I'm trying to run a test version of a web using the File System (i.e. the "Cassini" web server built-in to Visual Studio 2005) rather than (IIS 5.1 on my Win XP dev PC). This web is a hodge-podge of classic ASP files written years ago and some new development in ASP.NET (VB.NET).
How can I get past this error message as it tries to go to /TestWeb/default.asp? -
Server Error in '/TestWeb' Application.
This type of page is not served.
Description: The type of page you have requested is not served because it has been explicitly forbidden. The extension '.asp' may be incorrect. Please review the URL below and make sure that it is spelled correctly.
Requested URL: /TestWeb/default.asp
Version Information: Microsoft .NET Framework Version:2.0.50727.3603; ASP.NET Version:2.0.50727.3082
Things I have checked and previously encountered trying to get this mess working:
C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\CONFIG\web.config
(has nothing for *.asp nor
HttpForbiddenHandler so nothing to
comment out).
C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\CONFIG\machine.config
(has nothing for *.asp)
C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.4322\CONFIG\machine.config
(had a HTTPForbiddenHandler for
*.asp but I commented it out as per other postings advice; seemed to
have no effect for me though).
To get past an earlier error
("Request for the permission of type
'System.Web.AspNetHostingPermission'
failed"), I had to go to
"Administrative Tools > MS .Net
Framework 2.0 Configuration > My
Computer> Runtime Security Policy >
change Local Intranet to Full Trust.
To get past an earlier error ("the
network bios command limit has been
reached") I had to "enable a hot
fix" by adding the following DWORD
value at the following registry key:
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\ASP.NET\FCNMode
and set the value to 1 (per MS KB
Article 911272).
This whole web has been placed on a file server in our LAN and from my desktop VStudio2005 views it via the mapped drive letter (e.g. V:\SVNwork\myFolder\TestWeb)
Visual Studio 2005 models this as a "web site" (not a "web application project").
The remainder of this post describes some background about why I am trying this:
We tend to recreate the web site on our dev PC's which run IIS 5.1 on Win XP. Movement of new stuff into production can be awkward using WinDiff and copying files as needed.
I'm trying to implement source control over this work. I've had a heck of a time trying to configure Visual SourceSafe 2005 and local IIS to work together smoothly (interestingly, I had pretty good luck putting "web application projects" under VSS2005 so I think it's related to the awkwardness of the ASP.NET 2.0 "site" model and VSS).
Anyway, I've moved a development version of this classic ASP and ASP.NET to a common file server in our LAN. Before placing this under Subversion control as a working copy of it's equivalent imported into a repository, I just want to make sure it can work with the Cassini web server. That's where I am stuck. The ultimate goal is have this under SVN and view differences with TortoiseSVN.
Thanks for reading this far...hopefully someone can get me past this error and then I can move forward with the SVN and TortoiseSVN work.
Cassini doesn't, as far as I can tell, support classic ASP. An alternative would be to run a local install of Apache (since you can't/won't use IIS) which will host ASP, but is probably asking for trouble.
See also: http://blogs.msdn.com/mikhailarkhipov/archive/2005/06/24/432308.aspx
You could also run local IIS, which will, of course, host both ASP.NET and classic ASP. Visual Studio can easily be configured to debug with a local IIS install.
Points for moving to subversion: we use the Microsoft stack (Visual Studio, ASP.NET, SQL Server) with subversion and it works very well.
Subversion comment
GRRR.. bosses are fun. The svn model is known as copy/modify/merge. The repository lives in a central location - probably your file server. Using the svn client - or a Visual Studio plugin like the excellent AnkhSVN - each developer gets a LOCAL working copy,makes their changes and performs a "commit" when they're done working on a file.
SVN takes care of making sure that developers don't overwrite each others changes, provides a facility for merging changes when someone has modified a file between when you got your last copy and when you commit your changes, etc.
The whole point of a working copy is that it isolates developers from each other. The merge/commit step takes care of intergrating everyones changes. Having a central working copy that everyone works from defeats the purpose.
This is a very different approach than that used by Visual SourceSafe, which is basically a file locking mechanism. The fact that SVN is a real client-server application (where VSS is simply a disk-based "database" with no server app to administer it) provides all sorts of capabilities. We check out, modify, commit, then publish from svn to a dev server.
Also, if I remember correctly, Cassini won't server apps from a mapped drive.
Related
It seems like the View in Browser option doesn't really require IIS and it seems to process ASP pages fine. So how does it really work without a web server?
They used to have a developer web server (Cassini) which is dead long time back so is there some kind of built in capability in visual studio? Who processes the requests by asp pages if it doesn't require IIS?
I already have IIS installed so I am not sure if is servicing the pages but seems like it will work without IIS because I don't configure anything in IIS and new ASP.NET projects work out of the box as well View in Browser option for an asp page option which just directly executes that page.
