Converted UWP... Nothing Happens - desktop-bridge

I have converted a Win32 Application to UWP using MakeAppX and it doesn't seem to run. When I click the icon in the start menu literally nothing happens except a busy icon briefly appears on the cursor.
I completed the same process with Notepad++ and all it's DLLs and that worked fine (using the exact same manifest file, just changing the exe)
My questions are:
Where does the UWP save files that it creates/temporary files etc? If I run an executable and it generates files next to it, where would that be when you run a UWP?
Can I set that location in the AppxManifest?
Is there anyway to see if it has run correctly or not?
Edit:
Could this be a file permissions issue? My application needs to write to 'C:\MyFolder' & creates a folder with a load of files next to the executable upon startup and that doesn't happen.
So looking into this a bit more I came across this blog which discusses preparing for conversion. I think the above file accesses probably contravene the following:
Your app writes to the install directory for your app. For example, your app writes to a log file that you put in the same directory as your exe. This isn't supported, so you'll need to find another location, like the local app data store.
This looks like a fairly halting issue, am I correct in that assumption?

If your app is writing to the install directory you will need to change that code to write to your local app data folder instead, as the preparation guide calls out.
Write operations to the install directory are not allowed in order to ensure the ability for the app deployment stack to perform seamless, differential updates and clean uninstalls of your app.
Btw, to debug through your app launch failures you can do the following in Visual Studio: Debug -> Other Debug Target -> Debug Installed App Package -> select your app from the list of installed apps.

Related

Shiny server on EC2: URL lists folder content instead of displaying app

[Sorry, newbie here!]
I've just installed R server, shiny server on an ubuntu EC2 instance. I have left the shiny-server.conf intact, except that I added: preserve_logs true;. The sample app was working fine.
I have removed /srv/shiny-server/index.html and /srv/shiny-server/sample-apps.
I have linked my app files from my /home/myapp directory to /srv/shiny-server/myapp. The app files consists of a single apps.R, a footer.html, and a small dataset .Rds, and a www/style.css file.
When I navigate to http://[myip]:3838/ the only thing is the directory listing; the only folder is : myapp. When I click to http://[myip]:3838/myapp/ , I see the directory listing as well. That is, I see the content, and I can download each of them. BUt I see no evidence of the app running. If I click on apps.R, my browser downloads the file.
PS: the app works fine when tested in Rstudio, or deployed on Shinyapps.io
If anyone from the future reads this, I wish you heard the loud headslap when I realized my app single-file should be called app.R, not apps.R (which makes a lot of sense in retrospect).

Visual Studio command-line build pauses with warning message box

Our automated build process is as follows:
The build script fetches the latest version of the repository into a clean directory
It runs the build using the following command line command
devenv SolutionFile.sln /rebuild "ServerDeployment|Any CPU" | out-file -FilePath $BuildOutputFile
I want this to run unattendend.
But then the build pauses to display a modal dialog:
An error occurred when applying the IIS Express settings to server URL 'http://localhost:60143/' for project 'CMS.Website'. You may have to manually edit the applicationHost.config file and make the changes for your site to run correctly.
I have to press OK for the build to continue. This is no longer a working unattended build.
I see that Visual Studio has automatically generated a file .vs\applicationhost.config in my build folder.
I compared this file with the file .vs\applicationhost.config in my development folder. I can see the version of the file in my development folder (which doesn't cause errors) has an extra site entry under the node: //configuration/system.applicationHost/sites
How can I make this message box go away? Obviously I don't care if this runs on IIS Express or not, because I'm performing a build to be deployed on a different server.
Possible solutions (that I don't particularly like) are:
Check the file .vs\applicationhost.config into the repository, so it gets checked out as part of the build rather than regenerated
Modify my build script so it copies the template file from C:\Program Files\IIS Express\config\templates\PersonalWebServer\applicationhost.config and then modifies this XML file to manually add the new site entry
Is there a better solution to my problem?
In my case, the debug settings were stored as part of the Web Application's .csproj file (which is part of the checked-in repository).
It should be stored as part of the .csproj.user file (which does not get checked in).
In my project settings I needed to make sure that 'Apply server settings to all users (store in project file)' was unchecked.
Once I unchecked this setting the automated build ran from start to finish without presenting a modal message box.

