Anyone ever setup a custom error page? Mine doesn't work if I specify it as a page

[Larry Woods]

I have a custom 404 error page. When I change my site properties in IIS
(IIS 5.0, BTW) to point to a file, I still get the original 404 error page.
But, then I copied my error page to my root, then pointed to it via URL and
it works! BUT, I would prefer to use the file page instead of the URL.

Any ideas where I should look for the problem?

TIA,

Larry Woods

(cross-posted to ...inetserver.iis;inetserver.misc)

[Curt_C [MVP]]

I use URL with great success. Just out of curiosity, why dont you want to?

--
Curt Christianson
Owner/Lead Developer, DF-Software
Site: http://www.Darkfalz.com
Blog: http://blog.Darkfalz.com
"Larry Woods" <la***@NOSPAMlwoods.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

I have a custom 404 error page. When I change my site properties in IIS
(IIS 5.0, BTW) to point to a file, I still get the original 404 error page. But, then I copied my error page to my root, then pointed to it via URL and it works! BUT, I would prefer to use the file page instead of the URL.

Any ideas where I should look for the problem?

TIA,

Larry Woods

(cross-posted to ...inetserver.iis;inetserver.misc)

[Larry Woods]

Good question. Probably should. It just bugs me that I can't use the file
name.

Larry
"Curt_C [MVP]" <software_AT_darkfalz.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

I use URL with great success. Just out of curiosity, why dont you want to?

--
Curt Christianson
Owner/Lead Developer, DF-Software
Site: http://www.Darkfalz.com
Blog: http://blog.Darkfalz.com
"Larry Woods" <la***@NOSPAMlwoods.com> wrote in message
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

I have a custom 404 error page. When I change my site properties in IIS
(IIS 5.0, BTW) to point to a file, I still get the original 404 error

page.

But, then I copied my error page to my root, then pointed to it via URL

and

it works! BUT, I would prefer to use the file page instead of the URL.

Any ideas where I should look for the problem?

TIA,

Larry Woods

(cross-posted to ...inetserver.iis;inetserver.misc)

[Aaron [SQL Server MVP]]

> Good question. Probably should. It just bugs me that I can't use the

file
name.

? URL asks you to specify a file name (including the virtual path). File
asks you to specify a file name (with the absolute path). I don't
understand what bugs you.

Remember, ASP can't process a file like c:\whatever\404.asp ... it has to be
referenced as a URL, and loaded by the web server, in order to be processed.

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

[Aaron [SQL Server MVP]]

> (cross-posted to ...inetserver.iis;inetserver.misc)

No, it wasn't. Maybe you multi-posted?

http://www.aspfaq.com/5003

[CJM]

AFAIK, relative URLs are valid (e.g. '/404.asp') so I dont think it gets any
easier...

CJM

"Aaron [SQL Server MVP]" <te*****@dnartreb.noraa> wrote in message
news:uV**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

Good question. Probably should. It just bugs me that I can't use the
file
name.
? URL asks you to specify a file name (including the virtual path). File
asks you to specify a file name (with the absolute path). I don't
understand what bugs you.

Remember, ASP can't process a file like c:\whatever\404.asp ... it has to

be referenced as a URL, and loaded by the web server, in order to be processed.
--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

[Evertjan.]

CJM wrote on 08 jul 2004 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:

"Aaron [SQL Server MVP]" <te*****@dnartreb.noraa> wrote in message
news:uV**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

> Good question. Probably should. It just bugs me that I can't use
> the file
> name.

? URL asks you to specify a file name (including the virtual path).
File asks you to specify a file name (with the absolute path). I
don't understand what bugs you.

Remember, ASP can't process a file like c:\whatever\404.asp ... it
has to be
referenced as a URL, and loaded by the web server, in order to be
processed.

AFAIK, relative URLs are valid (e.g. '/404.asp') so I dont think it
gets any easier...

[why changing to topposting midway in a tread?]

'/404.asp' is a virtual path

'../../404.asp' is a relative path

imho.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[Aaron [SQL Server MVP]]

> [why changing to topposting midway in a tread?]

Because it's a preference, not a law.

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

[Evertjan.]

Aaron [SQL Server MVP] wrote on 08 jul 2004 in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:

[why changing to topposting midway in a tread?]

Because it's a preference, not a law.

