EPiFields problems

Vote:
 
I'm having problems getting EPiFields to work. I've downloaded the files specified on http://www.episerver.com/templates/Page____1351.aspx, but I'm having problems finishing step 6. The EPiFields catalouge is named EPiServer.Fields and this is where all the URL's are linked to as well. BUT, IIS does ont recognize this as a valid path. (http://xxxx/episerver.fields) I get a 404 error. By changing the foldername to episerverfields without the '.', I manage to enter the .../episerverfields/admin/config.aspx file, but I cannot view the pages because all the files are compiled with episerver.fields. I've changed all the LinkURL in the tblPage table to ..../episerverfields/... So when I try to browse to a epifield page now, I get the error: "The current template "/episerverfields/basesamples/EPiFieldsPage.aspx" does not match the specified page type file "/piserver.fields/basesamples/EPiFieldsPage.aspx" This isn't working, so I would appreciate if someone could tell me the correct way to get this to work. I'm starting to feel a bit lost... :(
#17341
Mar 25, 2008 19:32
Vote:
 
Hmmmm. Dunno how, but I managed to loose an 'e' when I pasted the error message. The error message should be: "The current template "/episerverfields/basesamples/EPiFieldsPage.aspx" does not match the specified page type file "/episerver.fields/basesamples/EPiFieldsPage.aspx""
#18001
Mar 25, 2008 19:42
Vote:
 
Hi Lars! As youve already discovered, EPiFields is built to use the foldername "EPiServer.Fields", and this is not changeable without rebuilding the assembly, i.e. it cannot be done without the sources to EPiFields available. If this directoryname is not "allowed" on Your IIS (urlscan filters perhaps?) there is no way to get the current version of EPiFields to run. We may consider changing the directoryname used by EPiFields in an upcoming release, and I'll file this as a feature request to the devteam. More information: Some urlscanning filters prevents foldernames containing period-characters to be used in order to prevent possible hackattacks of the form: "../../" et.c. It can be argued wether this approach is desired behaviour or not, it would be sufficient to check for _leading_ period-characters IMHO. Best regards, Johan Olofsson EP Research
#18002
Mar 25, 2008 19:42
* You are NOT allowed to include any hyperlinks in the post because your account hasn't associated to your company. User profile should be updated.