RE: log4Net on Windows server 2008
Ok ended up being a bunch of issues, the main one being that for some
reason the configuration call was not being picked up in my global.asax
file.
protected void Application_Start( object
sender, EventArgs e )
{
log4net.Config.XmlConfigurator.Configure();
I read somewhere that if you change the 'Managed Pipeline Mode' of the
application pool from Integrated to Classic (IIS 6) that this would fix
things however it didn't seem to help in my case. So now pulled the
configuration call out into a http module to ensure its all setup.
Once I got that going I just used the log4net internal log and a trace
listener to work out what else was wrong with things.
So yeah, thanks everyone for your help. A pretty silly fix in the end.
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com
[mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Michael Minutillo
Sent: Thursday, 1 July 2010 10:41 AM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: Re: log4Net on Windows server 2008
Hi David,
What sort of issues are you having? Windows 2008 is probably:
a) Packed full of more fine grained security controls AND
b) Even more secure by default
Failing that here are a few questions that you've probably already gone
through yourself:
* Are the framework versions the same?
* Are the App Pools configured the same?
* Can you get a simple one page app with log4net working? i.e. Is it
log4net or the config
* Can you get log4net working in a console app on that machine? i.e. Is
it IIS/ASP.NET
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 10:32 AM, David Walker
david.wal...@planbonline.com wrote:
Hey guys,
Has anyone had any issues with getting log4net working in an ASP.Net
project running on Windows Server 2008 (IIS 7). My configuration works
on both my Windows 7 development machine and another windows server 2003
web server. I have cut the config down but still nothing works.
This is a pretty broad question but I am kind of out of ideas.
Cheers,
Dave
--
Michael M. Minutillo
Indiscriminate Information Sponge
Blog: http://wolfbyte-net.blogspot.com
internationalisation of larger text/items
Hello, How do you guys handle this, specifically of large paragraphs of text? Localisation of controls and other such items (error messages, etc) is done trivially via the typical approach[1], and currently with my longer text I take a similar approach, but there are places where I have long sentences spanning a few paragraphs. Of course, I can simply either tokenise the text in some form, or just put HTML in the resource files themselves (pParagraph 1/ppAnd so on./p) but it feels slightly bad. Any thoughts? Clearly, I want to keep all my localisation work in the one place. I suppose my current approach is the most appropriate, but I'd be interested to know if anyone has spent any significant time working on a better solution. I'm not completely sure what it could be ... -- silky Every morning when I wake up, I experience an exquisite joy — the joy of being this signature. [1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163566.aspx
Re: [OT] 2560x1600 widescreen LCDs
Greg would still beat you total # of pixels by about 50 (assuming your 23 monitors are 1680 x 1050 - a fairly common resolution at that size). If they're 1920 x 1080 then you probably beat him by about 50. Joseph On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Grant Molloy graken...@gmail.com wrote: I've recently purchased 2 x 23 wide screen LG LCD's for $200 each.. 46 of widescreen for $400.. much better than $1500 for 30.. I guess it comes down to whether you can justify spending the money.. On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 7:34 PM, djones...@gmail.com wrote: It's three machines, using input director to share one keyboard / mouse. Screens 1 2 3 are in a line. 4 and 5 are above 1 and 2 BBM pin:2589AEE0 -- *From: *Greg Keogh g...