RE: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
See below: snip From: Vernon Viehe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 2:36 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: COM CFMX Workaround I hear, from a reliable source, that there will be a service pack for CFMX by or around the end of Sept, and among other issues addressed by it, are great improvements in the COM area. Vernon Viehe ColdFusion Community Manager Developer Relations Macromedia, Inc. Online diary: http://vvmx.blogspot.com/ /snip -Original Message- From: Dave Carabetta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 September 2002 14:38 To: CF-Talk Subject: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have moved to CFMX... Only patch there is out right now is the Apache hot fix for 2.0.39 -- CFMX SP1 should see the daylight within the next two weeks or very end of September. While not disputing your information, where did you get that info from? By several accounts (including MM employees), a service pack wasn't even on the timeline as of a few weeks ago. If there really is a service pack coming out, any idea as to what issues it will address? Regards, Dave. __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 10:16 AM ... I'm not too thrilled with it as none of the issues I was interested in were fixed. Okay, I'll bite. What are the issues you were interested in? __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
Have you checked out http://www.cfbughunt.org? Matt Liotta President CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ 888-408-0900 x901 -Original Message- From: Everett, Al [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 8:00 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX... From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 10:16 AM ... I'm not too thrilled with it as none of the issues I was interested in were fixed. Okay, I'll bite. What are the issues you were interested in? __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
Also keep in mind they're putting in place a new fix/update release process. I'll leave the details to MM but I think it'll be quite effective rather then waiting for service packs. Stace -Original Message- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 10:16 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have moved to CFMX... Since no one asked me to keep this a secret... I as well as others have been given access to an early release of the service pack. I'm not too thrilled with it as none of the issues I was interested in were fixed. Below are the notes associated with the service pack. COM-Related Issues The following issues with COM have been fixed: Issue ID COM objects with multiple IDispatch interfaces could not be used by ColdFusion MX. A java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Argument is not a COM object error would occur. 46303 Attempting to use COM objects with read-only or write-only properties could fail. 46612 Looping over a COM collection object using a COM object that has com2Java-generated Java stubs could cause a method selection exception. 46150 Passing parameters to COM objects by reference did not work correctly. 46776 ColdFusion MX would not allow you to use a literal value in CFML code that calls a COM method that takes a simple value passed by reference. You were required to use a variable as the argument in your CFML code. 45605 Saving COM objects in shared variable scopes could cause a Null Pointer Exception when ColdFusion executed the CFDUMP tag or if debugging were enabled. 45733 The following additional COM-related changes and improvements have been made: Change ID Significant improvements have been made to COM object performance on second and subsequent references by caching object type information. NOTE: Due to this change, if the COM object interface definitions change, you must restart ColdFusion MX to use the new COM object interface type definitions. 37315 Database-Related Issues The following database-related issues have been fixed: Issue ID SELECT and DROP keywords contained in SQL could produce a No ResultSet set was produced error message. 45938 45936 CFUPDATE did not work correctly when the target DB table has a compound primary key comprised of multiple columns. 46433 On upgrade from ColdFusion 5, MySQL and PostgreSQL data sources were erroneously migrated as ODBC Socket data sources on UNIX and cannot be deleted in the Administrator. This updater enables you to use the Administrator to delete the incorrect data sources and recreate them correctly. 46877 An exception message for CFUPDATE erroneously reversed the table and data source names. 45170 Invalid connections to Informix, Oracle, or DB2 data sources could erroneously be reused in the connection pool. 46251 Administrator-Related Issues The following issues with the ColdFusion MX Administrator have been fixed: Issue ID Scheduled tasks were not running at the correct time. 46312 ERROR.* variables were not available in the site-wide error handler. 46761 A potential script-execution vulnerability existed. 47096 When using web server Basic Authentication, the user was not prompted for the Administrator password after logging in to the web server, even when the ColdFusion MX Administrator password prompt is enabled. 47474 Runtime and Debugging-Related Issues The issues with the ColdFusion runtime and debugging information have been fixed: Issue ID A potential cross-site scripting vulnerability existed in a handler module. 46113 A malformed mail file could cause the mail service to fail to start. 46502 Client variables stored using the clientStorage=Cookie option did not work correctly if the case of the application name specified in the CFAPPLICATION tag was not correct. 46656 The DateDiff() function was not compatible with ColdFusion 5. 47153 Strings suffixed with D, d, F, or f would erroneously evaluate as numeric values. 47453 The word undelivered used as part of filenames for messages written to the \undelivr folder for undelivered e-mail was misspelled, undelievered. 45981 Messages written to the \undelivr folder for undelivered e-mail could have multiple undelivered_ strings at the start of the filename. 45980 ColdFusion MX did not attempt to resend undeliverable mail that was manually moved back to the mail spool directory. 45979 The debug output did not list the variables for a scope in alphabetic order. 45754 When using the NTAuth class to authenticate against a domain, ColdFusion MX would hang if the domain was not available or if you specified an incorrect domain. 47403 Internationalization-Related Issues The following internationalization-related issues have been fixed: Issue ID Multipart/form-data was not correctly controlled by
