I have a custom 404 error page. When I change my site properties in IIS
(IIS 5.0, BTW) to point to a file, I still get the original 404 error page.
But, then I copied my error page to my root, then pointed to it via URL and
it works! BUT, I would prefer to use the file page instead of the URL.

Any ideas where I should look for the problem?

TIA,

Larry Woods

(cross-posted to ...inetserver.iis;inetserver.misc)

I use URL with great success. Just out of curiosity, why dont you want to?

--
Curt Christianson
Owner/Lead Developer, DF-Software
Site: http://www.Darkfalz.com
Blog: http://blog.Darkfalz.com


[quoted text, click to view]

Good question. Probably should. It just bugs me that I can't use the file
name.

Larry
[quoted text, click to view]

[quoted text, click to view]

? URL asks you to specify a file name (including the virtual path). File
asks you to specify a file name (with the absolute path). I don't
understand what bugs you.

Remember, ASP can't process a file like c:\whatever\404.asp ... it has to be
referenced as a URL, and loaded by the web server, in order to be processed.

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

[quoted text, click to view]

No, it wasn't. Maybe you multi-posted?

http://www.aspfaq.com/5003

[quoted text, click to view]

Because it's a preference, not a law.

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

CJM wrote on 08 jul 2004 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
[quoted text, click to view]

[why changing to topposting midway in a tread?]

'/404.asp' is a virtual path

'../../404.asp' is a relative path

imho.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.

AFAIK, relative URLs are valid (e.g. '/404.asp') so I dont think it gets any
easier...

CJM

[quoted text, click to view]

[quoted text, click to view]

That's the point I was trying to make... just because YOU think it's a bad
habit doesn't mean its opposite is suddenly some standard we should strive
for. What you're asking is similar to asking everyone to use Outlook
Express or a single-line signature or to set their e-mail address to
anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com.

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

Aaron [SQL Server MVP] wrote on 08 jul 2004 in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
[quoted text, click to view]

Well Aaron,

Are you so law abiding that you always follow the law to the last tittel?
Since there are no laws on usenet, should we not try to hold a certain
amount of standards?
Cann't we ask about someones habits without it being a law?

[btw, it was not your mail I referred to. Your positive influence on this
NG far outweighs this welknown idea about topposting of yours.]

I think topposting is a bad habit, but topposting in a thread that does
bottom/interpost is far worse.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.

[quoted text, click to view]

The problem is, this is your opinion. Like CJM, I also top-post,
bottom-post, and answer inline, depending on the scenario. Just because I
contribute frequently does not make it okay for me to do it but bad for
others to do it. It is a judgement call, again, just like my choice of
newsreader. I don't really care that you don't like Outlook Express, nor
should I have to even know or care what newsreader you use.

And hearing you moan about top-posting issue every time is, IMHO, degrading
the effectiveness of the affected thread, far more than the choice of
posting method. Move on, okay?

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

[quoted text, click to view]

Sure, while we're here.

Why do you insist on bottom-posting? Do you not find it annoying when you
have to scroll through an entire paragraph that you've already read, to see
a one-line response or a link to an article? Do I really need to read the
entire paragraph again to understand the response? Is the cache in my
newsreader so short that I will not have the previous post stored anymore,
and will have to go search through google to find the things you've trimmed?

What is the point of leaving this in all your replies:

"Aaron [SQL Server MVP] wrote on 09 jul 2004 in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general: "

Do you think I'm going to forget who I am, or what date my post was sent, or
what group I'm in? Do you think my newsreader doesn't support threading,
and I won't be able to figure out who you're replying to?

Point is, we all do things that aren't the most convenient for the rest of
us. But we don't all go out of our way to make a big stink about it.

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)

Aaron [SQL Server MVP] wrote on 09 jul 2004 in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:

[quoted text, click to view]

The opposite of NOT changing a way of threading in the midst of a thread,
is doing that. It seems to me that is a bad habit.
And is it a bad habit to say so, just because I think it is?
I do not think so. It is the strength of usenet that people say what they
think.

Secondly, I did NOT say so, I just asked why the poster did that. He
could have had very good reasons for doing so: "My Outlook Express leaves
me no choice", for instance.

[quoted text, click to view]

No, that is a personal preference, as long as it does not degrade usenet
use. [I would not touch OE, even for emailing.]

[quoted text, click to view]

Again, as long as it does not degrade the NG usabilitiy, no.

==========

Time and again I ask people on this NG not to say ASP when they mean
VBScript, even when they mean serverside VBScript on an ASP platform.

You could just as easily say to me op that subject: "just because YOU
think it's a bad habit doesn't mean its opposite is suddenly some
standard we should strive for."

If I think something is a bad habit, I will certainly encourage people to
do the opposite.

===========

btw, Aaron, thank you for not topposting in your latest reply.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.

CJM wrote on 09 jul 2004 in microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
[quoted text, click to view]

You are perceiving things I did not say. I was not talking about a
"rule". I was not saying I was better than others.

It just stroke me that in that particular instance, the sudden change to
topposting was degrading the effectiveness of that thread.
Why should I not ask for your reason?

[quoted text, click to view]

I do not remember last time, Chris, but I do not think I was hostile in
this thread. I would certainly not be hostile to Aaron, who is one of the
pillars of this NG. The difference in meaning about topposting between us
is well known. A bit of fencing between two people that know eachothers
stances is not bad and sharpens the mind.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.

I wasnt going to reply to your post since a) Aaron already had, and b) I
initially thought it was better to let it pass.

However, since the debate goes on... more answers inline...

[quoted text, click to view]

Standards? One size does NOT fit all. Different approaches for different
situations, I should say. In my original post, the information was fairly
self-contained. The statement stood on its own. If you cant remember about
the post I was replying to, then you have the option to scroll down, but if
you were still following the thread then you arent put out by having to do
this.

As for habits, I top-post, bottom-post and post in-line depending on the
situation - which admittedly does sometimes include how rushed I am...

[quoted text, click to view]

So the 'rules' depend on you perceived worth to the NG? I object to this on
two-levels:

1) It sounds like animal farm - 'Some are more equal than others'

2) While I wouldn't presume to compete with Aaron, I put more into this
group than I take out. I didn't realise that someone was scoring, and that I
was doing so poorly.

[quoted text, click to view]

Needless to say we disagree on this.


Evertjan, the last time we crossed swords in this NG, we carried on
off-list. At the time, I was surprised by your hostile stance, but was
eventually re-assured by your more affable demeanour off-list. Is this deja
vu?

Chris

Aaron [SQL Server MVP] wrote on 09 jul 2004 in
microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general:
[quoted text, click to view]

okay.


--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.

Aaron,

Sorry for the delay in responding (looks like you all were keeping busy,
anyway) but either (1) I don't understand what you are saying, or (2) you
are wrong about file names.

Looking at a site in IIS, the default files for more of the various HTTP
error conditions are defined as "file" and have a complete local file path,
NOT a relative file path.

Example: Error 403, suberror 4:

file

C:\WINNT\help\iisHelp\common\403-4.htm


???????????????

Larry Woods

[quoted text, click to view]

Notice the file extension? HTM. This means it is HTML code. If you want
to use ASP code, you can't use a file reference. Go ahead, put a local file
reference to an ASP file and see what happens. You will get a bunch of
garbage because your ASP code won't be processed. You can see the same
symptom by typing in c:\folder\file.asp ... to be processed by the web
server, an ASP page must be accessed by the web server. So, you need a URL,
not a file.

--
http://www.aspfaq.com/
(Reverse address to reply.)






[quoted text, click to view]