IIS ASP.NET

  • Thread starter Thread starter RedLars
  • Start date Start date
R

RedLars

Cant seem to find a solution to this problemed (found many similar).

Using WinXP Prof with SP2 (.NET 1.0 and 1.1 - and IIS 5.1)

The ASP.NET service didnt work and the ASP.NET tab in IIIs was
missing, so I did aspnet_regiis -i under 1.1 .NET folder which seems
to have fixed the webservice but the ASP.NET tab is still missing.
Tryed the ASPNETVersionSwitcher but didnt help. Also the computer had
none of the reg entries mentioned here ;
http://www.eggheadcafe.com/forumpost.aspx?topicid=6&forumpostid=20592

Appreciate any input.
 
Cant seem to find a solution to this problemed (found many similar).

Using WinXP Prof with SP2 (.NET 1.0 and 1.1 - and IIS 5.1)

The ASP.NET service didnt work and the ASP.NET tab in IIIs was
missing, so I did aspnet_regiis -i under 1.1 .NET folder which seems
to have fixed the webservice but the ASP.NET tab is still missing.
Tryed the ASPNETVersionSwitcher but didnt help. Also the computer had
none of the reg entries mentioned here ;http://www.eggheadcafe.com/forumpost.aspx?topicid=6&forumpostid=20592

Appreciate any input.
Click to expand...

ASP.NET Tab will appear in IIS with .NET 2
 
You don't get the ASP.NET tab for 1.0 and 1.1.
You only get them for ASP.NET 1.1 and 2.0.

If you install the .Net Framework 2.0, you'll get the tab.

Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq :http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español :http://asp.net.do/foros/







- Vis sitert tekst -
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback.

Installing .NET 2.0 is not an option at the moment.

Another question, is there a 'correct' sequence of installing IIS
and .NET (1.0, 1.1 and 2.0) ? I've read somewhere that IIS should be
installed first and then each .NET package in succession but have not
found any microsoft document confirming this. Can anyone help me out?
 
You don't get the ASP.NET tab for 1.0 and 1.1.
You only get them for ASP.NET 1.1 and 2.0.
Click to expand...

Once .NET 2 is installed, ASP.NET Tab will have all available versions
to select.

I have 1.0, 1.1 and 2.0
 
Another question, is there a 'correct' sequence of installing IIS
and .NET (1.0, 1.1 and 2.0) ? I've read somewhere that IIS should be
installed first and then each .NET package in succession but have not
found any microsoft document confirming this. Can anyone help me out?- Hide quoted text -
Click to expand...

As far as I know it can be installed in any order. If IIS is installed
after the framework, you should register ASP.NET by using
aspnet_regiis.exe

Can be found at C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\{ver.}\
 
re:
!> Another question, is there a 'correct' sequence of installing IIS
!> and .NET (1.0, 1.1 and 2.0) ? I've read somewhere that IIS should be
!> installed first and then each .NET package in succession

That is exactly right.

..Net 1.0 is obsolete now, though.
Installing it now is only installing dead weight.

Start by installing IIS and then the .Net Frameworks 1.1 and 2.0, in that order.




Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
You don't get the ASP.NET tab for 1.0 and 1.1.
You only get them for ASP.NET 1.1 and 2.0.

If you install the .Net Framework 2.0, you'll get the tab.

Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq :http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español :http://asp.net.do/foros/







- Vis sitert tekst -
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback.

Installing .NET 2.0 is not an option at the moment.

Another question, is there a 'correct' sequence of installing IIS
and .NET (1.0, 1.1 and 2.0) ? I've read somewhere that IIS should be
installed first and then each .NET package in succession but have not
found any microsoft document confirming this. Can anyone help me out?
 
re:
I have 1.0, 1.1 and 2.0
Click to expand...

Yes, for Windows XP that's a possibility, albeit a useless one.

Sometimes I forget that not everybody is running a recent server.

W2K3 shipped with the .Net Framework 1.1 out of the box, no 1.0.
You can't even install the .Net Framework 1.0 on W2K3.

Do you do anything at all with the .Net Framework 1.0 ?
If not, you might as well uninstall it. It's dead weight.

Why run an obsolete/inefficient framework?




Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
 
re:
As far as I know it can be installed in any order.
Click to expand...

You might get by that way, but you might as well install them in numerical sequence.

It'll be good practice, so you don't install VS 2005 first and then VS 2003.
If you do that, the MSDN documentation gets screwed up.

Also, if you have several websites done in .Net 2.0, and install 1.1,
you need to be careful that sites aren't reset to use the 1.1 Framework.

I remember a few bug reports about that.
2.0 doesn't appropiate all websites.




Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
 
re:
!> For example, because of owning VS.NET 2002

I still own DOS 3.1 and Windows 3.11 for Workgroups.
Should I be developing websites in them ?

Upgrading your VS 2002 platform is a must.
Hanging on to it, just because you own it, is a mistake which will cost you dearly.




Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
 
re:
!> For example, because of owning VS.NET 2002

I still own DOS 3.1 and Windows 3.11 for Workgroups.
Should I be developing websites in them ?

Upgrading your VS 2002 platform is a must.
Hanging on to it, just because you own it, is a mistake which will cost you dearly.

Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
Click to expand...

Juan, there must be a reason.

