|
Hi I have an asp page which has a button, when the button is clicked a pop-up page is generated. On some clients this is generated successfuly. The problem is that on another client the pop-up cannot be displayed (http error 500). The server uses session variables, there is a unique session ID (number) on the clients' URL for successful popups, but for this client thacan't generate a popup the session ID is not there. What might be the problem, please help.
|
|
|
|
|
If the browser is set up to not accept session cookies, the default way of handling the session id doesn't work.
Solutions:
:: Make sure that the browser accepts cookies.
:: Use cookie-less session handling instead.
---
b { font-weight: normal; }
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All
I have a tough one (for me that is).
I have written a web service that recieve SOAP messages from an embedded device and it works fine
I now need to get this information into a service on a server running in the back ground so that I can manipulate the data and in the end save it a SQL2005 db.
I have seen that when I receive SOAP udates from my embedded device the web service "fires" on each POST from the embedded device, This can be as much as 10 000 time per second, I can see all my data. My first idea was to allow the web service to udate the SQL2005 db directly but this process is to slow.
That is why I planning a service running on the same server as a process in the background.
Regards
|
|
|
|
|
I have a C# windows form application that I developed with VS2003. The development PC has .Net Framework 1.1 installed so naturally it is used as a launch condition. A customer of mine has .Net Framework 2.0 installed, and when he tries to install my application, he gets an error.
Note: The setup project is set to install only the application (bootstrapper property is set to NONE). I leave it to the user to install the .Net Framework.
Question: If I install .Net Framework 2.0 on the development computer, will it automatically be used for the launch condition when I build the MSI setup project (I suppose it would)? I don't want all of my customers to have to install 2.0 because 1.1 seems to work fine. Is it possible for the application to use either 1.1 or 2.0? How do I specify that?
Victor
|
|
|
|
|
An application built in 1.1 must have the 1.1 framework installed on the machine that is running the application. 2.0 framework will not work for applications built in 1.1 or vice versa.
Mike Lasseter
|
|
|
|
|
Mike,
Thank you for the reply. So, if I have customers with both 2.0 and 1.1, then I need to provide separate versions of the application, right? There is no backward compatibility with .Net?
From the standpoint of application development, is there a way for me to have both 1.1 and 2.0 installed on my PC and switch between them when doing builds?
Thanks,
Vic
|
|
|
|
|
If you built the application using 1.1 then the users need the 1.1 framework on thier machine. If you built the application using 2.0 then the users need the 2.0 framework on thier machine. I would have your users install the correct verion of the framework on their machine rather than you having to build the software with each compiler.
Yes you can have both VS 2003 and VS 2005 installed on the same machine.
Mike Lasseter
|
|
|
|
|
Mike,
Thanks again for the reply.
I'm still confused though - It sounds like you are saying that VS2005 requires the 2.0 framework and VS2003 requires the 1.1 framework. Is there some interdependence?
Can my users have both 2.0 framework and 1.1 framework installed? If the user needs the 2.0 framework for some other application, then they will not be able to run my application without having both installed.
Thanks again,
Vic
|
|
|
|
|
Victor CM wrote: It sounds like you are saying that VS2005 requires the 2.0 framework and VS2003 requires the 1.1 framework.
This is exactly what I am saying. There is no backward compatibility.
Victor CM wrote: Can my users have both 2.0 framework and 1.1 framework installed?
Yes
Victor CM wrote: If the user needs the 2.0 framework for some other application, then they will not be able to run my application without having both installed.
If you built your application using the 1.1 framework then this is correct.
Mike Lasseter
|
|
|
|
|
Mike,
Thanks for being patient with me. I understand it now!
Vic
|
|
|
|
|
Has anyone had any success running a .NET 2.0 application on a Citrix server?
When I try to run any 2.0 WinForm application, I get an incomprehensible error message. I've heard that Citrix doesn't currently offer support for the 2.0 framework, but I'm hopoing someone has found a work-around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
i have wold file with fname , lname & status
and i have app that i will fill all this data (fname , lname & status )
and send this data as parameter to MSWord and print it
u can see MSWord file in
http://www.shoppinp.com/test.doc
and the win app in this file
http://www.shoppinp.com/test.gif
Palestine
|
|
|
|
|
when i search on the internet i see this code
try
Dim oWordApp
Dim oWordDoc
Set oWordApp = CreateObject("Word.Application")
If oWordApp Is Nothing Then
MsgBox "Couldn't start Word."
Else
oWordApp.visible =true
' Open a new document
Set oDoc = oWordApp.Documents.Add("c:\temp\mytemplate.dot")
with oDoc
'fill the word bookmarks with the corresponding text
.Bookmarks("mybookmark1").Range.Text = "test1"
.Bookmarks("mybookmark2").Range.Text = "test2"
.Bookmarks("mybookmark3").Range.Text = "test3"
end with
End If
but what is Bookmarks("mybookmark1").Range.Text ???
Palestine
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Just before I go and reinvent the wheel, I wanted to know if there's such a collection in the .NET Framework 2.0 that could be used as some kind of "Circular list", that is, everytime I want to get a value from it, I get the next item in the list, looping back at the beginning when reaching the end.
Thank you
Luc Morin
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I don't think there is one but I can give you a hint:
If you don't want to implement it completely yourself you can inherit from ArrayList and just overwrite GetEnumerator. This way you just have to implement your own IEnumerator.
Robert
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry this isn't really much of a question as it is a political thing, but I didn't want to put it in the Soapbox in fear of trolls.
Anyone else disappointed by the ".NET 3.0" name for WinFX?
http://www.petitiononline.com/winfx/petition.html[^]
I've listed several reasons here, so read up.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow 8 signatures so far... 
|
|
|
|
|
28 now 
Keep spreading the word!
|
|
|
|
|
Wow... I'm underwhelmed. 28 out of how many thousands using the .NET Framework??
Kind of reminds me about the legions of people who pitched a bitch about Microsoft finally ending support for VB6...
-- modified at 15:18 Thursday 10th August, 2006
Dave Kreskowiak
Microsoft MVP - Visual Basic
|
|
|
|
|
I just started this last night at midnight.
|
|
|
|
|
Why the "big deal"? They could call it ".NET DogPile 1.0" for all I care. It still makes me money when I write code in it...
Dave Kreskowiak
Microsoft MVP - Visual Basic
|
|
|
|
|
If you don't care then don't comment.
I somehow doubt you've even read the petition.
Besides, with all the thousands of .NET programmers out there and the 3.2 million CP users, only 3 new threads since yesterday night on these forums. Is that a bad sign? 
|
|
|
|
|
I beg to differ. I find all 8 points on your petition rather petty...
Dave Kreskowiak
Microsoft MVP - Visual Basic
|
|
|
|
|
Actually the eighth point is not my point, it's a reiteration of Microsoft's point. Petty? Yes, the eighth one is indeed.
Again I don't think you've read it properly. Not that I expect someone who doesn't care to read it.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
