Can someone please confirm or deny my assumption below and/or offer any alternatives?
My Goal
I'd like to be able to precompile and merge my ASP.NET MVC 4 application (as documented here and here) when one-click publishing to our production environment.
The Symptom
I've got an ASP.NET MVC 4 project in Visual Studio 2012. My Web.config contains various entries that are removed in the Web.Release.config transformation. One of the removed entries is the entire configSections element because we maintain those entries in the production server's Machine.config.
However, when I configure my project to precompile and merge for release publication, I get the following error:
Unrecognized configuration section [our custom section name]
My Assumption
What I assume is happening is that it is precompiling everything locally before publishing to the production server (which makes perfect sense) but that part of that precompilation process is to resolve and validate the entire .config chain, from the project's Web.config up to my local Machine.config (which doesn't make much sense, practically). And since my local Machine.config does not declare configSections (or any of the other settings we rely on the production server's Machine.config for), the resolved Web.config doesn't validate.
And since the Web.config doesn't validate, the site can't be precompiled and so nothing is ever published to production.
The Rub
If that is indeed what's happening, then we won't be able to precompile, because the only solution I can think of (other than some potential configuration option I haven't been able to find) would be for all of our developers to have local copies of our production server's Machine.config on their machines. And that simply isn't reasonable because it defeats the whole purpose of having those common settings declared in a single location.
Related
I work on an ASP.NET web project which was migrated from target framework 3.5 to 4.5. After migration to 4.5 there is an issue with the redirecting of HTTP requests. A redirect from a called web page which is located in a subfolder causes a duplication of the root folder and subfolder in the called URL (but: no duplication with same code in 3.5). The affected subfolder is not registered as separate web application.
Hosted files are:
/WebAppRoot/SubfolderInWebApp/Page1.aspx
/WebAppRoot/SubfolderInWebApp/Page1.aspx.cs
/WebAppRoot/SubfolderInWebApp/Page2.aspx
/WebAppRoot/SubfolderInWebApp/Page2.aspx.cs
Page1 should redirect to Page2 using tilde (~) to address the root-relative path. Redirect call within /WebAppRoot/SubfolderInWebApp/Page2.aspx.cs is:
Response.Redirect("~/SubfolderInWebApp/Page2.aspx", false);
On my local machine using Microsoft Visual Studio and IIS Express the redirect points to
/SubfolderInWebApp/SubfolderInWebApp/Page2.aspx
On the test environment running IIS which hosts the app in WebAppRoot the redirect points to
/WebAppRoot/SubfolderInWebApp/WebAppRoot/SubfolderInWebApp/Page2.aspx
If I change the redirect call to
Response.Redirect("/Page2.aspx", false)
it works. But this is not really satisfying, knowing that it worked with the tilde before migration and keeping in mind that there are several other places in the application which work with the tilde (but not used in a redirect).
Here some details about my used setup:
local machine for development: Microsoft Visual Studio Professional 2017 15.9.49 (running IIS Express on local machine)
test environment: IIS 8.5.9600.16384
both setups use the
application pool ".NET v4.5 Classic" with .NET CLR version v4.0.30319 in classic pipeline mode
I wasn't able to identify possible reasons for this behaviour yet. As far as I understand the behaviour before the migration is the expected one. But I am not very experienced with ASP.NET, so maybe I misinterpret some information or I did not use the correct keywords in my search to find a solution. Also I did not identify issues in this list of breaking changes which could be the reason for the current behaviour. But maybe I am not aware of the impact of some statements in this list.
Any idea what might be wrong in my project? Is there an obvious configuration I miss? Is my expectation of the behaviour wrong? Thanks in advance for your help.
I solved it with help of Leo's answer here. The relevant control was firing an asynchronous postback which caused the described behaviour above.
When migration to 4.5 the HTTP module ScriptModule was removed from the web.config. Integrating this module again did not work for me and I wasn't aware of this. After defining the relevant control as PostBackTrigger by using the Triggers element within the UpdatePanel, it worked again:
<asp:UpdatePanel>
...