@mira.net *Sender: *ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com *Date: *Sat, 3 Jul 2010 19:19:31 +1000 *To: *'ozDotNet'ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com *ReplyTo: *ozDotNet ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com *Subject: *RE: [OT] 2560x1600 widescreen LCDs I never found bigger screens to increase productivity, they just give me a larger code window. I prefer 2 or more screens when writing code. I'm currently sat looking at 5 screens. I have a gut feeling that one large screen has certain ergonomic (and human perception) advantages over multiple screens. I find that swinging my head and eyes over to my second screen too frequently is uncomfortable. Sometimes by accident I will start typing something long on the second screen and I realise I feel a bit queasy and I move the window to centre-front and suddenly it all feels better again. I try to keep infrequently used windows on the second screen, ones that I glance at but don’t “work” at. For example I have Outlook on the second screen, but I read and compose emails on the first screen. I reckon that if I had a huge screen then I wouldn’t just fill it with a bigger code window, I’d dock more stuff open and around me to use the space wisely (I’ll have to wait and see if I’m so disciplined in reality). I also theorise this is true because our eyes and brain like to look at one continuous surface rather than many disjoint ones. How on earth have you wired-up 5 screens and how are they positioned and supported? Wallace, we must always try to justify spending money on hardware by convincing ourselves and others that it will increase productivity. I told my wife that a spa, turbo Porsche, private helipad and wine cellar would help my productivity, but she just said I’d have to work harder and send out more invoices. Greg -- Joseph Cooney http://jcooney.net
RE: OOXML to PDF Converter
Are you doing very custom conversion or using any platforms like SharePoint? Michael Nemtsev Microsoft MVP B: http://msmvps.com/blogs/laflour S: http://www.sharepoint-sandbox.com From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Matt Siebert Sent: Thursday, 1 July 2010 3:58 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: OOXML to PDF Converter Hi all, Does anyone know of a cheap / free OOXML to PDF converter program / library? I'm working on an app where we'll be producing .docx and .xlsx files and we then need to convert these to PDF. I'm considering using the OpenXML SDK to create the OOXML files and it would be nice if we didn't have to depend on MS Office to turn those into PDFs. Having said that, this is just a 'nice to have' - the reality is that most (if not all) of our user base will have MS Office so we're not keen on spending a lot of money for this functionality. A quick google revealed Aspose.Words http://www.aspose.com/categories/.net-components/aspose.words-for-.net/defa ult.aspx but it's a bit pricey and we're only interested in a fairly small subset of it's functionality. Cheers, Matt.
Re: [OT] 2560x1600 widescreen LCDs
umart.com.au http://www.umart.com.au/pro/products_listnew.phtml?id=10id2=143bid=2sid=47197 http://www.umart.com.au/pro/products_listnew.phtml?id=10id2=143bid=2sid=47197 http://www.umart.com.au/pro/products_listnew.phtml?id=10id2=143bid=2sid=51466 http://www.umart.com.au/pro/products_listnew.phtml?id=10id2=143bid=2sid=51466They have 4 shops in Bris, and 1 in Vic.. MSY.com.au had the same models at a similar price.. On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 10:36 PM, Greg Keogh g...@mira.net wrote: I've recently purchased 2 x 23 wide screen LG LCD's for $200 each.. 46 of widescreen for $400.. much better than $1500 for 30.. Where? – Greg (tell me off-list if it’s a national secret)
Re: [OT] 2560x1600 widescreen LCDs
Well if we copies Silky's setup of 5 monitors, then that's $1k, and many more pixels !! On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Joseph Cooney joseph.coo...@gmail.comwrote: Greg would still beat you total # of pixels by about 50 (assuming your 23 monitors are 1680 x 1050 - a fairly common resolution at that size). If they're 1920 x 1080 then you probably beat him by about 50. Joseph On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Grant Molloy graken...@gmail.com wrote: I've recently purchased 2 x 23 wide screen LG LCD's for $200 each.. 46 of widescreen for $400.. much better than $1500 for 30.. I guess it comes down to whether you can justify spending the money.. On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 7:34 PM, djones...@gmail.com wrote: It's three machines, using input director to share one keyboard / mouse. Screens 1 2 3 are in a line. 4 and 5 are above 1 and 2 BBM pin:2589AEE0 -- *From: *Greg Keogh g...