Running a compainion application at install

I have two WPF applications in the same solution. One is a configuration helper for the other and needs to be run before the 'big' app is run. In the VS Setup project I have included the Primary Output from both applications.
I want to run the configuration helper during the Commit phase of setup so I added a Custom Action consisting of the Primary Output of configuration helper and marked the Installer Class as false.
When I run the resulting msi, both applications are installed in the same folder as desired, but I then get an error that 'a program run as part of the setup did not finish as expected.' The msi then uninstalls.
I was hoping the configuration helper would be kicked off as the msi exits, but would also be happy with the installer hanging open until the configuration helper exits.
What am I missing?
The program you ran as a custom action has failed, probably crashed. It may need some extra error checking or tracing to see what's going on. Programs that run as custom actions are not in the same environment as running them from the interactive user's desktop. The working directory is probably not what you expect (so file paths must be specified in full) and it's probably running with the system account, because that's the way Everyone installs work, so any assumptions about user locations (including the interactive user's desktop, user folders, access to the network, access to databases, ability to show forms) will be wrong and are likely to be failure points. It's better to run configuration tools like this when the app first starts because you are now running in a normal user environment.

Using app_offline.htm to take an app offline while updating dll's fails while updating dll's

So I sometimes use app_offline.htm to take an app offline while I upload a new version.
However, while I am in the process of uploading larger dll's, I get the yellow error-screen saying the dll could not be loaded.
This seems to be out of sync with my expectations of what app_offline.htm does (stops the app entirely), and also provides the users with errors in stead of the nice app_offline.htm I put up.
Am I doing something wrong or is this behavior by design?
The app_offline.htm is shut-down the application, but not fully stop the compiler.
So, on the first dll that you have upload, the compiler see the different and start the compilation again... so then when you try for the next dll probably is used by the compilation and can not be delete/replaced.
There is also the possibility that even if you ask for shut-down the application still make process and use this dll.
What I do, I upload all files on the server in one other directory, I open the app_offline.htm, then I wait for all my pool to close (I have place message on the application end) and then I copy from the server all the update files fast. The different is that with the ftp the time to upload is bigger than the time the compiler trigger for recompile the global functions from dll.
To see that even with the app_offline.htm , the system is still make compiles, just use Process Explorer and see the compilations.
What is compile ? I think that compile the dlls except the pages.
The message is from compiler that try to compile the program, from the first dll that you have upload the compiler is triggered and start the new compilation, now you uploading the next one, and while is trying to make the compile, the dll is locked by ftp.

How do you deploy your ASP.NET applications to live servers?

