Publishing

[Sunvee]

Have had trouble revamping site - (Just switched from FP2000 to 2003 on win
XP - not happy with '03 yet!). Host setup new url to hold new design and did
get major changes published thru FTP (He doesn't understand FP and says the
extensions are up). Now get these messages when tweaking final look: The
file ‘images/daughter/_vti_cfn/CM-10.jpg’ exists on the destination server
but does not exist in the current web site. Would you like FP to remove it
from ‘ftp://….’? Isn't the FTP also the destination site? I'm confused.

 

[Ronx]

Get your host to reinstall the extensions, since using FTP has probably
corrupted them.
Never use FTP with a FrontPage extended web site.
Open your local site in FrontPage, and use File->Publish Site. Type in
the we address starting with http:// in the form http://www.example.com
and publish.
Again, never use FTP - this will corrupt the extensions.

 

[Sunvee]

Thanks Ronx, I have sent along your remarks to my host. We were having
trouble getting '03 to do what 2000 did quite easliy so that's why we
reverted to FTP. We will NOT make that mistake again. Silence will confirm
it worked! Sunvee

 

[Trevor L.]

Thanks Ronx, I have sent along your remarks to my host. We were
having trouble getting '03 to do what 2000 did quite easliy so that's
why we reverted to FTP. We will NOT make that mistake again.
Silence will confirm it worked! Sunvee

Strange,
I found FP2003 quiet easy for publishing - probably better than FP2002.

There was one point - I had to set up the remote location for each different
web,
E.G.
Web #1 opened on disk
Web #1 opened on server
Web #2 opened on server
(I don't bother with opening Web #2 on disk, since the FP extensions don't
work locally. I just publish in reverse to update it.)

Web #1 is an FTP site, but it worked perfectly, once I figured out the
above. If your site is FTP, then either use an FTP program or FP, but I
recommend FP as it keeps track of how up-to-date each version of the site is
(local or remote)

 

[Trevor L.]

I found FP2003 quiet easy for publishing - probably better than
FP2002.

Actually, everything I do is quiet as I leave my speakers off when I don't
want sound )

But I did find FP2003 quite easy for publishing

 

[Sunvee]

Thank all of you for your replies. Trevor, I jumped from 2000 to -03 so
can't compare -02. As for the silence, it just meant the suggestions worked
and I wouldn't have to send another question. My site is in the 24-hour
transition to going live. I don't quite understand why it takes that long to
transfer it from the numbered url to the named domain...but I'm just happy
knowing it's on its way! BTW - I am a "seat of my pants" learner - and miss
the shared pages of -00 - don't yet understand "dynamic" pages - and know I
made more work for myself than necessary for the lack of such understanding.
--
in Tampa

I found FP2003 quiet easy for publishing - probably better than
FP2002.

Actually, everything I do is quiet as I leave my speakers off when I don't
want sound )

But I did find FP2003 quite easy for publishing
--
Cheers,
Trevor L.
[ Microsoft MVP - FrontPage ]
MVPS Website: http://trevorl.mvps.org/