@mira.net *Sender: *ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com *Date: *Sat, 3 Jul 2010 19:19:31 +1000 *To: *'ozDotNet'ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com *ReplyTo: *ozDotNet ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com *Subject: *RE: [OT] 2560x1600 widescreen LCDs I never found bigger screens to increase productivity, they just give me a larger code window. I prefer 2 or more screens when writing code. I'm currently sat looking at 5 screens. I have a gut feeling that one large screen has certain ergonomic (and human perception) advantages over multiple screens. I find that swinging my head and eyes over to my second screen too frequently is uncomfortable. Sometimes by accident I will start typing something long on the second screen and I realise I feel a bit queasy and I move the window to centre-front and suddenly it all feels better again. I try to keep infrequently used windows on the second screen, ones that I glance at but don’t “work” at. For example I have Outlook on the second screen, but I read and compose emails on the first screen. I reckon that if I had a huge screen then I wouldn’t just fill it with a bigger code window, I’d dock more stuff open and around me to use the space wisely (I’ll have to wait and see if I’m so disciplined in reality). I also theorise this is true because our eyes and brain like to look at one continuous surface rather than many disjoint ones. How on earth have you wired-up 5 screens and how are they positioned and supported? Wallace, we must always try to justify spending money on hardware by convincing ourselves and others that it will increase productivity. I told my wife that a spa, turbo Porsche, private helipad and wine cellar would help my productivity, but she just said I’d have to work harder and send out more invoices. Greg -- Joseph Cooney http://jcooney.net
RE: OOXML to PDF Converter
SharePoint 2010 standard and above will do this for you using Word Automation Serviceshttp://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee558278.aspx. One alternative to the Apose.Words server I've played with is Ericon's XF Rendering Serverhttp://www.ecrion.com/Products/XFRenderingServer/Overview.aspx, but it's also a little pricey. A major consideration is how much your generated docs will require some client-side rendering before they're converted. Are you using fields and/or tables (like tables of contents or references etc)? Are you using AltChunks to compose documents? If so, you need to use some kind of rendering engine (preferably Word itself or the SharePoint Word Automation Services engine) to get full fidelity. Remember that the OOXML SDK doesn't do any rendering, it simply provides the markup for the rendering engine to consume. If you want a full-fidelity fixed-format document (pdf or xps) then you need a good rendering engine first, and the one that's going to do the job that's closest to what Word does is Word itself (in either client or [Word Automation] server form). Cheers Andrew Coates, ME, MCPD, MCSD MCTS, Developer Evangelist, Microsoft, 1 Epping Road, NORTH RYDE NSW 2113 Ph: +61 (2) 9870 2719 * Mob +61 (416) 134 993 * Fax: +61 (2) 9870 2400 * http://blogs.msdn.com/acoat From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Michael Nemtsev Sent: Sunday, 4 July 2010 9:10 PM To: 'ozDotNet' Subject: RE: OOXML to PDF Converter Are you doing very custom conversion or using any platforms like SharePoint? Michael Nemtsev Microsoft MVP B: http://msmvps.com/blogs/laflour S: http://www.sharepoint-sandbox.com From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Matt Siebert Sent: Thursday, 1 July 2010 3:58 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: OOXML to PDF Converter Hi all, Does anyone know of a cheap / free OOXML to PDF converter program / library? I'm working on an app where we'll be producing .docx and .xlsx files and we then need to convert these to PDF. I'm considering using the OpenXML SDK to create the OOXML files and it would be nice if we didn't have to depend on MS Office to turn those into PDFs. Having said that, this is just a 'nice to have' - the reality is that most (if not all) of our user base will have MS Office so we're not keen on spending a lot of money for this functionality. A quick google revealed Aspose.Wordshttp://www.aspose.com/categories/.net-components/aspose.words-for-.net/default.aspx but it's a bit pricey and we're only interested in a fairly small subset of it's functionality. Cheers, Matt.