<Triggers>
<asp:PostBackTrigger ControlID="ControlWithSyncPostback" />
</Triggers>
</asp:UpdatePanel>
After this change everything works as expected again and there is no need to keep the ScriptModule declaration in the web.config (at least in my case).
I moved a web application I am working on from one machine to another. It is built using .Net MVC and Entity Framework but when I execute the Update-Database command so that the database is updated, I get this error:
Could not find any resources appropriate for the specified culture or the neutral culture. Make sure "NameofMigration.resources" was correctly embedded or linked into assembly "NameofProject" at compile time, or that all the satellite assemblies required are loadable and fully signed.
Does anyone know how to fix this error?
I had a similar issue when the resx part of the migration was not included in the project file when a fellow developer checked the project in (probably due to a merge issue). You may find that the resx file is there but greyed out. If it's there, try right clicking the "NameofMigration.resx" file and selecting "include in project". If it's not there, you better go find it on the other machine and add it to the project :-)
I think the issue (one issue) is that the .resx file is added as "dependent upon" (nested under) the .cs file, and the way the build engine works, "dependent upon" changes the name that an embedded resource is saved with (something like, it changes from being based on the filename to being based on the type name; I've dealt with this in other scenarios but can't remember for sure).
This leads to problems when using SDK .csproj files, for some reason (I guess that by default SDK .csproj does not change the resource name in this situation, but the migrations system expects it to).
As someone else had posted, SDK .csproj can use the following tag to change the embedded resource naming scheme for "dependent upon" resources, which then allows the migrations system to find the embedded resource:
<EmbeddedResourceUseDependentUponConvention>
true
</EmbeddedResourceUseDependentUponConvention>
This should go in a <PropertyGroup> of your SDK .csproj file.
For VS 2017, the solution is as follows:
Go to the project file, and for all of the migrations, apply the following format:
<Compile Include="Migrations\201804251606403_emailsWithEffort.cs" />
<Compile Include="Migrations\201804251606403_emailsWithEffort.Designer.cs">
<DependentUpon>201804251606403_emailsWithEffort.cs</DependentUpon>
</Compile>
<EmbeddedResource Include="Migrations\201804251606403_emailsWithEffort.resx">
<DependentUpon>201804251606403_emailsWithEffort.cs</DependentUpon>
</EmbeddedResource>
I guess that the problem is when changing version(s) of Visual Studio, old format of describing dependencies stays, and the Visual Studio 2017 can not interpret it correctly.
Hence, applying the format as described above (change your format to this), you can make the Visual Studio get the idea of where it's resources are.
Slightly different situation, where I created a new environment, and database, and received the above error message.
For my fix, I had to right-click on the migration files (initial and resx) and set property to embedded as resource. Update-database command ran fine afterward.
I encountered the same issue (VS 2017) and none of the solutions provided here worked. I fixed the problem by cleaning the solution and manually deleting the bin folder and then building it again.
If anybody wants to look into the source or compiler to know why this is happening; I don't feel like it right now. After an hour of tinkering, my resolution is odd.
Granted, I shouldn't have done this in the first place, but for quick code I temporarily added classes into the same file as my generated DbMigration 201906212110305_initial.cs. The mere existence of those temporary classes in the same file caused this error. As soon as I moved them to their own file (which I was going to do all along anyway) the runtime error vanished.
Unloading and then reloading migration file worked for me!
I have a MVC3 Web Application project that I develop and publish from Visual Studio 2012. This was recently a VS2010 project that was migrated.
My web.config is setup using a <location inheritInChildApplications="false"> tag so that a child application running in a virtual directory does not take on the settings.
I have setup a WebDeploy publish profile, which worked flawlessly in VS2010, but breaks my application when published from VS2012. It adds a <connectionStrings> node after the closing aforementioned </location> tag, even though I already have a <connectionStrings> node inside my <location> node. This breaks the app due to an invalid configuration file.
I've tried re-creating the profile from scratch which didn't solve the problem.
Based on what I have read here, http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd465337.aspx, unchecking the "Use this connection string at runtime" checkbox should instruct the publish process to NOT add the connection string, but it does anyway.
I'm thinking that this would not be an issue if I wasn't using the <location inheritInChildApplications="false">, because the connection string would get added to the right spot.
