I'm having a bit of a hair-puller here.
I'm publishing a VS 2008 application to a server, to be installed via ClickOnce. So far, so good. It installs just fine. Then I added in a ClickOnce update checker - one that uses ApplicationDeployment to handle checking for & applying updates.
So far, so good.
Then, on some of the machines it was installed on, the updater wouldn't work. The error it returned was that the application had already been installed from another URI - which it wasn't.
After enough digging around, I found that:
URL 1: htfp://www.domain.com/app/myapp.application
URL 2: htfp://www.domain.dom/App/myapp.application
ClickOnce considers URLs 1 and 2 to be entirely different - even though "app" contains a capital A in URL 2, and both point to the same, valid .application file.
When I found that out I edited all our intranet links to point to an all-lowercase version of the URL, which is working for now, but there's always the chance that someone might install it from an "incorrect" URL - the only solution being to forcibly uninstall and reinstall the application from the correct URL.
How do I force the deployment URL ClickOnce checks against for updates? It seems to generate its manifest based on the URL it was installed from, so I'm not sure I can fix it from VS' end.
Thanks,
~ Wogan
Try this:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/16z3sw0x%28VS.80%29.aspx
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 am trying to upgrade the site from v 7.6 to v. 7.15.1.
I have done the upgrade on localhost which included updating the db.
Now I transferred my files from localhost o the test site and on there I am getting an error in log:
ERROR Umbraco.Core.UmbracoApplicationBase - An unhandled exception occurred
System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException (0x80131904): Invalid object name 'umbracoUserLogin'.
and I can't login to the backoffice.
It seems to be looking for umbracoUserLogin on test while it doesn't exist yet because on test the db is not updated yet.
How to update the db on test in this case while the files have already been updated on localhost and transferred to test site?
I have done 2 umbraco upgrades recently; one is from 7.5.7 to 7.13.1 and the recent one is from 7.13.1 to 7.15.1.
During my upgrade; I have seen this problem and fix in this issue can help you for your problem(and I didn't see this problem again after doing the upgrade again, but this time checking all the auto changing files and accepting them one at a time-see details below for this) but coming back to your question; "What's the best way to upgrade from umbraco 7.6 to 7.15.1(including db upgrade)"; here are the steps that you should follow;
Create a backup for your project and your umbraco db before you start. If you are using Git, then things will be super easy for this.
Open up Nuget Package Manager for your Umbraco project and do the package upgrade using the Nuget Package Manger window or the consol. Search for UmbracoCms version 7.15.1 for your case.
Once you start doing the upgrade, you will see some popup windows that will ask you to approve some auto file changes(including some config files changes). As you don't want to lose some of your pre-upgrade settings, don't accept them all or discard them all, check all of them one by one, and as a general rule; if you don't have any custom changes for those files, then simply approve the change, otherwise, check your changes and make sure you don't loose anything and discard some of these file changes as a result.
Once you're done with your UmbracoCms upgrade(which will automatically do some dependency package upgrades), build your project, make sure all is looking good then go to your local project's umbraco back-office url, this will trigger the rest of the umbraco upgrade process and simply complete the upgrade steps by following the screens- at this point your umbraco db changes will be done automatically and it is possible that you might have some issues with some old corrupt cached files, if this happens, then simply delete App_Data/TEMP files and App_Data umbraco.config file and try again. If you see some other problems during the installation, check the logs(browser developer tools can be handy to understand the problems in this case), and fix them one at a time. It is possible that you don'T need some of your old web.config settings and they might cause some issues, simply comment out those lines and see if this will fix some of the issues.
Once you are done with you local upgrade, deploy your code to your testing environment, and go to the umbraco url of your test environment and follow the screens to complete the installation for your testing environment. If you see any problems, please check my notes for step 4 above.
Do your umbraco upgrade for other testing environments(QA, UAT, Training etc) and complete your umbraco upgrade tests. Once the tests are done, then you are ready to go live. After the live deployment, you will have to complete the umbraco upgrade one last time, but this time for the live system.
Always get your back-ups for each environment before you do the upgrade, so you will be ready to rollback your changes if things go wrong(which might happen as you're doing a big umbraco upgrade).
Final note; there are some good articles for this, please take a look to understand the process better. Good luck!
I had a bundle deployed in an Apache Felix (Sling, in fact) host. The bundle contained some configurable elements, and its version was 2.0.