Actually this is what occurs:
Your web web.config is copied.
Then VS spools up a WHOLE running copy of IIS (it is the express version - but it is the same for the most part as the full edition of II).
Once VS spools up and starts and configures that running copy of IIS?
Then your web page and web application can run. If you look at your system try, you see this:
So in above that 2nd from the left in the tray shows that blue thing icon. I have right clicked on it to show the options you see.
So now you have a running copy of IIS on your computer. So you ARE running a full web server here. (well, ok IIS express - but the base parts and what that means is much the same as the full edition).
Around about VS version 2010, they USED to have a smaller built in web server as part of VS. The problem of course was for Microsoft to maintain 100% compatibility was VERY hard. So while for a considerable time frame and history of VS? Yes, they had a built in web server as part of VS. But they dropped it a number of versions ago in VS, and as noted now use IIS express.
So Now? Well, when you install VS, they also install a working copy of IIS. (the express version). The express version is quite much the same as the full pop edition of IIS. What is removed is "most" if not "all" of the IIS management screens and setup. (and sometimes I wish they would just install that part too!).
Your experience thus that a copy of IIS is launched. Once launched IIS does keep running during your development process (depends on your VS config and setup). But, if you go file->close solution, then you find that IIS express then also shuts down.
So, to view that web page? Yes, VS does config, and then does spool up and start internet services and that web server. So this running of IIS on your computer is what allows those web pages to work and run correctly. As noted, while this is a copy of IIS, it is for the most part the same as the full edition - just with most of the management tools removed. As noted, you SHOULD see that new icon appear in the system tray.
And as noted, I believe around VS 2010, they made that switch from the VS built in IIS to that of now using IIS express edition. As noted, this change was made to ensure a greater probability that when coding and debugging your web site in VS, that the end result will be much the same when running a full edition.
I do find that over time, the production (web hosted site) does get so many config and tweaks and changes, that I now can't include my web.config file in the publish (can't risk overwriting the server production web.config). So, over time, we added things like https security certificates and installed them, and set them up for the production web site. I don't have those same security certificates setup on my local machine. And of course there are some virtual folders and few more things that exist on the production web site as opposed to the dev copy I use. So, it somewhat my fault to let the production web.config over time to become "different" then what I run local when coding and debugging the web site. So now, when I publish - I remove the web.config file before I actually copy the new updated web application to the final production server (which of course is running the full edition of IIS).
But to make a long story short?
Yes, a whole copy of IIS web server is configured for you, and that whole copy of IIS is spooled up, launched, and once that occurs, then your web page option "view in browser" can run. But make no mistake here - IIS services is setup, is started, and is running for that web page preview to occur.
I am having a problem setting up a website hosted on Windows Server 2012. The website is just the default website you get when setting up a new "ASP.NET Web Site (Razor v2)" site. Then I simply published it using the "Publish Web Site" option in VS2012. I have also added the .cshtml extension in the MIME types. The server is running IIS v8 and .NET v4. The problem is when I visit the website this is how it displays:
http://i806.photobucket.com/albums/yy341/SamuelCB/Razor%20Error/Untitled.png
Is there anything I am missing?
Items to check:
rarely do MIME Types actually matter if IIS and ASP.Net are installed properly
don't mis-interpret this statement, I'm not saying MIME types don't matter, just that if/when configured properly all of this, IIS/ASP.Net is "out of the box" without mucking with MIME types.
The issue with adding ".cshtml" manually is that IIS will (now) serve it, but the ASP.Net engine isn't (necessarily "there" for) handling it (e.g. integrated mode). That's why you're seeing the "unparsed" (raw) version of the file...code and all...it's all IIS (no ASP.net engine is configured to handle it).
if you run your own box, run Web Platform Installer - and it should give you insight on what's installed vs. what's not. Pay attention to ASP.Net bits and versions. You may need to (re)register ASP.Net
if you're hosted, just because your host has .Net Framework 4.x installed, doesn't mean they have all the bits and pieces of ASP.Net installed as well. Ask your host for guidance instead of doing a guessing game. I often have to "load" things that my dev machine has "by default" (of course its my machine) because I end up with non-functioning stuff when deployed to my host. You're not even getting an ASP.Net engine error, so that's a sure sign ASP.Net needs some work.
Nuget is excellent for this task. Some items that might be necessary to be "bin deployed" (aka. you have to add them to your deployment/upload to /bin directory on your host):
Microsoft ASP.NET Razor
Microsoft ASP.NET Web Pages
Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure
Unrelated: This sounds more like it should go to ServerFault rather than here on SO...I don't mind...but the community may think differently...and you might even get better answers....
Hth...
I have a .net program using Ektron APIs to get folder list and its details. It was working before on my development machine. Now it doesn't work any more. I notice, we have upgraded to Ektron 8.xx from 7.xx.
