mod-aspdotnet-devel Mailing List for mod_aspdotnet
Brought to you by:
wrowe
Menu
▾
▴
mod-aspdotnet-devel — Development discussion of mod-aspdotnet
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2006 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(1) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2010 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(6) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Todd H. <ele...@ho...> - 2010-05-04 02:15:44
|
This article: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ee819091.aspx indicates that 1.1 and 2.0 can't be loaded in the same process. Figure 2 on that page is an in-process compatibility matrix. Personally I'm not deving 1.1 apps but being able to host 2.0 and 4.0 side by side is useful. I should be able to account for this by failing if 1.1 && 2.0 are specified. -----Original Message----- From: William A. Rowe Jr. [mailto:wr...@ro...] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 6:54 PM To: mod...@li... Subject: Re: Per app framework version. On 5/3/2010 5:09 PM, Todd Hicks wrote: > This from MSDN: > The .NET Framework version 4 consolidates many of the version 2.0 hosting > APIs. In addition, .NET Framework 4 supports in-process side-by-side runtime > host activation... Good to know. It's awfully heavy-weight, but if it's not impossible, I'd certainly entertain a patch. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- _______________________________________________ mod-aspdotnet-devel mailing list mod...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mod-aspdotnet-devel |
|
From: William A. R. Jr. <wr...@ro...> - 2010-05-03 23:20:58
|
On 5/3/2010 5:09 PM, Todd Hicks wrote: > This from MSDN: > The .NET Framework version 4 consolidates many of the version 2.0 hosting > APIs. In addition, .NET Framework 4 supports in-process side-by-side runtime > host activation... Good to know. It's awfully heavy-weight, but if it's not impossible, I'd certainly entertain a patch. |
|
From: Todd H. <ele...@ho...> - 2010-05-03 22:09:45
|
This from MSDN: The .NET Framework version 4 consolidates many of the version 2.0 hosting APIs. In addition, .NET Framework 4 supports in-process side-by-side runtime host activation... -----Original Message----- From: Todd Hicks [mailto:ele...@ho...] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 5:59 PM To: mod...@li... Subject: RE: Per app framework version. Just reading up on CorBindToRuntimeEx, and it's been deprecated in the 4.0 framework. But I see what you mean. I seem to recall on one of my installations in the past that httpd had multiple processes running (using process explorer or task manager). I don't know if this was by design or by some config option. Could that be leveraged somehow? -----Original Message----- From: William A. Rowe Jr. [mailto:wr...@ro...] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 4:09 PM To: mod...@li... Subject: Re: Per app framework version. On 5/3/2010 2:22 PM, Todd Hicks wrote: > Has anyone given a thought to the possibility of setting AspNetVersion per > mounted application? > Maybe as an optional parameter to the AspNetMount directive, with the > default being the global AspNetVersion. It would be very unwise; better to use mod_proxy to front several different servers running different asp.net levels. And it's likely not possible unless the CorBindToRuntimeEx permits multiple .NET engines to coexist in the same process space. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- _______________________________________________ mod-aspdotnet-devel mailing list mod...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mod-aspdotnet-devel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- _______________________________________________ mod-aspdotnet-devel mailing list mod...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mod-aspdotnet-devel |
|
From: Todd H. <ele...@ho...> - 2010-05-03 21:59:03
|
Just reading up on CorBindToRuntimeEx, and it's been deprecated in the 4.0 framework. But I see what you mean. I seem to recall on one of my installations in the past that httpd had multiple processes running (using process explorer or task manager). I don't know if this was by design or by some config option. Could that be leveraged somehow? -----Original Message----- From: William A. Rowe Jr. [mailto:wr...@ro...] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 4:09 PM To: mod...@li... Subject: Re: Per app framework version. On 5/3/2010 2:22 PM, Todd Hicks wrote: > Has anyone given a thought to the possibility of setting AspNetVersion per > mounted application? > Maybe as an optional parameter to the AspNetMount directive, with the > default being the global AspNetVersion. It would be very unwise; better to use mod_proxy to front several different servers running different asp.net levels. And it's likely not possible unless the CorBindToRuntimeEx permits multiple .NET engines to coexist in the same process space. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- _______________________________________________ mod-aspdotnet-devel mailing list mod...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mod-aspdotnet-devel |
|
From: William A. R. Jr. <wr...@ro...> - 2010-05-03 20:35:50
|
On 5/3/2010 2:22 PM, Todd Hicks wrote: > Has anyone given a thought to the possibility of setting AspNetVersion per > mounted application? > Maybe as an optional parameter to the AspNetMount directive, with the > default being the global AspNetVersion. It would be very unwise; better to use mod_proxy to front several different servers running different asp.net levels. And it's likely not possible unless the CorBindToRuntimeEx permits multiple .NET engines to coexist in the same process space. |
|
From: Todd H. <ele...@ho...> - 2010-05-03 19:22:48
|
Has anyone given a thought to the possibility of setting AspNetVersion per mounted application? Maybe as an optional parameter to the AspNetMount directive, with the default being the global AspNetVersion. |
|
From: William A. R. Jr. <wr...@ro...> - 2007-08-17 19:13:22
|
The first snapshot of the Visual Studio 2005/VC++.NET 8.0 source tree is now available for download. I've created a new "snapshots" package for purpose of distributing such temporary sources; http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=175077&package_id=242735 The one bug on the radar to fix before release (of both versions) is the add-cookie and other combinable-headers bug. Please call out any others as you see them. In terms of other issues, if you are in a position to test, please jump on this zip file, or grab the subversion branch for this particular effort. http://mod-aspdotnet.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/mod-aspdotnet/mod_aspdotnet2/trunk/ To the other three developers who also hacked on a 2005 flavor, please compare and feel free to chime in with 'better solutions' to particular migration issues, or optimizations. We've already eliminated the .cs script hack to jaggy arrays, now that 2005 fully supports them. I plan to hack out a number of casts, as well, by working out some cleaner declarations. And anyone with a clue of why it believes apr_pool_t needs to be a complete type, feel free to chime in :) AFAIK there's no reason for this silliness. Yours, Bill |
|
From: Nitin J. <jn...@ss...> - 2007-04-30 09:12:05
|
Hi all, We are using mod-aspdotnet module with apache server on Windows = platform. Presently all of our application code is in same CS file.=20 But as the code grows we would like to seprate code into multiple class = files. But it seems Apache/ASP .NET did not support this. Is there any way of = doing this ?=20 Please provide your inputs. Thanks and Regards |
|
From: William A. R. Jr. <wr...@ro...> - 2006-09-07 20:05:12
|
mod-aspdotnet-devel is the new home of mod_aspdotnet module development discussion. |