I have updated the bundle to v2.0.1 for some small code changes, and now the bundle will not pick up its configuration correctly - it remains at the defaults set in code rather than picking up the values configured in the Felix Web Console.
There is an error message in the log: "[Configuration Updater] org.apache.felix.scr Cannot use configuration pid=com.mypackage.MyClass for bundle inputstream:my-bundle-2.0.1.jar because it belongs to bundle inputstream:my-bundle-1.0.jar" which sounds like the cause of the issue.
However:
I can't edit the inputstream value through the web interface - only by stopping the server, editing the config file manually, and restarting. Surely when I update the bundle, the config should be updated too?
Although the inputstream specifies v1.0, the bundle did not have a problem when it was upgraded to v2.0. What's made the difference here?
I have done the same thing (though perhaps not exactly!) on two servers, and one server seems to have the config specify inputstream=v2.0 (and the bundle at v2.0.1) and it works fine. What caused inputstream version to update on this server? (Presumably the same as the answer to 2 - I imagine it'll depend exactly which steps in the process have been executed and in what order.)
Any advice gratefully received - I haven't been able to find any documentation that gives instructions or troubleshooting suggestions for administering bundles through the Felix Web Console.
If at all possible, I would simply stop and remove the bundle altogether and install it using Sling , e.g. with the maven-sling-plugin or dropping it in the /apps/myapp/install folder using WebDAV .
I find it easiest to be consistent this way and the installation is nicely automated and it handles bundle upgrades properly.
When using a local NuGet server, whenever I try to install an individual package from that server, all I get is this error: "The remote server returned an error: (404) Not Found."
The packages are all there in the filesystem and the feed itself sees all the packages appropriately. I can even browse the package directly!
What am I missing?
I did just upgrade from NuGet server 1.4 to 1.5, but I've seen this happen before. Touching the package files used to help, but that does not appear to be the case now.
EDIT: Actually, I hadn't seen that exact error before...I've seen this one, intermittently, that touching the package tended to fix.
On Windows Server 2008, I was having the same issue. I switched the Application Pool from "ASP.NET v4.0 Classic" to "ASP.NET v4.0". The install-package command worked fine after the change.
sigh...
http://blogs.thesitedoctor.co.uk/tim/2011/09/02/Nuget+Server+On+IIS6+Returns+404+When+Downloading+Package+After+Upgrade.aspx
EDIT: In case the link ever dies...I am hosting my NuGet server in IIS6, which wasn't set up to properly handle extensionless URLs. And since the semantics of downloading individual packages changed from a direct file link to an extensionless route, I started getting 404s. Adding the wildcard mapping described in the article fixed it instantly.
I've been trying to figure this for a couple of hours...
Checked the IIS logs and discovered that URLScan was blocking the route:
GET /Rejected-By-UrlScan ~/api/v2/package/
URLScan doesn't accept any route not starting with '/'. The best I could do was to remove the URLScan from the list of ISAPI filters for the website in the IIS Manager.
I was having the same issue on Windows Server 2008.
Problem was in my own package MyPackage.nupkg that I saved without version.
MyPackage was visible in PackageManager but it was getting 404 error on install.
Fix:
I saved it with name MyPackage.1.0.0.nupkg (1.0.0 is current version) and problem was fixed.
I had the same problem, srv 2008 R2. Changed the application pool to Integrated from Classic and all works fine now.
My problem was same as image above. I could go to the site on url
http://localhost:3407/nuget/Packages
but not
http://localhost:3407/api/v2/package/{package name}/1.0.0.0
I encountered this error while trying to download Signal-R after update Nuget, however it was just that I had not checked the "Allow Nuget to download missing packages during build" option in package manager settings. Once that was that set it all worked fine again.
It could be this as well -
You are trying to refer to a url like : http://yourdomain/application/nuget/packages
Then you should change it to :
http://yourdomain/application/nuget
This is a common mistake.
I'm trying to customize the location of the user.config file. Currently it's stored with a hash and version number
%AppData%\[CompanyName]\[ExeName]_Url_[some_hash]\[Version]\
I want to it be agnostic to the version of the application
%AppData%\[CompanyName]\[ProductName]\
Can this be done and how? What are the implications? Will the user lose their settings from the previous version after upgrading?