Well Aaron,

Are you so law abiding that you always follow the law to the last tittel?
Since there are no laws on usenet, should we not try to hold a certain
amount of standards?
Cann't we ask about someones habits without it being a law?

[btw, it was not your mail I referred to. Your positive influence on this
NG far outweighs this welknown idea about topposting of yours.]

I think topposting is a bad habit, but topposting in a thread that does
bottom/interpost is far worse.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[Aaron [SQL Server MVP]]

> I think topposting is a bad habit,

That's the point I was trying to make... just because YOU think it's a bad
habit doesn't mean its opposite is suddenly some standard we should strive
for. What you're asking is similar to asking everyone to use Outlook
Express or a single-line signature or to set their e-mail address to
an*******@discussions.microsoft.com.

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

[Evertjan.]

Aaron [SQL Server MVP] wrote on 09 jul 2004 in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:

I think topposting is a bad habit,
That's the point I was trying to make... just because YOU think it's a
bad habit doesn't mean its opposite is suddenly some standard we
should strive for.

The opposite of NOT changing a way of threading in the midst of a thread,
is doing that. It seems to me that is a bad habit.
And is it a bad habit to say so, just because I think it is?
I do not think so. It is the strength of usenet that people say what they
think.

Secondly, I did NOT say so, I just asked why the poster did that. He
could have had very good reasons for doing so: "My Outlook Express leaves
me no choice", for instance.
What you're asking is similar to asking everyone
to use Outlook Express
No, that is a personal preference, as long as it does not degrade usenet
use. [I would not touch OE, even for emailing.]
or a single-line signature or to set their
e-mail address to an*******@discussions.microsoft.com.

Again, as long as it does not degrade the NG usabilitiy, no.

==========

Time and again I ask people on this NG not to say ASP when they mean
VBScript, even when they mean serverside VBScript on an ASP platform.

You could just as easily say to me op that subject: "just because YOU
think it's a bad habit doesn't mean its opposite is suddenly some
standard we should strive for."

If I think something is a bad habit, I will certainly encourage people to
do the opposite.

===========

btw, Aaron, thank you for not topposting in your latest reply.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[CJM]

I wasnt going to reply to your post since a) Aaron already had, and b) I
initially thought it was better to let it pass.

However, since the debate goes on... more answers inline...

"Evertjan." <ex**************@interxnl.net> wrote in message
news:Xn******************@194.109.133.29...

Aaron [SQL Server MVP] wrote on 08 jul 2004 in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:

[why changing to topposting midway in a tread?]
Because it's a preference, not a law.

Well Aaron,

Are you so law abiding that you always follow the law to the last tittel?
Since there are no laws on usenet, should we not try to hold a certain
amount of standards?
Cann't we ask about someones habits without it being a law?

Standards? One size does NOT fit all. Different approaches for different
situations, I should say. In my original post, the information was fairly
self-contained. The statement stood on its own. If you cant remember about
the post I was replying to, then you have the option to scroll down, but if
you were still following the thread then you arent put out by having to do
this.

As for habits, I top-post, bottom-post and post in-line depending on the
situation - which admittedly does sometimes include how rushed I am...
[btw, it was not your mail I referred to. Your positive influence on this
NG far outweighs this welknown idea about topposting of yours.]

So the 'rules' depend on you perceived worth to the NG? I object to this on
two-levels:

1) It sounds like animal farm - 'Some are more equal than others'

2) While I wouldn't presume to compete with Aaron, I put more into this
group than I take out. I didn't realise that someone was scoring, and that I
was doing so poorly.
I think topposting is a bad habit, but topposting in a thread that does
bottom/interpost is far worse.

Needless to say we disagree on this.
Evertjan, the last time we crossed swords in this NG, we carried on
off-list. At the time, I was surprised by your hostile stance, but was
eventually re-assured by your more affable demeanour off-list. Is this deja
vu?

Chris

[Evertjan.]

CJM wrote on 09 jul 2004 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:

So the 'rules' depend on you perceived worth to the NG? I object to
this on two-levels: 1) It sounds like animal farm - 'Some are more
equal than others'
You are perceiving things I did not say. I was not talking about a
"rule". I was not saying I was better than others.

It just stroke me that in that particular instance, the sudden change to
topposting was degrading the effectiveness of that thread.
Why should I not ask for your reason?
Evertjan, the last time we crossed swords in this NG, we carried on
off-list. At the time, I was surprised by your hostile stance, but was
eventually re-assured by your more affable demeanour off-list. Is this
deja vu?