I agree that the development using the VS.NET 2002 for Win 2000 Server
and SQL 2000 looks obsolete today, in 2007. At the same time, there
are still many users/organizations that use this software because the
cost to change is much higher than the cost to leave and for other
reasons. I said, I have the VS 2002. This is because I have a big
project written on .NET 1.0 and it's not updated to .NET 2.0 because
it doesn't bring anything new to the user in terms of functionality.
To the end of the year this project will be replaced by a new software
(.NET2/Win2003), but for a while I have to keep the .NET 1 installed
to be able to do a change if it will be necessary. Another example:
I'm using a special business-critical add-on for VS 2003, which
still(!) has no version for VS 2005, and because of this I have to
keep the .NET 1.1 installed. Okay, the new projects I do on .NET2, no
doubt, I have it too, and recently I've started to work with new MOSS
and WWF and I installed the .NET 3. Do you mean I'm running a not-
recent box? :-)

Just because it's new doesn't mean "a must".
 
re:
Just because it's new doesn't mean "a must".
Click to expand...

The released version of VS 2005 is already almost 1.5 years old and,
if you count the Beta period, it's almost 3 years old. :-)

If VS 2005's cost is a problem, you can use VWD to upgrade your app to 2.0.
It's free.

re:
Do you mean I'm running a not-recent box? :-)
Click to expand...

Not at all, but it's clear you're running your app on a not-recent platform. :-)

The .Net Framework 2.0 dances circles around the 1.0 version.
If you, at all, can upgrade your app...I strongly suggest you do.




Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
 
Thanks for the feedback.

Is there any microsoft web article that highlights the need to install
IIS and .NET in the right order or using aspnet_regiis -i afterwards?
Needs this confirmed by something more 'official' than a news-group
that I can show my boss, no offence.

Thanks
 
Is there any microsoft web article that highlights the need to install
IIS and .NET in the right order or using aspnet_regiis -i afterwards?
Needs this confirmed by something more 'official' than a news-group
that I can show my boss, no offence.
Click to expand...

This newsgroup is official Microsoft newsgroup :-)

ASP.NET Development Requirements
Quote: "If you install IIS after the .NET .NET Framework is already
installed, you must use the Aspnet_regiis.exe utility to register
ASP.NET with IIS."
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms228041.aspx

Frequently Asked Questions
Quote: "If you install IIS after you install the .NET Framework, you
must also register the ASP.NET extensions with IIS. You can do this by
running the aspnet_regiis executable from: %windows root directory%
\Microsoft.NET\Framework\%version of the .NET Framework%\aspnet_regiis
-r where %windows root directory% is the directory Windows is
installed to (typically c:\windows or c:\winnt) and %version of
the .NET Framework% is the version of the .NET Framework you have
installed. The directory for .NET 1.0 is v1.0.3705, for 1.1 is
v1.1.4322, and for 2.0 is v2.0.50727."
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/asp.net/aa336670.aspx
 
This newsgroup is official Microsoft newsgroup :-)
Click to expand...

This newsgroup, like all other newsgroups on msnews.microsoft.com, is
unmoderated and open to anyone and everyone - anyone can post anything they
like...

Some people like Juan et al are known as MVPs ("most valuable
professionals"), which is an acknowledgement given at Microsoft's discretion
in recognition (among other things) for their contribution to the newsgroup
and, as such, is Microsoft's way of saying that it is highly likely that
these people know what they are talking about... So, if Juan or Peter or
John or Eliyahu or any other MVP posts in here, you can be more than
reasonably confident that what they're saying is correct...

But that in no way makes it "official"... MVPs are not Microsoft employees,
and receive no monetary reward for their efforts... In fact, if an MVP
subsequently becomes a Microsoft employee, it is my understanding that they
can no longer be an MVP...
 
re:
!> Is there any microsoft web article that highlights the need to install
!> IIS and .NET in the right order

See :
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...cb-4362-4b0d-8edd-aab15c5e04f5&displaylang=en

That's the .Net Framework 2.0 system requirements / download page.

Scoot down to "Additional Information"...

----------------------------------------------------------
Server Installation Requirements:

"If you have been directed to do a server installation, you must have the following
software installed in addition to the typical installation requirements:

Microsoft Data Access Components 2.8 or later is recommended.

Internet Information Services (IIS) version 5.0 or later.

To access the features of ASP.NET, IIS with the latest security updates
must be installed prior to installing the .NET Framework."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can show that to your boss.

The principal problem encountered when the .Net Framework is installed before IIS
is that users need to manually register the framework with IIS ( it's impossible to
register the .net framework with IIS if IIS isn't installed... )

There's other problems which crop up, like inability to use the VS debugger,
security problems for the ASP.NET account, problems with the ASP.NET
version selector, etc., if you install Visual Studio before installing IIS.

The order of installation is very important.

To prevent problems, install in this order :

OS ( if you can select/install IIS, install it when you install the OS )
....otherwise install IIS immediately afterwards
Install the .Net Framework
Install your database tool of choice
Install Visual Studio




Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
 
Install your database tool of choice
Install Visual Studio
Click to expand...

Does that still apply if your database was released a fair bit later than
Visual Studio.NET e.g. if you were using SQL Server 2005 but still using
Visual Studio.NET 2003...?
 
Back
Top