Hi,
I need to deploy 2 Codejock Ocx files in a XP terminal. I do exactly that 
the Codejock help says about redist files, with regsvr32, but my app can't 
create the ActiveX control.
Any trick?
Thanks
Pedrito

Hello Pedrito,

> I need to deploy 2 Codejock Ocx files in a XP terminal. I do exactly
> that
> the Codejock help says about redist files, with regsvr32, but my app
> can't
> create the ActiveX control.
> Any trick?

Not sure if this will work with Codejock, but I prefer using COM components 
RegFree.  This allows you to use your COM objects like application local 
DLLs.  Works on XP or better which is all I use/support.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms973913.aspx

Regards,

Rodd Graham, Consultant
Graham Automation Systems, LLC

Rodd Graham wrote:
> Hello Pedrito,
> 
>> I need to deploy 2 Codejock Ocx files in a XP terminal. I do exactly
>> that
>> the Codejock help says about redist files, with regsvr32, but my app
>> can't
>> create the ActiveX control.
>> Any trick?
> 
> Not sure if this will work with Codejock, but I prefer using COM 
> components RegFree.  This allows you to use your COM objects like 
> application local DLLs.  Works on XP or better which is all I use/support.
> 
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms973913.aspx
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rodd Graham, Consultant
> Graham Automation Systems, LLC
> 
> 

Could you elaborate a little more on this.  The link is rather complex 
for users that only work with Xbase++ and not C++, etc..  If we have an 
activeX control we currently utilize,  what is really needed to use it 
like a normal application DLL.  I like this idea as I really hat the 
need to register software on workstations like this.

I have had the same problem with an activeX from x360software where I 
had to do their install, instead of the regsvr32 command to get Xbase++ 
to recognize their DLL.  A visual basic software package would however 
recognize it.

Cliff.

Hello Clifford,

>>> I need to deploy 2 Codejock Ocx files in a XP terminal. I do exactly
>>> that
>>> the Codejock help says about redist files, with regsvr32, but my app
>>> can't
>>> create the ActiveX control.
>>> Any trick?
>> Not sure if this will work with Codejock, but I prefer using COM
>> components RegFree.  This allows you to use your COM objects like
>> application local DLLs.  Works on XP or better which is all I
>> use/support.
>> 
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms973913.aspx
>> 
> Could you elaborate a little more on this.  The link is rather complex
> for users that only work with Xbase++ and not C++, etc..  If we have
> an activeX control we currently utilize,  what is really needed to use
> it like a normal application DLL.  I like this idea as I really hat
> the need to register software on workstations like this.
> 
> I have had the same problem with an activeX from x360software where I
> had to do their install, instead of the regsvr32 command to get
> Xbase++ to recognize their DLL.  A visual basic software package would
> however recognize it.

The short answer is that Windows XP (SP2?) or better will allow an XML file 
(per the specification at the MSDN link above) stored with the executable 
to contain the activeX COM registration information that would normally be 
stored in the registry by regsvr32.  The windows provided COM object creator 
will pre-load the XML file so that any COM objects that resolves via the 
XML do not require accessing the registry.  Basically a application local 
vs machine global thing and independent of the source language that created 
the application.

However, if your activeX controls (such as the x360software one) require 
additional configuration work outside of the context of COM registration 
as part of their installation then the reg-free COM will not work.  IMO, 
a COM object should only require registration to work although it might start 
with default settings.

Since all commonly used programming languages are very similar, I recommend 
that you not limit yourself to knowing the Xbase++ niche only.  It does not 
take much effort for a Xbase++ user to read and understand VB examples even 
if the details are murky.

Regards,

Rodd Graham, Consultant
Graham Automation Systems, LLC

I Rodd Graham wrote:
> Hello Clifford,
> 
>>>> I need to deploy 2 Codejock Ocx files in a XP terminal. I do exactly
>>>> that
>>>> the Codejock help says about redist files, with regsvr32, but my app
>>>> can't
>>>> create the ActiveX control.
>>>> Any trick?
>>> Not sure if this will work with Codejock, but I prefer using COM
>>> components RegFree.  This allows you to use your COM objects like
>>> application local DLLs.  Works on XP or better which is all I
>>> use/support.
>>>
>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms973913.aspx
>>>
>> Could you elaborate a little more on this.  The link is rather complex
>> for users that only work with Xbase++ and not C++, etc..  If we have
>> an activeX control we currently utilize,  what is really needed to use
>> it like a normal application DLL.  I like this idea as I really hat
>> the need to register software on workstations like this.
>>
>> I have had the same problem with an activeX from x360software where I
>> had to do their install, instead of the regsvr32 command to get
>> Xbase++ to recognize their DLL.  A visual basic software package would
>> however recognize it.
> 
> The short answer is that Windows XP (SP2?) or better will allow an XML 
> file (per the specification at the MSDN link above) stored with the 
> executable to contain the activeX COM registration information that 
> would normally be stored in the registry by regsvr32.  The windows 
> provided COM object creator will pre-load the XML file so that any COM 
> objects that resolves via the XML do not require accessing the 
> registry.  Basically a application local vs machine global thing and 
> independent of the source language that created the application.
> 
> However, if your activeX controls (such as the x360software one) require 
> additional configuration work outside of the context of COM registration 
> as part of their installation then the reg-free COM will not work.  IMO, 
> a COM object should only require registration to work although it might 
> start with default settings.
> 
> Since all commonly used programming languages are very similar, I 
> recommend that you not limit yourself to knowing the Xbase++ niche 
> only.  It does not take much effort for a Xbase++ user to read and 
> understand VB examples even if the details are murky.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rodd Graham, Consultant
> Graham Automation Systems, LLC
> 
> 
I have reviewed visual basic a little, Turbo Pascal, etc.  Don't have 
much time to do more than this as fully occupied with our company's 
internal software development.

Thanks for the insights.  Will review in more detail.

Hello Clifford,

> I have reviewed visual basic a little, Turbo Pascal, etc.  Don't have
> much time to do more than this as fully occupied with our company's
> internal software development.
> 
> Thanks for the insights.  Will review in more detail.
> 

If your distribution is limited to internal use only, then reg-free COM is 
not worth persuing.  If it was me, I would package the controls into a silent 
MSI and push out using GPO's.  This is easier to do than reg-free, but you 
must have IT control of the systems to push GPO's.

Regards,

Rodd Graham, Consultant
Graham Automation Systems, LLC