ applications still require the C/C++ run-time libraries. They're somewhat smaller than the .NET Framework, but if you develop with recent versions of Visual Studio, you can't be sure that all targeted versions of Windows will have the appropriate run-time libraries installed. – Cody Gray - on strike Apr 01 '11 at 09:27
0

In the bin folder (debug or release - it depends on your compilation configuration) you have compiled program that you can take (will all dll's that are in this folder) to another computer. Because you use C# (and generally .Net) as you programming language to run this program .Net framework has to be installed on the machine you want to use this app - this is requirement.

Rafal Spacjer
  • 4,838
  • 2
  • 26
  • 34
0

On every machine? Do u mean pc (windows, linux, unix), mac etc? U have to use multiplatfor leangue like Java orac C/C++.

VoonArt
  • 884
  • 1
  • 7
  • 21