I am looking for different techniques/tools you use to deploy an ASP.NET web application project (NOT ASP.NET web site) to production?
I am particularly interested of the workflow happening between the time your Continuous Integration Build server drops the binaries at some location and the time the first user request hits these binaries.
Are you using some specific tools or just XCOPY? How is the application packaged (ZIP, MSI, ...)?
When an application is deployed for the first time how do you setup the App Pool and Virtual Directory (do you create them manually or with some tool)?
When a static resource changes (CSS, JS or image file) do you redeploy the whole application or only the modified resource? How about when an assembly/ASPX page changes?
Do you keep track of all deployed versions for a given application and in case something goes wrong do you have procedures of restoring the application to a previous known working state?
Feel free to complete the previous list.
And here's what we use to deploy our ASP.NET applications:
We add a Web Deployment Project to the solution and set it up to build the ASP.NET web application
We add a Setup Project (NOT Web Setup Project) to the solution and set it to take the output of the Web Deployment Project
We add a custom install action and in the OnInstall event we run a custom build .NET assembly that creates an App Pool and a Virtual Directory in IIS using System.DirectoryServices.DirectoryEntry (This task is performed only the first time an application is deployed). We support multiple Web Sites in IIS, Authentication for Virtual Directories and setting identities for App Pools.
We add a custom task in TFS to build the Setup Project (TFS does not support Setup Projects so we had to use devenv.exe to build the MSI)
The MSI is installed on the live server (if there's a previous version of the MSI it is first uninstalled)
We have all of our code deployed in MSIs using Setup Factory. If something has to change we redeploy the entire solution. This sounds like overkill for a css file, but it absolutely keeps all environments in sync, and we know exactly what is in production (we deploy to all test and uat environments the same way).
We do rolling deployment to the live servers, so we don't use installer projects; we have something more like CI:
"live" build-server builds from the approved source (not the "HEAD" of the repo)
(after it has taken a backup ;-p)
robocopy publishes to a staging server ("live", but not in the F5 cluster)
final validation done on the staging server, often with "hosts" hacks to emulate the entire thing as closely as possible
robocopy /L is used automatically to distribute a list of the changes in the next "push", to alert of any goofs
as part of a scheduled process, the cluster is cycled, deploying to the nodes in the cluster via robocopy (while they are out of the cluster)
robocopy automatically ensures that only changes are deployed.
Re the App Pool etc; I would love this to be automated (see this question), but at the moment it is manual. I really want to change that, though.
(it probably helps that we have our own data-centre and server-farm "on-site", so we don't have to cross many hurdles)
Website
Deployer:
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/install/deployer.aspx
I publish website to a local folder, zip it, then upload it over FTP. Deployer on server then extracts zip, replaces config values (in Web.Config and other files), and that's it.
Of course for first run you need to connect to the server and setup IIS WebSite, database, but after that publishing updates is piece of cake.
Database
For keeping databases in sync I use http://www.red-gate.com/products/sql-development/sql-compare/
If server is behind bunch of routers and you can't directly connect (which is requirement of SQL Compare), use https://secure.logmein.com/products/hamachi2/ to create VPN.
I deploy mostly ASP.NET apps to Linux servers and redeploy everything for even the smallest change. Here is my standard workflow:
I use a source code repository (like Subversion)
On the server, I have a bash script that does the following:
Checks out the latest code
Does a build (creates the DLLs)
Filters the files down to the essentials (removes code files for example)
Backs up the database
Deploys the files to the web server in a directory named with the current date
Updates the database if a new schema is included in the deployment
Makes the new installation the default one so it will be served with the next hit
Checkout is done with the command-line version of Subversion and building is done with xbuild (msbuild work-alike from the Mono project). Most of the magic is done in ReleaseIt.
On my dev server I essentially have continuous integration but on the production side I actually SSH into the server and initiate the deployment manually by running the script. My script is cleverly called 'deploy' so that is what I type at the bash prompt. I am very creative. Not.
In production, I have to type 'deploy' twice: once to check-out, build, and deploy to a dated directory and once to make that directory the default instance. Since the directories are dated, I can revert to any previous deployment simply by typing 'deploy' from within the relevant directory.
Initial deployment takes a couple of minutes and reversion to a prior version takes a few seconds.