Re: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
I didn't see any WDDX issues addressed. There are some -- I can make WDDX fail, if the packet is too large (works in CF 5.0) I was under the impression that it and other CFMX WDDX issues had been reported by others. I have been told that I can't report a bug because I don't (currently) run a supported version of CFMX. I don't know where to go to find out if a bug report exists. Any ideas? TIA Dick On Wednesday, September 11, 2002, at 08:58 AM, Stacy Young wrote: Also keep in mind they're putting in place a new fix/update release process. I'll leave the details to MM but I think it'll be quite effective rather then waiting for service packs. Stace snip __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
Unfortunately, we don't have a publicly available bug list, and running CF in an unsupported configuration will interfere w/ you getting that info by contacting support, because you're not going to get an incident opened for an unsupported config. You can keep an eye on the CF support site, watch these lists, and even www.CFBughunt.org. We're looking at ways to get more public info out there about known issues (bugs), hopefully whatever efforts we make in that area will help you (as well as everyone else!). Vernon Viehe ColdFusion Community Manager Macromedia, Inc. -Original Message- From: Dick Applebaum To: CF-Talk Sent: 9/11/2002 9:10 AM Subject: Re: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX... I didn't see any WDDX issues addressed. There are some -- I can make WDDX fail, if the packet is too large (works in CF 5.0) I was under the impression that it and other CFMX WDDX issues had been reported by others. I have been told that I can't report a bug because I don't (currently) run a supported version of CFMX. I don't know where to go to find out if a bug report exists. Any ideas? TIA Dick On Wednesday, September 11, 2002, at 08:58 AM, Stacy Young wrote: Also keep in mind they're putting in place a new fix/update release process. I'll leave the details to MM but I think it'll be quite effective rather then waiting for service packs. Stace snip __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
Dick, I ran into the large wddx packet issue myself. There is a bug in our db for it - but there is also a quick fix for now if you want to use it. It is my experience the issue only occurs when the packet is large and contains dateTime strings. My fix was to simply replace the dateTime 'marker'. Please use this at your own risk: cfset fileData = REReplace(fileData,dateTime(.*?)T(.*?)-(.*?)/dateTime,string\1 \2/string,all) Of course, change fileData to your packet. Also, note that I munged the dateTinme value a bit as well. You could mod my regex to leave it as is. === Raymond Camden, ColdFusion Jedi Master for Hire Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo IM : cfjedimaster My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. - Yoda -Original Message- From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 12:10 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX... I didn't see any WDDX issues addressed. There are some -- I can make WDDX fail, if the packet is too large (works in CF 5.0) I was under the impression that it and other CFMX WDDX issues had been reported by others. __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
Raymond The failure I experienced was in CFMX using WDDX2CFML on a packet created in CF 5.0, and it reported a date error -- so it appears the quick fix addresses this. I will give it a try. Thanks Dick On Wednesday, September 11, 2002, at 10:38 AM, Raymond Camden wrote: Dick, I ran into the large wddx packet issue myself. There is a bug in our db for it - but there is also a quick fix for now if you want to use it. It is my experience the issue only occurs when the packet is large and contains dateTime strings. My fix was to simply replace the dateTime 'marker'. Please use this at your own risk: cfset fileData = REReplace(fileData,dateTime(.*?)T(.*?)-(.*?)/dateTime,string\1 \2/string,all) Of course, change fileData to your packet. Also, note that I munged the dateTinme value a bit as well. You could mod my regex to leave it as is. === Raymond Camden, ColdFusion Jedi Master for Hire Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo IM : cfjedimaster My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. - Yoda -Original Message- From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 12:10 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX... I didn't see any WDDX issues addressed. There are some -- I can make WDDX fail, if the packet is too large (works in CF 5.0) I was under the impression that it and other CFMX WDDX issues had been reported by others. __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