I do not remember last time, Chris, but I do not think I was hostile in
this thread. I would certainly not be hostile to Aaron, who is one of the
pillars of this NG. The difference in meaning about topposting between us
is well known. A bit of fencing between two people that know eachothers
stances is not bad and sharpens the mind.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[Aaron [SQL Server MVP]]

> It just stroke me that in that particular instance, the sudden change to

topposting was degrading the effectiveness of that thread.

The problem is, this is your opinion. Like CJM, I also top-post,
bottom-post, and answer inline, depending on the scenario. Just because I
contribute frequently does not make it okay for me to do it but bad for
others to do it. It is a judgement call, again, just like my choice of
newsreader. I don't really care that you don't like Outlook Express, nor
should I have to even know or care what newsreader you use.

And hearing you moan about top-posting issue every time is, IMHO, degrading
the effectiveness of the affected thread, far more than the choice of
posting method. Move on, okay?

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

[Aaron [SQL Server MVP]]

> Cann't we ask about someones habits without it being a law?

Sure, while we're here.

Why do you insist on bottom-posting? Do you not find it annoying when you
have to scroll through an entire paragraph that you've already read, to see
a one-line response or a link to an article? Do I really need to read the
entire paragraph again to understand the response? Is the cache in my
newsreader so short that I will not have the previous post stored anymore,
and will have to go search through google to find the things you've trimmed?

What is the point of leaving this in all your replies:

"Aaron [SQL Server MVP] wrote on 09 jul 2004 in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general: "

Do you think I'm going to forget who I am, or what date my post was sent, or
what group I'm in? Do you think my newsreader doesn't support threading,
and I won't be able to figure out who you're replying to?

Point is, we all do things that aren't the most convenient for the rest of
us. But we don't all go out of our way to make a big stink about it.

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

[Evertjan.]

Aaron [SQL Server MVP] wrote on 09 jul 2004 in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:

Move on, okay?

okay.
--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[Larry Woods]

Aaron,

Sorry for the delay in responding (looks like you all were keeping busy,
anyway) but either (1) I don't understand what you are saying, or (2) you
are wrong about file names.

Looking at a site in IIS, the default files for more of the various HTTP
error conditions are defined as "file" and have a complete local file path,
NOT a relative file path.

Example: Error 403, suberror 4:

file

C:\WINNT\help\iisHelp\common\403-4.htm
???????????????

Larry Woods

"Aaron [SQL Server MVP]" <te*****@dnartreb.noraa> wrote in message
news:uV**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

Good question. Probably should. It just bugs me that I can't use the
file
name.
? URL asks you to specify a file name (including the virtual path). File
asks you to specify a file name (with the absolute path). I don't
understand what bugs you.

Remember, ASP can't process a file like c:\whatever\404.asp ... it has to

be referenced as a URL, and loaded by the web server, in order to be processed.
--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

[Aaron [SQL Server MVP]]

Notice the file extension? HTM. This means it is HTML code. If you want
to use ASP code, you can't use a file reference. Go ahead, put a local file
reference to an ASP file and see what happens. You will get a bunch of
garbage because your ASP code won't be processed. You can see the same
symptom by typing in c:\folder\file.asp ... to be processed by the web
server, an ASP page must be accessed by the web server. So, you need a URL,
not a file.

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)


"Larry Woods" <la***@NOSPAMlwoods.com> wrote in message
news:eL**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

Aaron,

Sorry for the delay in responding (looks like you all were keeping busy,
anyway) but either (1) I don't understand what you are saying, or (2) you
are wrong about file names.

Looking at a site in IIS, the default files for more of the various HTTP
error conditions are defined as "file" and have a complete local file
path,
NOT a relative file path.

Example: Error 403, suberror 4:

file

C:\WINNT\help\iisHelp\common\403-4.htm
???????????????

Larry Woods

"Aaron [SQL Server MVP]" <te*****@dnartreb.noraa> wrote in message
news:uV**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

> Good question. Probably should. It just bugs me that I can't use the
> file
> name.

? URL asks you to specify a file name (including the virtual path).
File
asks you to specify a file name (with the absolute path). I don't
understand what bugs you.

Remember, ASP can't process a file like c:\whatever\404.asp ... it has to

be

referenced as a URL, and loaded by the web server, in order to be

processed.

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)