FP/XP and 2002 Extns - Includes doubling!

[Bob]

I upgraded my win2K server today to use the 2002 extensions. It was
using the 2000 extensions earlier. I am using fp-xp on the client.

As soon as I did, all my webs with Include-> Page statements
started to double all page content. If I had two includes, I was
getting triple content! I built a brand new web with two "single line
of text" web pages, used one as an include, and the problem remained.
So, it was not my web(s). I removed the 2002 extensions as best I
could, re-installed the 2000 extensions on the server and everything
seems back to normal.

Any pointers for references on this problem ?

 

[Thomas A. Rowe]

See:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;298827

--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)

FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================

 

[Bob]

See:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;298827

Thank you, that hit the spot.
<rant>
I just wish I hadn't spent wasted 3 hours trying to hunt down and
correct this problem. Arrrrg!. You'd think they'd add a patch to the
2002 extensions for this... but that would make too much sense I
guess.
</rant>

 

[Stefan B Rusynko]

Believe they did in the 2 SP at http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnservext/html/fpse02win.asp


--




| On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 19:43:10 -0500, "Thomas A. Rowe" <[email protected]>
| wrote:
|
| >See:
| >http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;298827
|
| Thank you, that hit the spot.
| <rant>
| I just wish I hadn't spent wasted 3 hours trying to hunt down and
| correct this problem. Arrrrg!. You'd think they'd add a patch to the
| 2002 extensions for this... but that would make too much sense I
| guess.
| </rant>

 

[Bob]

Believe they did in the 2 SP at http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnservext/html/fpse02win.asp

Thanks for the pointer. It doesn't appear to be stated in the update
summary... but maybe they lipped it in somewhere. I'll try it when I
have a few hours I can spare for the possible re-removal or
application of the other update.

My point though is that MS should not have a 2002 Server Extensions
Update with *known bugs* available for download - and even if they
do there should be a big red warning about this problem on the
download page and a pointer to an immediate update requirement.
Allowing people to download bug-ridden updates just wastes the time
of the customer and causes dis-satisfaction.

I'm constantly frustrated at the number of MS web pages I have to
read and cross reference to solve a problem like this. As a customer,
I don't have several hours to spend each time I need an update. You
always end up reading and cross reading a half dozen update pages
before you can hone down what needs to be installed before what to
solve your particular problem. If you're lucky, you only spend
a few hours at it. If they would post summary updates it would
be of great benefit (i.e. "here's the latest FP2002 server extensions
with no bugs and all the current updates included".

Bob

 

[Bob]

See:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;298827

Thomas:

I don't have Office installed on the server (after all, it's a
*server*). DO you have any knowledge of whether I can install that
update just to fix the extensions ? Or is it the type of update
that will allow detailed selection at install time ?

Thanks,
Bob

 

[Thomas A. Rowe]

Bob,

You can make the changes indicated directly in the registry, thereby you have nothing to install.

However export those sections of the registry prior to making the indicated changes, as you may find
a need to put a few of original content back.

--
==============================================
Thomas A. Rowe (Microsoft MVP - FrontPage)
WEBMASTER Resources(tm)

FrontPage Resources, WebCircle, MS KB Quick Links, etc.
==============================================

 

[Bob]

Bob,

You can make the changes indicated directly in the registry, thereby you have nothing to install.

However export those sections of the registry prior to making the indicated changes, as you may find
a need to put a few of original content back.

Ok... sounds like a plan. The MS page seemed to indicate that the SP
was the preferred route but it didn't make much sense for a server.
Then again, it didn't make much sense that they didn't simply fix the
extensions and/or provide a specific patch for this issue.

Thanks,