It has been a nice solution for me and relies only on the three command-line utilities (svn, xbuild, and releaseit), the DB client, SSH, and Bash.
I really need to update the copy of ReleaseIt on CodePlex sometime:
http://releaseit.codeplex.com/
Simple XCopy for ASP.NET. Zip it up, sftp to the server, extract into the right location. For the first deployment, manual set up of IIS
Answering your questions:
XCopy
Manually
For static resources, we only deploy the changed resource.
For DLL's we deploy the changed DLL and ASPX pages.
Yes, and yes.
Keeping it nice and simple has saved us alot of headaches so far.
Are you using some specific tools or just XCOPY? How is the application packaged (ZIP, MSI, ...)?
As a developer for BuildMaster, this is naturally what I use. All applications are built and packaged within the tool as artifacts, which are stored internally as ZIP files.
When an application is deployed for the first time how do you setup the App Pool and Virtual Directory (do you create them manually or with some tool)?
Manually - we create a change control within the tool that reminds us the exact steps to perform in future environments as the application moves through its testing environments. This could also be automated with a simple PowerShell script, but we do not add new applications very often so it's just as easy to spend the 1 minute it takes to create the site manually.
When a static resource changes (CSS, JS or image file) do you redeploy the whole application or only the modified resource? How about when an assembly/ASPX page changes?
By default, the process of deploying artifacts is set-up such that only files that are modified are transferred to the target server - this includes everything from CSS files, JavaScript files, ASPX pages, and linked assemblies.
Do you keep track of all deployed versions for a given application and in case something goes wrong do you have procedures of restoring the application to a previous known working state?
Yes, BuildMaster handles all of this for us. Restoring is mostly as simple as re-executing an old build promotion, but sometimes database changes need to be manually restored, and data loss can occur. The basic rollback process is detailed here: http://inedo.com/support/tutorials/performing-a-deployment-rollback-with-buildmaster
web setup/install projects - so you can easily uninstall it if something goes wrong
Unfold is a capistrano-like deployment solution I wrote for .net applications. It is what we use on all of our projects and it's a very flexible solution. It solves most of the typical problems for .net applications as explained in this blog post by Rob Conery.
it comes with a good "default" behavior, in the sense that it does a lot of standard stuff for you: getting the code from source control, building, creating the application pool, setting up IIS, etc
releases based on what's in source control
it has task hooks, so the default behaviour can be easily extended or altered
it has rollback
it's all powershell, so there aren't any external dependencies
it uses powershell remoting to access remote machines
Here's an introduction and some other blog posts.
So to answer the questions above:
How is the application packaged (ZIP, MSI, ...)?
Git (or another scm) is the default way to get the application on the target machine. Alternatively you can perform a local build and copy the result over the Powereshell remoting connection
When an application is deployed for the first time how do you setup the App Pool and Virtual Directory (do you create them manually or with some tool)?
Unfold configures the application pool and website application using Powershell's WebAdministration Module. It allows us (and you) to modify any aspect of the application pool or website
When a static resource changes (CSS, JS or image file) do you redeploy the whole application or only the modified resource? How about when an assembly/ASPX page changes?
Yes unfold does this, any deploy is installed next to the others. That way we can easily rollback
when somehting goes wrong. It also allows us to easily trace back a deployed version to
a source control revision.
Do you keep track of all deployed versions for a given application?
Yes, unfold keeps old versions around. Not all versions, but a number of versions. It makes rolling back almost trivial.
We've been improving our release process for the past year and now we've got it down pat. I'm using Jenkins to manage all of our automated builds and releases, but I'm sure you could use TeamCity or CruiseControl.
So upon checkin, our "normal" build does the following:
Jenkins does a SVN update to fetch the latest version of the code
A NuGet package restore is done running against our own local NuGet repository
The application is compiled using MsBuild. Setting this up is an adventure, because you need to install the correct MsBuild and then the ASP.NET and MVC dll's on your build box. (As a side note, when I had <MvcBuildViews>true</MvcBuildViews> entered in my .csproj files to compile the views, msbuild was randomly crashing, so I had to disable it)
Once the code is compiled the unit tests are run (I'm using nunit for this, but you can use anything you want)