Re: OOXML to PDF Converter
Thanks for the info Andrew. I was a little concerned about the rendering but wasn't sure how much of an issue it would be. I'll probably use Word / Excel to open the generated documents and print / export to PDF. Cheers. On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Andrew Coates (DPE AUSTRALIA) andrew.coa...@microsoft.com wrote: SharePoint 2010 standard and above will do this for you using Word Automation Serviceshttp://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee558278.aspx . One alternative to the Apose.Words server I’ve played with is Ericon’s XF Rendering Serverhttp://www.ecrion.com/Products/XFRenderingServer/Overview.aspx, but it’s also a little pricey. A major consideration is how much your generated docs will require some client-side rendering before they’re converted. Are you using fields and/or tables (like tables of contents or references etc)? Are you using AltChunks to compose documents? If so, you need to use some kind of rendering engine (preferably Word itself or the SharePoint Word Automation Services engine) to get full fidelity. Remember that the OOXML SDK doesn’t do any rendering, it simply provides the markup for the rendering engine to consume. If you want a full-fidelity fixed-format document (pdf or xps) then you need a good rendering engine first, and the one that’s going to do the job that’s closest to what Word does is Word itself (in either client or [Word Automation] server form). Cheers Andrew Coates, ME, MCPD, MCSD MCTS, Developer Evangelist, Microsoft, 1 Epping Road, NORTH RYDE NSW 2113 Ph: +61 (2) 9870 2719 • Mob +61 (416) 134 993 • Fax: +61 (2) 9870 2400 • http://blogs.msdn.com/acoat *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Michael Nemtsev *Sent:* Sunday, 4 July 2010 9:10 PM *To:* 'ozDotNet' *Subject:* RE: OOXML to PDF Converter Are you doing very custom conversion or using any platforms like SharePoint? *Michael Nemtsev* Microsoft MVP B: http://msmvps.com/blogs/laflour S: http://www.sharepoint-sandbox.com *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Matt Siebert *Sent:* Thursday, 1 July 2010 3:58 PM *To:* ozDotNet *Subject:* OOXML to PDF Converter Hi all, Does anyone know of a cheap / free OOXML to PDF converter program / library? I'm working on an app where we'll be producing .docx and .xlsx files and we then need to convert these to PDF. I'm considering using the OpenXML SDK to create the OOXML files and it would be nice if we didn't have to depend on MS Office to turn those into PDFs. Having said that, this is just a 'nice to have' - the reality is that most (if not all) of our user base will have MS Office so we're not keen on spending a lot of money for this functionality. A quick google revealed Aspose.Wordshttp://www.aspose.com/categories/.net-components/aspose.words-for-.net/default.aspx but it's a bit pricey and we're only interested in a fairly small subset of it's functionality. Cheers, Matt.
Re: UI Automation Testing Software for Win Forms
On 2 July 2010 21:43, ste...@malikoff.com ste...@malikoff.com wrote: The thought of having third party software clicking all over a winforms app gives me the creeps. Why should it? IMO it's a good thing. The idea is to try and break the code before your customers do. A few years back I put AutoMate ( http://www.networkautomation.com/automate/7/) to a lot of use running tests on my winforms code (clinical applications). At the time I also had to build stuff in CA Visual Objects which only had an IDE and no command line compiler. I had the AutoMate scripts drive the compiler and produce builds, and check the text on the status line for compilation results. This saved a lot of time and made it more conducive to running a build more often. I can appreciate that in a scenario where it is not possible to directly simulate the user interface in code, you might want have a test harness actually use the UI. The downside is that the coupling between your testing code and the user interface is brittle. What happens if the window size changes, a button is renamed/moved, tab order changes, one form is refactored into two? In each case the test harness will break and you need to adjust it to cope with the changed UI. I acknowledge that some of the same problems are present when you simulate your UI directly in code, and the UI changes. However you will know about it sooner via a compiler error. All your testing code benefits from strong typing and refactoring support in the IDE. That really helps shake bugs out of your software. Unit tests are great too but there is definitely a place for these sorts of external UI-exercisers. Fair point, I can see the value in having some external UI-exerciser used in conjunction with unit tests. I would limit the use however to basic scenarios such as Is the form showing without error and leave the complicated scenarios to unit tests and code, unless I had plenty of manpower to keep the scripts up to date.