When I ran the same codes but it gave me this error:
Failed to map the path '/WorkArea/'.
I had no idea why. I'm running this test program on visual studio 2010.
Any suggestion is greatly appreciated.
I had the exact same problem (Ektron version 8.6.1) trying to run a 3-Tier minsite on my local machine (for dev), talking to a (staging) Application Tier.
First I followed the instructions for setting up a Presentation Tier
One thing that is not mentioned in these instructions is the requirement that your Presentation Tier site's virtual path match that of the appSettings > ek_sitePath value in the Application Tier's web.config. By default, this value is /.
By default, when you open/create a Web Site Project and use the built-in VS server for development, the site's path looks like http://localhost:wxyz/SiteName.
So you have 2 options:
Change the web.config on Application Tier so appSettings > ek_sitePath is the same as /SiteName (probably not the best option, since any new site development will require changing this again, and it could break production sites)
Change the virtual path of your Presentation Tier site to /, which is easy to do as outlined in this ScottGu blog post (talks about VS 2005, I use 2010 and it was the same process)
I took the latter approach, and everything is working smoothly now!
On my Windows XP desktop, I have a fairly simple ASP.NET targetting .net 4 in Visual Studio 2010. I can run it on my local host by ctrl + F5, it works all fine.
I have a Windows Server 2003, that I can access via mstsc, but also via Explorer. When I go to the publish section of my build properties, i see 4 publish methods :
Web Deploy, FTP, File System, FPSE
I have already installed IIS 6 successfully on the Windows Server, and given all authorizations for everything I could so far (to get things to work in the first place, will check on that later).
How should I proceed to publish to that remote machine ? Should I target a specific folder ? Do I need to setup things in IIS 6 for that site first ? Or will it all get settled from te properties I have in Visual Studio ?
Thank you guys,
J.
Personally I've always plumped for a manual deployment; that is I create the Web Site in IIS creating an appropriate AppPool and targeting the correct .NET version to utilise. From there simply copy (xcopy if you will) the appropriate files over, e.g. DLL and all supporting pages such as ASPX, CSS and associated images. In most situations where I have direct / RDP access this is what I run with.
That said, this can be automated from Visual Studio and this can be useful for those situations where you're maintaining an awful lot of sites on a regular basis. With IIS 6 and Visual Studio, this was achieved by installing FrontPage Extensions on the server then utilising the Publish option.
For VS2010 it seems this has been streamlined using the IIS Web Deploy module and configuring the Studio to publish in this manner that looks mildly quick...
HTH
I've never used the Web Deploy feature in 2010, so I can't really tell you about its merits or drawbacks. I've read that it works much better with IIS7 than IIS6. If you have direct access to the IIS root folder on the server (typically c:\inetpub\wwwroot) through a network share I would recommend doing the file system deployment. FPSE works as well if you have to publish to the server through a remote URL, but there are some security issues with FPSE that make enabling it on your web server a less than ideal choice.
Once the files have been deployed, all that should be left is to configure the website as an application inside of IIS.
Remote in to the web server and open IIS
Right-click Default Web Site and choose properties (if you've deployed to a subfolder in the root, then locate that folder and choose those properties instead
Switch to the Home Directory tab (Just 'Directory' for a subfolder)
Look for the Application Settings section and click the button that says Create
Optional: Select an app pool if you have created a custom one from the default
That should enable IIS to execute your .aspx files inside of your application. Once you've successfully configured the app for the first time, you can just keep publishing your app to the same location over and over without having to reconfigure it.
I'm using Visual Studio 2005 on a Windows XP SP3 machine and recently have come accross a some what strange issue.
I have a C# and ASP.NET project that runs fine when on the team test server and using IIS locally on my own machine. However, running it using the in-built Visual Studio ASP.NET Development server it doesn't seem to serve all the images/scripts/css files all of the time. When I load a page one time images A, B and C will be missing and I may get a system (sub-package) error however loading it again all those images will be there and the sub-package will work but a CSS, a script or any other image file may be missing.
The Windows event application log seems to show occasionally the missing files will be logged but this isn't consistent either.
It happens to me all the time; I think the reason is that the ASP.NET Develoment server is not a very good HTTP server, and when receiveing too many requests, it drops some ones.
Since it is also very very slow, I configured vs2008 (you can do that with vs2005, of course) to use ASP.NET for debugging; it works far better that way.
To do that:
Project -> properties -> Web (last tab) -> Server. There are three alternatives: Use Visual Studio Development Server; Use local Web IIS; Use custom Web server. Choose the second. (not sure about the exact english names: I have the Italian version of VS).
Check the page in Firefox/Firebug or with IE8 and see if the paths to the files/scripts/images is correct or not. A common problem when switching between the local dev webserver and IIS hosted pages is that the paths may not resolve the same. You can fix this sometimes by using the "~" character before a path in the asp code.