If all the unit tests pass, I stop the IIS app pool, deploy the app locally (just a few basic XCOPY commands to copy over the necessary files) and then restart IIS (I've had problems with IIS locking files, and this solved it)
I have separate web.config files for each environment; dev, uat, prod. (I tried using the web transformation stuff with little success). So the right web.config file is also copied across
I then use PhantomJS to execute a bunch of UI tests. It also takes a bunch of screenshots at different resolutions (mobile, desktop) and stamps each screenshot with some information (page title, resolution). Jenkins has great support for handling these screenshots and they are saved as part of the build
Once the integration UI tests pass the build is successful
If someone clicks "Deploy to UAT":
If the last build was successful, Jenkins does another SVN update
The application is compiled using a RELEASE configuration
A "www" directory is created and the application is copied into it
I then use winscp to synchronise the filesystem between the build box and UAT
I send a HTTP request to the UAT server and make sure I get back a 200
This revision is tagged in SVN as UAT-datetime
If we've got this far, build is successful!
When we click "Deploy to Prod":
The user selects a UAT Tag that was previously created
The tag is "switched" to
Code is compiled and synced with Prod server
Http request to Prod server
This revision is tagged in SVN as Prod-datetime
The release is zipped and stored
All up a full build to production takes about 30 secs which I'm very, very happy with.
Upsides to this solution:
It's fast
Unit tests should catch logic errors
When a UI bug gets into production, the screenshots will hopefully show what revision # caused the it
UAT and Prod are kept in sync
Jenkins shows you a great release history to UAT and Prod with all of the commit messages
UAT and Prod releases are all tagged automatically
You can see when releases happen and who did them
The main downsides to this solution are:
Whenever you do a release to Prod you need to do a release to UAT. This was a conscious decision we made because we wanted to always ensure that UAT is always up to date with Prod. Still, it's a pain.
There's quite a few configuration files floating around. I've attempted to have it all in Jenkins, but there's a few support batch files needed as part of the process. (These are also checked in).
DB upgrade and downgrade scripts are part of the app and run at app startup. It works (mostly), but it's a pain.
I'd love to hear any other possible improvements!
Back in 2009, where this answer hails from, we used CruiseControl.net for our Continuous Integration builds, which also outputted Release Media.
From there we used Smart Sync software to compare against a production server that was out of the load balanced pool, and moved the changes up.
Finally, after validating the release, we ran a DOS script that primarily used RoboCopy to sync the code over to the live servers, stopping/starting IIS as it went.
At the last company I worked for we used to deploy using an rSync batch file to upload only the changes since the last upload. The beauty of rSync is that you can add exclude lists to exclude specific files or filename patterns. So excluding all of our .cs files, solution and project files is really easy, for instance.
We were using TortoiseSVN for version control, and so it was nice to be able to write in several SVN commands to accomplish the following:
First off, check the user has the latest revision. If not, either prompt them to update or run the update right there and then.
Download a text file from the server called "synclog.txt" that details who the SVN user is, what revision number they are uploading and the date and time of the upload. Append a new line for the current upload and then send it back to the server along with the changed files. This makes it extremely easy to find out what version of the site to roll back to on the off chance that an upload causes problems.
In addition to this there is a second batch file that just checks for file differences on the live server. This can highlight the common problem where someone would upload but not commit their changes to SVN. Combined with the sync log mentioned above we could find out who the likely culprit was and ask them to commit their work.
And lastly, rSync allows you to take a backup of the files that were replaced during the upload. We had it move them into a backup folder So if you suddenly realised that some of the files should not have been overwritten, you can find the last backup up version of every file in that folder.
While the solution felt a little clunky at the time I have since come to appreciate it a whole lot more when working in environments where the upload method is a lot less elegant or easy (remote desktop, copy and paste the entire site, for instance).
I'd recommend NOT just overwriting existing application files but instead create a directory per version and repointing the IIS application to the new path.
This has several benefits:
Quick to revert if needed
No need to stop IIS or the app pool to avoid locking issues
No risk of old files causing problems
More or less zero downtime (usually just a pause at the new appdomain initialises)
The only issue we've had is resources being cached if you don't restart the app pool and rely on the automatic appdomain switch.

Resources