We have created an ActiveX component in C# and we are placing it on an HTML page served via ASP.NET. The ActiveX is referenced via the tag. The dll sits on the web site in the same folder where the aspx is and all is working nice.
However, we have deployed this to a customer and it doesn't work there. We have setup the .net framework on the clients and all supporting libraries are there. In fact the activeX component works fine there when run via UserControl TestContainer. It just won't work in the web browser - as if activeX was disabled. However, the web site is added as a trusted site in the IE options and activeX is enabled. This is Windows 2003 server.
I followed http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555687 and I think we did all we should have, including the CAS policy (although even switching CAS off temporarily didn't help)
Any idea where to look at? Any help would be very appreciated.
Martin
I found it. The IIS was set to expire everything immediately and that prevented MSIE from using the dll.
Related
I has built a REST service follow to tutorial
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeIE3jzAxHU
I has published it in IIS using Visual Studio. But I don't understand how consume it. In the sample that works under IIS Express it is called as
localhost:port/api/person.
When I publish the service in IIS I see many compiled files but I do not understand what address I should call to get the same result as it was under IIS Express.
Try this to get url:
Open IIS
Expand out the left tree until you see Sites
Select the one you made for the demo
Click on Browse *:port under Browse Website heading on far right pane.
That will give you the base site url for your testing, and just add api/person to it from there.
Likely http://localhost/api/person, unless the demo was really weird. If you are unable to still browse the site, give us more information (errors?) or at least screenshots.
I'm having difficulty in integrating AEM 5.6.1 with Site Catalyst. It allows me to connect in the configuration successfully, but does not work on the framework setup.
I've followed the standard procedure to connect AEM to SC and it accepts my login in the configuration, but fails on the framework set up with the browser message 'We were not able to login to SiteCatalyst. Please check your credentials and try again.'. Behind the scenes in the server log;
12.12.2014 14:10:06.967 *WARN* [0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1 [1418393406764] POST /libs/cq/analytics/sitecatalyst/service.json HTTP/1.1] com.day.cq.analytics.sitecatalyst.impl.SitecatalystHttpClientImpl Data center 'https://api3.omniture.com/admin/1.3/rest/' responded with errors {"error":{"code":500,"message":"Internal Server Error"}}
12.12.2014 14:10:06.967 *ERROR* [0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1 [1418393406764] POST /libs/cq/analytics/sitecatalyst/service.json HTTP/1.1] com.day.cq.analytics.sitecatalyst.impl.servlets.SitecatalystServlet Call to SiteCatalyst method 'Company.GetReportSuites' failed com.day.cq.analytics.sitecatalyst.SitecatalystException: not authenticated
I've tried accessing via the API Explorer and it works.
I've tried the troubleshooting guide without success.
I can log in to Site Catalyst, I'm an admin, I am in the web services access group.
I've tried using a clean install of CQ5.6.1 with geometrixx - it doesn't work either.
I've tried this from a server and from a localhost/dev machine with the same results. No proxy. I've even tried using the shared secret as the password but then it doesn't connect at all, and fails on the configuration screen.
What might cause this to fail?
If it doesn't work with a fresh install and Geometrixx, then it's probably an Adobe bug. That's typically the first thing support will ask you about.
I would also verify using Geometrixx Outdoors, or a more recent demo site, on your fresh install, just to ensure it's not an outdated ClientLib issue.
I know this isn't a direct answer to your question, but honestly, I would approach the integration differently. I've worked with the AEM-SC framework and it's buggy at best. It's very finicky, it doesn't REALLY work the way the documentation claims, and it requires that you're very specific about what Clientlibs are on the page.
Moving forward, I think using Adobe Dynamic Tag Manager is the better approach, for many reasons. My understanding is that it's Adobe's recommendation as well. I'd consider moving to that. In AEM 5.6.1, you'll have to customize your integration with DTM, but it's not very hard.
Solution: Add a property on the configuration node for sitecatalyst: (eg. /etc/cloudservices/sitecatalyst/my-sc-configuration)
server=https://api.omniture.com/admin/1.2/rest/
it also seems to work with newer API versions such as https://api3.omniture.com/admin/1.3/rest/
It would appear that for 5.6.1 it ignores the OSGi configuration, at least for the configuration screens. With this extra property, the framework page loads without error and allows selection of the RSID.
I need to show to a user an interface of some application running on a server using a browser. It should be like RDP-client for a single application on a server.
Are there any solutions or services that can implement following functionality? Maybe Citrix?
Thanks in advance!
This looks like what you're looking for:
http://freerdp.net/
About FreeRDP-WebConnect
FreeRDP-WebConnect is an open source gateway for accessing RDP
sessions using any HTML5 compliant browser. In particular it relies on
the Canvas and the WebSockets feature. FreeRDP-WebConnect is a
subproject of the FreeRDP project.
On the server side, a standalone daemon - written in C++ - provides a
Web page via HTTPS (or HTTP, if configured) and uses FreeRDP libs to
connect as a client to any RDP session. The server side WebSockets
implementation handles current RFC6455 only, so browsers that
implement the older drafts do not work. With RFC6455 being raised to
the "Proposed Standard" level, this should change now really soon.
I would create an account on the server for the user, and only give it access to the one application it needs access to.
You can use Cameyo. To start, create yourself a free account, and click on "Add App". If your installer supports unattended installation, you simply need to submit it. Otherwise, you can build a Cameyo package locally and send it in. It will then be playable as HTML5.
You don't indicate what server you are running on.
As an alternative to FreeRDP-Webconnect cited above, also open source and also using FreeRDP as rdp client through an HTTP gateway, there is Myrtille.
FreeRDP-WebConnect embeds a standalone daemon written in C++ to provide a web page via HTTP(S), and so will also work on Linux servers, while Myrtille have a IIS/.NET (C#) implementation and an MSI installer, thus is more intended for Windows Servers.
I deployed MVC 4 application to Arvixe.com hosting. In local everything is okay, site opens full, but after deploying, site opens, but, not full. css, jquery, javascript is not working. Only html tags seem.
Arvixe support send this to me: How to Bin Deploy ASP.NET Assemblies on Shared Servers. But I can not understand it well. Can anybody help me to find that why site does not open full? What shloud I check to solve this?
When linking your views and resources you should use relative paths
instead of
"Views/MyView.aspx"
use
"~/Views/MyView.aspx"
This is valid for all resources in your application and it is know to cause these problems.
When working locally the paths are correct since it's all resolved to your computer.
In a web environment you will have to use the relative path so the url is resolved in front of all your resources.
I have a problem where, on some developer machines, everything resolves correctly and the start page is as expected (/Home/Index), but on other developer machines, it will just render a directory listing of the website root. When creating a virtual directory, it works, but we would prefer to use the development server initially if possible.
It's worth mentioning the OS we are working with is XP.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Are you talking about running your website through IIS or through Visual Studio's built in web server (Cassini)?
It sounds like you are using IIS and it is not configured for running MVC properly but without further information it's hard to say.
I would compare the IIS configuration between a working machine and one that doesn't