Problems with VS2005 on Vista

[John Kotuby]

Hi all...

Well my earlier post aboout not being able to access http://localhost has
been resolved. I am still having problems testing my Web site project.

First, thanks to Juan Libre I edited my HOSTS file and can access
localhost. However, what I found in the HOSTS file was not what I expected.
Juan mentioned that the following line might be missing.

127.0.0.1 localhost

Actually the line was there followed by:
::1 localhost

I place a comment sign in front of that line:
#::1 localhost

And now can access localhost. However, at first the default.aspx page would
not show because it was not listed as a startup document in IIS Manager.

Once I fixed that, I was prompted that:
"The page you are requesting cannot be served because of the Multipurpose
Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) map policy that is configured on the Web
server.
The page you requested has a file name extension that is not recognized, and
is not allowed. "

So... I added a mime type of:
.aspx text/html

The error went away, and now I get a blank page. Is that progress?

So I still have a problem. Vista seems to be VERY asp.net development
unfriendly and is driving me nuts.
Why would Microsoft make things so difficult for their development
"partners"?

I am going to look for another update patch for VS 2005, but i am pretty
sure I have all the patches. It must be a problem between IIS and ASP.NET.

Anybody have any suggestions?

[Mark Rae]

"John Kotuby" <jo***@discussi ons.microsoft.c omwrote in message
news:5B******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...

I am going to look for another update patch for VS 2005, but i am pretty
sure I have all the patches. It must be a problem between IIS and ASP.NET.

Presumably you have installed the Vista Update Patch for VS.NET 2005 + SP1:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-gb/vstudio/bb265237.aspx

Also, presumably you're running VS.NET as administrator.. .?
--
http://www.markrae.net

Both presumably correct Mark. Don't know why IIS is balking at default.aspx
on the basis of undefined MIME type.

I found this post from Juan to be interesting.
I'd also check what you'll need to run with Vista.
Vista runs IIS 7.0, and enabling ASP.NET is also needed.

In response to the post:

When do I need to run "aspnet_reg iis -i"?

Boy, I am glad I still have my old WinXP box. I bought the new faster
machine to speed up compiles and make development faster. Never did I expect
that Vista would stop my development cold...LOL.

Good work MicroMoney (or would that be MacroMoney)! Now I see why Bill Gates
moved on to charity work. His conscience couldn't handle what his company
was doing. I guess it just wasn't fun for him anymore.

Oh well, sour grapes don't taste very good, so I'm signing off. Being an
early adopter sure sucks...

Not sure how to "enable" ASP.NET on Vista.

"Mark Rae" <ma**@markNOSPA Mrae.netwrote in message
news:uN******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...

"John Kotuby" <jo***@discussi ons.microsoft.c omwrote in message
news:5B******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...

>I am going to look for another update patch for VS 2005, but i am pretty
sure I have all the patches. It must be a problem between IIS and
ASP.NET.

Presumably you have installed the Vista Update Patch for VS.NET 2005 +
SP1:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-gb/vstudio/bb265237.aspx

Also, presumably you're running VS.NET as administrator.. .?
--
http://www.markrae.net

[Mark Rae]

<jo***@powerlis t.comwrote in message
news:%2******** *******@TK2MSFT NGP02.phx.gbl.. .

Both presumably correct Mark. Don't know why IIS is balking at
default.aspx on the basis of undefined MIME type.

It's sounding more and more like a bad install...

I found this post from Juan to be interesting.
I'd also check what you'll need to run with Vista.
Vista runs IIS 7.0, and enabling ASP.NET is also needed.

Hmm - I certainly didn't need to "enable" ASP.NET...

Not sure how to "enable" ASP.NET on Vista.

I don't recall having to do anything specific to enable ASP.NET on Vista...

As far as I recall, I installed stuff in the following order:

1) 64-bit Vista Business + patches

2) VS.NET 2005 & Visual SourceSafe 2005

3) 64-bit SQL Server Developer Edition

4) VS.NET 2005 SP1

5) SQL Server updates and patches

6) Vista Update Patch for VS.NET 2005 SP1

7) Office 2007 + patches

As far as I recall, I simply backed up my SourceSafe database from my XP Pro
machine, copied it to my new Vista machine, and imported it. Then I fired up
VS.NET 2005, set all the first-time configuration stuff, and then recreated
all my projects from SourceSafe.

The WinForms ones worked straightaway.

With the WebForms ones, I simply went into the Project Properties of each
one and clicked the Create Virtual Directory button to create its virtual
directory on the new machine.

Then I went to Computer Management, Services and Applications, Internet
Information Services (IIS) Manager, selected my new machine (no other
choice, obviously!), Web Sites, Default Web Site.

Then I did the following for each virtual directory:

1) Authentication
2) Made sure Windows Authentication was enabled
3) Edited Anonymous Authentication and set it to Application pool identity
4) In Advanced Settings, set the Application Pool to "Classic .NET
Application Pool"
Finally, I ran selfcert.exe from the IIS6 Resource Kit (couldn't find an
equivalent for IIS7) to create a local secure certificate for testing etc,
and haven't had a single problem since...

--
http://www.markrae.net

Thanks Mark,
I'll run thru the littany and see if I missed anything. I'm using 32 bit
Vista. Havent been brave enough to go
64 bit yet. I suppose that might allow me better use of my new dual-core
processor? I am not planning on any 64-bit programming code yet, so I havent
seen a need to go 64. Maybe there are some other benefits I havent
discovered yet (havent really looked actually).