I wanted to add this quoted text as a reference for when i have this problem in the future. Supposedly you can instruct the ApplicationSettings infrastructure to copy settings from a previous version by calling Upgrade:
Properties.Settings.Value.Upgrade();
From Client Settings FAQ blog post: (archive)
Q: Why is there a version number in the user.config path? If I deploy a new version of my application, won't the user lose all the settings saved by the previous version?
A: There are couple of reasons why the
user.config path is version sensitive.
(1) To support side-by-side deployment
of different versions of an
application (you can do this with
Clickonce, for example). It is
possible for different version of the
application to have different settings
saved out.
(2) When you upgrade an
application, the settings class may
have been altered and may not be
compatible with what's saved out,
which can lead to problems.
However, we have made it easy to
upgrade settings from a previous
version of the application to the
latest. Simply call
ApplicationSettingsBase.Upgrade() and
it will retrieve settings from the
previous version that match the
current version of the class and store
them out in the current version's
user.config file. You also have the
option of overriding this behavior
either in your settings class or in
your provider implementation.
Q: Okay, but how do I know when to
call Upgrade?
A: Good question. In Clickonce, when
you install a new version of your
application, ApplicationSettingsBase
will detect it and automatically
upgrade settings for you at the point
settings are loaded. In non-Clickonce
cases, there is no automatic upgrade -
you have to call Upgrade yourself.
Here is one idea for determining when
to call Upgrade:
Have a boolean setting called
CallUpgrade and give it a default
value of true. When your app starts
up, you can do something like:
if (Properties.Settings.Value.CallUpgrade)
{
Properties.Settings.Value.Upgrade();
Properties.Settings.Value.CallUpgrade = false;
}
This will ensure that Upgrade() is
called only the first time the
application runs after a new version
is deployed.
i don't believe for a second that it could actually work - there's no way Microsoft would provide this ability, but the method is there just the same.
To answer the first question, you technically can put the file wherever you want, however you will have to code it yourself, as the default place the file goes to is the first of your two examples. (link to how to do it yourself)
As for the second question, it depends on how you deploy the application. If you deploy via a .msi, then there are two hashes in the properties of the setup project (that the msi is built from), the 'upgrade code' and the 'product code'. These determine how the msi can be installed, and if it upgrades, overwrites, or installs beside any other version of the same application.
For instance, if you have two versions of your software and they have different 'upgrade' codes, then to windows they are completely different pieces of software regardless of what the name is. However if the 'upgrade' code is the same, but the 'product' code is different then when you try to install the 2nd msi it will ask you if you want to upgrade, at which time it is supposed to copy the values from the old config to a new config. If both values are the same, and the version number didn't change then the new config will be in the same location as the old config, and it won't have to do anything. MSDN Documentation
ClickOnce is a little bit different, because its based more off of the ClickOnce version # and URL path, however I have found that as long as you continue to 'Publish' to the same location the new version of the application will continue to use the existing config. (link to how ClickOnce handles updates)
I also know there is a way to manually merge configs during the install of the msi using custom install scripts, but I don't remember the exact steps to do it... (see this link for how to do it with a web.config)
The user.config file is stored at
C:\Documents and Settings>\<username>\[Local Settings\]Application Data\<companyname>\<appdomainname>_<eid>_<hash>\<version>
<C:\Documents and Settings> is the user data directory, either non-roaming (Local Settings above) or roaming.
<username> is the user name.
<companyname> is the CompanyNameAttribute value, if available. Otherwise, ignore this element.
<appdomainname> is the AppDomain.CurrentDomain.FriendlyName. This usually defaults to the .exe name.
<eid> is the URL, StrongName, or Path, based on the evidence available to hash.
<hash> is a SHA1 hash of evidence gathered from the CurrentDomain, in the following order of preference:
1. StrongName
2. URL:
If neither of these is available, use the .exe path.
<version> is the AssemblyInfo's AssemblyVersionAttribute setting.
Full description is here http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms379611.aspx
(I'd add this as a comment to #Amr's answer, but I don't have enough rep to do that yet.)
The info in the MSDN article is very clear and appears to still apply. However it fails to mention that the SHA1 hash is written out base 32 encoded, rather than the more typical base 16.
I believe the algorithm being used is implemented in ToBase32StringSuitableForDirName, which can be found here in the Microsoft Reference Source.