Raymond Yes, that in fact did bypass the problem -- I was able to deserialize on CFMX a large packet created on a remote CF 5.0 site. The Packet contained a record set with 509 rows and 16 columns with a total packet size of 747065-- so it works with a pretty large packet. This is not the norm, but, sometimes, processing packets this large is required! Thanks for the quick fix. Dick On Wednesday, September 11, 2002, at 10:38 AM, Raymond Camden wrote: Dick, I ran into the large wddx packet issue myself. There is a bug in our db for it - but there is also a quick fix for now if you want to use it. It is my experience the issue only occurs when the packet is large and contains dateTime strings. My fix was to simply replace the dateTime 'marker'. Please use this at your own risk: cfset fileData = REReplace(fileData,dateTime(.*?)T(.*?)-(.*?)/dateTime,string\1 \2/string,all) Of course, change fileData to your packet. Also, note that I munged the dateTinme value a bit as well. You could mod my regex to leave it as is. === Raymond Camden, ColdFusion Jedi Master for Hire Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo IM : cfjedimaster My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. - Yoda -Original Message- From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 12:10 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX... I didn't see any WDDX issues addressed. There are some -- I can make WDDX fail, if the packet is too large (works in CF 5.0) I was under the impression that it and other CFMX WDDX issues had been reported by others. __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
Hmmm... Does anyone know in what format the sp will be distributed, and what process will be required to install it? In particular, for the Linux platform? Also, when will the trial versions be updated to include the service pack. What I really want to know is: Will the users of the port to OS X, be able to download and install without going through another port of either: 1) the service pack 2) the updated trial version Is a RC of the sp available? I have quite a few readers who will be interested this and I feel obligated to make their upgrade as smooth as possible. TIA Dick On Wednesday, September 11, 2002, at 06:44 AM, John Beynon wrote: See below: snip From: Vernon Viehe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 2:36 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: COM CFMX Workaround I hear, from a reliable source, that there will be a service pack for CFMX by or around the end of Sept, and among other issues addressed by it, are great improvements in the COM area. Vernon Viehe ColdFusion Community Manager Developer Relations Macromedia, Inc. Online diary: http://vvmx.blogspot.com/ /snip -Original Message- From: Dave Carabetta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 September 2002 14:38 To: CF-Talk Subject: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have moved to CFMX... Only patch there is out right now is the Apache hot fix for 2.0.39 -- CFMX SP1 should see the daylight within the next two weeks or very end of September. While not disputing your information, where did you get that info from? By several accounts (including MM employees), a service pack wasn't even on the timeline as of a few weeks ago. If there really is a service pack coming out, any idea as to what issues it will address? Regards, Dave. __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
No problem, and I'm glad it helped. It drove me crazy a few weeks back when I was working on a CFC. (Soon to be released - a Bug Tracker. Forgive the blatant plug. ;) === Raymond Camden, ColdFusion Jedi Master for Hire Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo IM : cfjedimaster My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. - Yoda -Original Message- From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 3:16 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX... Raymond Yes, that in fact did bypass the problem -- I was able to deserialize on CFMX a large packet created on a remote CF 5.0 site. The Packet contained a record set with 509 rows and 16 columns with a total packet size of 747065-- so it works with a pretty large packet. This is not the norm, but, sometimes, processing packets this large is required! Thanks for the quick fix. __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
In particular, for the Linux platform? bin - installer asks you questions, etc. You'll have to do the install on linux and migrate everything back over to OS X. Is a RC of the sp available? No. Not til next week or so. I have quite a few readers who will be interested this and I feel obligated to make their upgrade as smooth as possible. TIA Dick -- Todd Rafferty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - http://www.web-rat.com/ | Team Macromedia Volunteer for ColdFusion | http://www.macromedia.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/ | http://www.flashCFM.com/ - webRat (Moderator)| http://www.ultrashock.com/ - webRat (Back-end Moderator) | __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: MX Service Pack? was Re: Looking back - for those who have mo ved to CFMX...
Well, I hope that isn't true. On the trial version, the shell script asks you questions also tests the platform the script is running on (uname). You can fudge the platform, but then it decompresses the another script, and launches it. This also tests the platform and aborts after wiping itself out. It was interesting, in that JRun used the same basic install packaging, but did not abort for a non-supported platform. I commend Jesse on his expertise... g it caused me and many others to do the ugly port. But, it did what he set out to do! I just hope that the update won't find it necessary to abort, as there is a CFMX product already installed. Dick On Wednesday, September 11, 2002, at 12:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: bin - installer asks you questions, etc. You'll have to do the install on linux and migrate everything back over to OS X. __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
