Professional OPC
Development Tools

logos

Online Forums

Technical support is provided through Support Forums below. Anybody can view them; you need to Register/Login to our site (see links in upper right corner) in order to Post questions. You do not have to be a licensed user of our product.

Please read Rules for forum posts before reporting your issue or asking a question. OPC Labs team is actively monitoring the forums, and replies as soon as possible. Various technical information can also be found in our Knowledge Base. For your convenience, we have also assembled a Frequently Asked Questions page.

Do not use the Contact page for technical issues.

Win7 x64 Toolbox Message ["The following assemblies are installed SDK assemblies but could not..."]

More
03 Dec 2011 12:35 #679 by support
R.,

This is one of the issues that will be resolved in the upcoming Version 5.12. I know that the customer’s experience with the different combinations of .NET Framework and 32/64 bits in the current version is still not ideal. The blame is really on Microsoft – all the issues are caused by the fact the managed and mixed-mode C++ (C++/CLI) does not produce the same seamless experience as if the whole software was written in C# or VB.NET. And, it is quite difficult to overcome these limitations.

I spent a great deal of time in recent 2 months addressing precisely problems like this. The result, in Version 5.12, should be seamless experience between different .NET Framework versions, and 32/64 bits. Only a single set of assemblies will exist for all combinations. And the VS2010 designer/toolbox issues should be resolved, too. Here is an excerpt from current (pre-release) “What’s New” document:
Technology
- Minimum platform requirement is now unified to .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 (Client Profile or Full).
- In most scenarios, it is now possible to use the QuickOPC.NET assemblies from .NET Framework 4 CLR without extra precautions (i.e. without setting useLegacyV2RuntimeActivationPolicy in the configuration file).
Packaging
- Using a special technique, mixed-mode assemblies (containing native code, separate for x86 and x64 platforms) have been merged into a single assembly that appears as MSIL assembly to the consumers. You can now reference the same assemblies without regard for the target platform.
- Applications with QuickOPC.NET can now be built for “Any CPU” platform, without differentiating between 32-bit and 64-bit targets.
- The Visual Studio designer limitation (allowing only 32-bit components be loaded to the designer) no longer matters, also as result of the above assembly merging.
- Assemblies have been restructured (i.e. the product is now made of different assemblies as compared to Version 5.11), and assembly names have been made consistent, now always starting with “OpcLabs” prefix.

The only downside to these changes is that the structure of the assemblies has changed, i.e. existing projects will have to reference different assemblies. This is a small change, but it also affects all examples etc. Unfortunately there was no way of keeping the existing structure if I wanted to improve the developer’s experience.

Version 5.12 will be released in the similar timeframe as QuickOPC-UA 1.00, i.e. December 2011-January 2012. It should be free of charge to Version 5.1x users. I would therefore suggest that the customer waits until this release. Alternatively, I can provide a “pre-release” of Version 5.12 already. Let me know.

Best regards,

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
03 Dec 2011 12:15 #678 by admin
Zbynek,
We have a customer who is seeing the dialog in the attached screenshot when trying to add the .dlls to his toolbox. He is on Win7x64 Pro and using VS2010. Win has reproduced this on his machine creating a new framework 4.0 winform project and using version 5.11.355 of the Data.NET. Win tested this running VS as an admin.
VSToolBoxError.png
This does not appear to affect functionality, since clicking ok and dismissing the dialog does allow him to add the components to the toolbox- but it is problematic since it causes the user to think there is an error.
Have you seen this behavior before?
Regards,
R.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: support
Time to create page: 0.140 seconds