I will be happy to get past the current problem for now. I have considered
using my old XP as the web server in an Intranet and continue to program my
projects from that location using the VS2005 install on my new
machine...allow ing me to test changes immediately.

Will let you know how I made out. I probably just missed a simple step. It
seems strange that default.aspx or anything with that extension didn't even
show up as a "startup default" page in IIS manager.

BTW... happy mothers day! Everybody has a mother.

"Mark Rae" <ma**@markNOSPA Mrae.netwrote in message
news:e8******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...

<jo***@powerlis t.comwrote in message
news:%2******** *******@TK2MSFT NGP02.phx.gbl.. .

>Both presumably correct Mark. Don't know why IIS is balking at
default.aspx on the basis of undefined MIME type.

It's sounding more and more like a bad install...

>I found this post from Juan to be interesting.
I'd also check what you'll need to run with Vista.
Vista runs IIS 7.0, and enabling ASP.NET is also needed.

Hmm - I certainly didn't need to "enable" ASP.NET...

>Not sure how to "enable" ASP.NET on Vista.

I don't recall having to do anything specific to enable ASP.NET on
Vista...

As far as I recall, I installed stuff in the following order:

1) 64-bit Vista Business + patches

2) VS.NET 2005 & Visual SourceSafe 2005

3) 64-bit SQL Server Developer Edition

4) VS.NET 2005 SP1

5) SQL Server updates and patches

6) Vista Update Patch for VS.NET 2005 SP1

7) Office 2007 + patches

As far as I recall, I simply backed up my SourceSafe database from my XP
Pro machine, copied it to my new Vista machine, and imported it. Then I
fired up VS.NET 2005, set all the first-time configuration stuff, and then
recreated all my projects from SourceSafe.

The WinForms ones worked straightaway.

With the WebForms ones, I simply went into the Project Properties of each
one and clicked the Create Virtual Directory button to create its virtual
directory on the new machine.

Then I went to Computer Management, Services and Applications, Internet
Information Services (IIS) Manager, selected my new machine (no other
choice, obviously!), Web Sites, Default Web Site.

Then I did the following for each virtual directory:

1) Authentication
2) Made sure Windows Authentication was enabled
3) Edited Anonymous Authentication and set it to Application pool identity
4) In Advanced Settings, set the Application Pool to "Classic .NET
Application Pool"
Finally, I ran selfcert.exe from the IIS6 Resource Kit (couldn't find an
equivalent for IIS7) to create a local secure certificate for testing etc,
and haven't had a single problem since...

--
http://www.markrae.net

[Mark Rae]

<jo***@powerlis t.comwrote in message
news:%2******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..

I'm using 32 bit Vista. Havent been brave enough to go 64 bit yet. I
suppose that might allow me better use of my new dual-core processor? I am
not planning on any 64-bit programming code yet, so I havent seen a need
to go 64. Maybe there are some other benefits I havent discovered yet
(havent really looked actually).

There are no reasons to go 64-bit yes unless:

1) you have more than 4Gb RAM on your machine

2) you need to develop / test / run 64-bit software

I have 8Gb on my development machine, and am already writing my first piece
of 64-bit software for a client, so I didn't really have a decision to
make...

64-bit SQL Server runs faster than any other RDBMS I've ever seen, and the
extra RAM allows me to have several virtual machines open at the same time,
which really can make a huge difference...

However, anyone thinking of writing 64-bit WinForms software needs to be
*very* aware that there is no 64-bit version of the Jet engine, no 64-bit
version of MDAC, and no 64-bit OleDb drivers for anything other than SQL
Server...

So, if you're thinking of using e.g. a Jet database with a purely 64-bit
app, you can't - you'd need to be thinking of something like SQLCE, which is
much better anyway...
--
http://www.markrae.net

[John Kotuby]

Mark,

Good to know..

FYI, I got my asp.net application working on IIS Vista by running
"aspnet-regiis -enable -i" from the command prompt in the appropriate folder
for the v.2.0... install of the framework.
In my case c:\windows\micr osoft.net\frame work\v2.0.50727 .

I suppose I might have been able to indicate asp.net v3.0 for the web
application in IIS and it may have worked from the beginning, but I'm not
sure about that.

oh well, tomorrow's another day in the usa
"Mark Rae" <ma**@markNOSPA Mrae.netwrote in message
news:OW******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...

<jo***@powerlis t.comwrote in message
news:%2******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..

>I'm using 32 bit Vista. Havent been brave enough to go 64 bit yet. I
suppose that might allow me better use of my new dual-core processor? I
am not planning on any 64-bit programming code yet, so I havent seen a
need to go 64. Maybe there are some other benefits I havent discovered
yet (havent really looked actually).

There are no reasons to go 64-bit yes unless:

1) you have more than 4Gb RAM on your machine

2) you need to develop / test / run 64-bit software

I have 8Gb on my development machine, and am already writing my first
piece of 64-bit software for a client, so I didn't really have a decision
to make...

64-bit SQL Server runs faster than any other RDBMS I've ever seen, and the
extra RAM allows me to have several virtual machines open at the same
time, which really can make a huge difference...

However, anyone thinking of writing 64-bit WinForms software needs to be
*very* aware that there is no 64-bit version of the Jet engine, no 64-bit
version of MDAC, and no 64-bit OleDb drivers for anything other than SQL
Server...

So, if you're thinking of using e.g. a Jet database with a purely 64-bit
app, you can't - you'd need to be thinking of something like SQLCE, which
is much better anyway...
--
http://www.markrae.net