Also, note that if I publish to the File System instead of using WebDeploy, the published Web.Config is created correctly and does NOT have the extra connection string node added.
Are there any known workarounds for this issue?
As I suspected, this issue is related to the inheritInChildApplications attribute. It is likely a bug in the Visual Studio 2012 Web Deploy whereby the deploy process always adds the connection string to the configuration file, even if you tell it not to. In my case, it was also adding in the wrong spot, which broke my application.
To fix the issue, I simply stopped using the attribute and turned off configuration inheritance using one of the options listed here.
I can now publish without errors, but the process still adds the connection string to the deployed configuration file. Annoying but not a show stopper.
I've been trying to figure this out and so far haven't found a simple solution. Is it really that hard to deploy a database project (and a web site) using TFS 2010 as part of the build process?
I've found one example that involved lots of complicated checks and editing the workflow (which is a giant workflow btw).
I've even purchased the book "professional application lifecycle management with VS 2010", but apparently professionals don't deploy their applications since it isn't even mentioned in the book.
I know I'm retarded when it comes to TFS, but it seems like there should be any easy way to do this. Is there?
I can't speak for the database portion, but I just went through this on the web portion, the magic part is not very well documented component, namely the MSBuild Parameters.
In your build definition:
Process on the Left
Required > Items to Build > Configurations to Build
Edit, add a new one, for this example
Configuration: Dev (I cover how to create a configuration below)
Platform: Any CPU
Advanced > MSBuild Process
Use the following arguments (at least for me, your publish method may vary).
MsBuild Params:
/p:MSDeployServiceURL="http://myserver"
/p:MSDeployPublishMethod=RemoteAgent
/p:DeployOnBuild=True
/p:DeployTarget=MsDeployPublish
/p:CreatePackageOnPublish=True
/p:username=aduser
/p:password=adpassword
Requirements:
You need to install the MS Deploy Remote Agent Service on the destination web server, MSDeploy needs to be on the Build/Deployer server as well, but this should be the case by default.
The account you use in the params above needs admin access, at least to IIS...I'm not sure what the minimum permission requirements are.
You configure which WebSite/Virtual Directory the site goes to in the Web project you're deploying. Personally I have a build configuration for each environment, this makes the builds very easy to handle and organize. For example we have Release, Debug and Dev (there are more but for this example that's it). Only the Web project has a Dev configuration.
To do this, right click the solution, Configuration Manager..., On the web project click the configuration drop down, click New.... Give it a name, "Dev" for this example, copy settings from debug or release, whatever matches closest to what your deployment server environment should be. Make sure "Create new solution configurations" is checked, it is by default. After creating this, change the configuration dropdown on the solution to the new Dev one, and Any CPU...make sure your projects are all correct, I had some flipping to x86 and x64 randomly, not sure of the exact cause of that).
In your web project, right click, properties. On the left, click Package/Publish Web (you'll also want to mess with the other Package/Publish SQL tab, but I can't speak to that). In the options on the right click Create deployment package as a zip file. The default location is fine, the next textbox I didn't find documented anywhere. The format is this: WebSite/Virtual Directory, so if you have a site called "BuildSite" in IIS with no virtual directory (app == site root), you would have BuildSite only in this box. If it was in a virtual directory, you might have Default Web Site/BuildVirtualDirectory.
After you set all that, make sure to check-in the solution and web project so the build server has the configuration changes you made, then kick off a build :)
If you have more questions, I recommend you watch this video by Vishal Joshi, specifically around 22 and 59 minutes in, he covers the database portion as well...but I have no actual experience trying it since we're on top of a non MSSQL database.
I have an ASP.NET MVC 2 application.
Web project contains a reference to SomeProject
SomeProject contains references to ExternalAssembly1 and ExternalAssembly2.
SomeProject explicitly calls into ExternalAssembly1, but NOT ExternalAssembly2.
ExternalAssembly1 calls into ExternalAssembly2
When I perform a local build everything is cool. All DLLs are included in the bin\debug folder. The problem is that when I use the Publish Web command in Visual Studio 2010, it deploys everything except ExternalAssembly2.
