![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
I guess I'm confused because a PIA is wrapping an existing COM component that will be used from .NET, so why the heck do you need the extra meta-data in the registry that RegAsm will add to the existing COM entries? Shouldn't registering the original COM component be enough? |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Jul 24, 9:16 pm, Mike S <mgspr... (AT) netscape (DOT) net> wrote: I guess I'm confused because a PIA is wrapping an existing COM component that will be used from .NET, so why the heck do you need the extra meta-data in the registry that RegAsm will add to the existing COM entries? Shouldn't registering the original COM component be enough? Well, I'm going to answer a portion of my own post - I should've read the "official" PIA primer on MSDN before posting... What what I just read (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ aa302338.aspx), a PIA needs to be RegAsm'ed so that Visual Studio can reference the PIA instead of generating a new IA when you add a reference to a COM component that has a PIA associated with it. I sort of suspected the extra registry keys were being used by the IDE, and not by the CLR per se. But I'm still a bit confused. Since it seems like these extra registry entries are only used by the IDE to differentiate between plain old COM components and those that have PIAs, I wondering if I need to RegAsm the PIA's when I deploy components to a client machine. That is, in a compiled .NET assembly using the COM classes defined in the PIA, the assembly will already be referencing the PIA, so do I need to RegAsm the PIA on the client machine, or is installing the PIA's assembly file to the GAC enough? It seems like the extra registry entries are just there to so that the IDE can locate any PIA's while it's enumerating the keys under HKLCR\TypeLib... -- Mike S |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
| |