Is a server which returns 2.0.50727.4200 for System.Environment.Version going to support ASP.NET 3.5?
The webhost claims I should ignore the details in the control panel but I get 2.0.50727.4200 when checking the aforementioned system variable.
This article should make things clearer: http://www.west-wind.com/Weblog/posts/289139.aspx
In short, just because it says it's version 2.0, doesn't mean it isn't actually running 3.5. v3.0 and v3.5 are essentially updates to v2.0
The CLR for 3.5 is still 2.0, so no, you're not being screwed, it will be fine.
.NET 4.0 will have a 4.0 CLR, so when you're promised .NET 4.0, you can look for a number higher than 2.0.
The runtime for ASP.NET 3.5 is still 2.0
It will be upgraded to 4.0 when .NET 4 is released.
Don't ask my why that is, but ASP.NET MVC will work.
asp.net is version 2....
the MVC stuff in 3.+ just extends the base of v2....so that is an expected result. as the core of asp.net is still at 2.*... you will be able to run mvc
Related
There there is various information around, for example from Microsoft about the new features of ASP.NET 4.5.
http://www.asp.net/aspnet/overview/aspnet-and-visual-studio-2012/whats-new
However, they do not talk about .NET versions, only of ASP.NET Versions.
Is .NET 4.5 required (on the server) for ASP.NET 4.5? (or is 4.0 sufficient?)
Yes, you must install .NET 4.5 on the server if you want to run ASP.NET 4.5 applications. ASP.NET and .NET come bundled - you cannot have one without the other.
Some of features needs it.But you dont have to install if you are an end user
detailed information : http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms171868(v=vs.110).aspx
We have 1 prod and 1 dev server, both running .NET 3.5. I'm trying to build an ASP.NET MVC 4 application, but it requires at least .NET 4.0.
I can't just buy another IIS server and we can't upgrade our existing ones because there are other much larger applications that run on .NET 3.5.
What are my options?
If you cannot upgrade to .NET framework 4.0 then and are tied to .NET framework 3.5 then you will have to downgrade your application to MVC 2.0. Which ought not to be difficult UNLESS your using LOTS of NEW features which are only in MVC 4.0 and not in MVC 2.0 Also having said that, you may even be able to create workarounds to some of them if not all of them.
You can run Asp.Net 2.0 and Asp.Net 4.0 side by side. Find more information here
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/a99txfy5(v=vs.100).aspx
There was a time that I thought the current non-beta ASP.NET claimed the version number of the current .NET CLR (2.0), even though the .NET Framework was version 3.5. Whenever I saw "ASP.NET 3.5", I felt that whomever had written it was incorrect.
However, I'm starting to feel that I'm incorrect. Has the official ASP.NET version number changed from 2.0 to 3.5 (during the time that the .NET Framework version has been 3.5), or has it always officially been "ASP.NET 3.5" (and I've been an idiot)?
In terms of the CLR, there is only 2.0; in terms of the libraries, there are definite changes in ASP.NET in the .net Framework versions 2.0, 3.0, 3.5 and 3.5 SP1 (see MSDN, for example).
Since there are feature changes, I would call it "ASP.NET 3.5".
However, to make things worse, the drop-down box in IIS where you can select either "1.1..." or "2.0...." is called "ASP.NET version". Of course, IIS is referring to the CLR version here.
I've been unable to find an "official" statement on this (I haven't looked hard, though). Microsoft seems to avoid this problem. In the above MSDN link, they write about "ASP.NET Enhancements in .net Framework 3.5 SP1".
So, strictly speaking, I guess ASP.NET does not have a version number, just like WinForms does not have a version number or System.String does not have a version number. "ASP.NET 3.5" is just an informal abbreviation for the ASP.NET part of the .net Framework 3.5 libraries.
Yes, ASP.NET 2.0 and ASP.NET 3.5 are different. 3.5 is the most current non-beta release. Both 2.0 and 3.5 use the 2.0 runtime environment.
Has anybody tried Mono rails from Caste project . Unfortunately the client wants to develop in .nET v2.0 and not 3.5 , and I was looking for some MVC framework in .NET 2.0 .
Lots of people have successfully used MonoRail for several years. It's a great framework, and if you later want to migrate to ASP.NET MVC it's no big deal.
Unfortunately you'll have to use RC3 (which is over 2 years old now) to get .NET 2.0 support, as the latest trunk versions only support .NET 3.5.
If you really want to go with ASP.NET MVC you might want to try this hack to make it work on .NET 2.0.
Try ASP.NET MVC over ASP.NET 2.0.
I am currently aware that ASP.NET 2.0 is out and about and that there are 3.x versions of the .Net Framework.
Is it possible to upgrade my ASP.NET web server to version 3.x of the .Net Framework?
I have tried this, however, when selecting which version of the .Net framwork to use in IIS (the ASP.NET Tab), only version 1.1 and 2.0 show.
Is there a work around?
if I install 3.5 and have IIS setup to use 2.0. I will be able to use 3.5 features?
Yes, that is correct. You have IIS set to 2.0 for both 2.0 and 3.5 sites, as they both run on the same CLR. 3.5 uses a different compile method than 2.0. This is declared in the web.config for the site. See this post for more details on this. But the setup in IIS for both 3.5 and 2.0 ASP.net sites is identical.
Unfortunately, the statement .NET versions can be installed side-by-side, so it won't disrupt any "legacy" apps isn't entirely true. If you install 3.5, it requires 2.0 SP1, which can disrupt legacy applications that uses 2.0 and connects to Oracle database servers.
Sure, download the 3.5 redistributable, install it on the servre, and you're good to go. .NET versions can be installed side-by-side, so it won't disrupt any "legacy" apps.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=333325FD-AE52-4E35-B531-508D977D32A6&displaylang=en
GateKiller,
.NET 3.0 and .NET 3.5 did not change the version of the CLR, so "using ASP.NET 3.5" is a more complicated thing that it sounds like it should be at first. In essence, you're still running on the 2.0 CLR, but you're using the C# 3.0 compiler and linking against the 3.5 libraries. It means adding a bunch of stuff to your Web.config file to become an ASP.NET 3.5 project.
Scott Hanselman has an awesome blog post covering the details:
http://www.hanselman.com/blog/HowToSetAnIISApplicationOrAppPoolToUseASPNET35RatherThan20.aspx
The version you are selecting in IIS is the version of the CLR to use. There are only two versions of the CLR. The .NET Framework 3.5 runs on CLR 2.0
The new framework is .Net 3.5, you'll have a new assembly System.Core, + a few more if you use features like Linq
.Net 3.5 comes with the new C#3.0 compiler
ASP.Net is still version 2.0
Lovely and confusing isn't it ;-)
You should upgrade the .Net framework on the server to .Net 3.5 SP1, but you're still going to be running ASP.Net 2.0