It appears to ignore assemblies that aren't directly used (remember, ExternalAssembly2 is only used by ExternalAssembly1).
Is there any way I can tell Visual Studio 2010 to include ExternalAssembly2?
I can write a dummy method that calls into ExternalAssembly2. This does work, but I really don't want to have dummy code for the sole purpose of causing VS2010 to publish the DLL.
None of these answers are sufficient in my mind. This does seem to be a genuine bug. I will update this response if I ever find a non-hack solution, or Microsoft fixes the bug.
Update:
Doesn't seem promising.
https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/731303/publish-web-feature-not-including-all-dlls
I am having this same problem (different assemblies though). If I reference the assemblies in my web project, then they will get included in the publish output, but they should be included anyway because they are indirect dependencies:
Web Project ---> Assembly A ---> Assembly B
On build, assemblies A and B are outputed to the \bin folder. On publish, only assembly A is outputed to the publish folder.
I have tried changing the publish settings to include all files in the web project, but then I have files in my publish output that shouldn't be deployed.
This seems like a bug to me.
I had the same problem with VS2010 and a WCF Service Application.
It turns out that if your (directly or indirectly) referenced DLL's are deployed to GAC, the VS publishing feature excludes them. Once I removed the assemblies from GAC, publishing feature started working as expected.
I guess VS is assuming that if your assemblies can be located in GAC on the machine you build, they will be located in GAC on the target machine as well. At least in my case this assumption is false.
My tests show that the external assemblies get published when I have a reference on them in the web project. I do not have to write any dummy code to make it work. This seems acceptable to me.
I agree with Nicholas that this seems to be a bug in visual studio. At least it escapes me what the reason for the behavior could be.
I have created this issue as a bug on Microsoft Connect. If anyone experiencing it could vote it up https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/637071/publish-web-feature-not-including-all-dlls then hopefully we'll get something done about it.
If you go into the ExternalAssembly2 reference property list and change the "Copy Local" to "True" i think that might solve your issue.
I don't know if you are watching this still but I found the solution (I had the exact same issue) via this MSDN article. Under "build action" for the file choose "Content" that should include it in the list of files publish brings over.
I have created a new Connect bug here https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/731303/publish-web-feature-not-including-all-dlls
I've also attached a solution and detailed steps to reproduce this issue. Lets hope this time they won't close it as Can't Reproduce.
Vote for this connect issue if you experience the missing dll problem.
Copy local did the trick. I had an issue that the Newtonsoft.Json assembly get included in the deploymeny package. Copy local was set to false.
I am experiencing the same type of issue with a web project. I have a web project that references assembly A which references assembly B. It worked fine for some time but today it was broken. I did a rebuild of the solution and this time it deployed everything correctly.
I had this same problem today. I published my web project and realized that not all of the reference DLL's were there. In particular, the indirect DLL references.
It turns out that the directory in which I was publishing to was out of disk space (network share). I had just enough space to publish all the files except for few indirect reference DLL's. The sad part is that VS08 didn't throw any errors. It just published the files are usual. I cleared out some HDD space and everything worked fine.
I didn't find the HDD space issue until I tried to manually move the DLL's over.
in my case it is quite tricky.
Reference to ExternalAssembly2 is not required to Build the project but vital for run-time since we use reflection to configure Unity container.
So, I delete the reference - build the project successfully, but get run-time error.
If I preserve the reference I can Build and Run the application but I cannot Publish it with ExternalAssembly2 - get run-time exception as well.
This is happen because of internal VS2010 assemblies optimization.
So, what we can do here?
1. Put some unrequired peice of code to use any ExternalAssembly2's class.
2. escape from reflection and use static assemblies linking.
Hope this helps to smbd.
I got the same problem and this is a VS2010 bug if there's a reference link like:
Web Project --> custom project --> assembly1 -->(indirectly) assembly2.
For now I find if I reference the Assembly1 in the web project, then assembly2 is included in the bin folder.
So I had to add an additional reference link like:
Web project --> assembly1 -->(indirectly) assembly2.
Then VS can recognize assembly2 and include its dll file in publish action.