cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

PowerBuilder.net Image files

Former Member
0 Kudos

I have been working for a while to translate an application I developed from PB classic to .net.  There are a number of struggles because I have not found a good set of documentation.  (I do have access to the Sybase docs, but with versioning differences, upgrades, and Microsoft making wholesale changes to it's operating system frequently, this documentation (PB 11.5) is often out of date.

One of the issues I have had the most trouble with was deploying bitmap image files to the .net application.  I had tried it with and without the path, with relative paths, with absolute paths.  I had tried referencing the image in the pbr (again - with and without path information).  Lets just say I tried a lot of variations.

Finally I was able to get one of my bitmap icons to display, and figured I was on my way.  Turned out I could not get any other icons to display even though they are coded and referenced just the same.  Figuring out it  was not a problem with the Powerbuilder reference to the icon, but the location in which it was stored, I decided to do a system wide search of the icons that did display and did not.

The upshot was that I found the displaying icon in the following path...

C:\inetpub\wwwroot\app_name_root\file\common\c\inetpub\wwwroot\app_name\images. 

None of the other application images are in that location.  But when I copy them over, they of course are then available and displaying in the app.

My questions are...

1. Where can I find documentation on this path?

2. Why would the deploy process deposit one image file, but none of the others?  (OK, The image found is the first referenced by the app.)

3. Is there an upgrade guide to be found anywhere?  (As in, if I was successfully running PB11.5 .net framework 3.0 and IIS 5.0 on a windows XP machine, yet want/need to upgrade to windows 8.1 machine running .net 4.5 and IIS7, is there a guide to the changes or do we have to muddle through to discover how ourselves?)

4. Is PB.net viable for the foreseeable future, or is it already known to be limited and I am wasting my time?  What are the limiting factors?  Appeon is not a viable alternative for me - costs far too much.

Thanks all.

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (1)

Answers (1)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi H;

First if all ... Your not doing PB.Net as your still trying to deploy a WebForms application target which is only available from PB CLASSIC v12.5.1 or lower. PB.Net is an entirely different IDE and ONLY supports client/server applications not Web.

Answers to your questions...

1) the WebForms target allows you to define external resources to be deployed.

2) Check your WebForms project.

3) PB 11.5 only supports .Net 2.0

4) Viable for Web:  No

     Limited: Yes, C/S only apps.

     Wasting your time:  Yes, neither PB Classic or

           PB.Net can or ever will do native Web

          as far as we can see.

      Appeon: only option for PB Classic to the web

            For now & foreseeable future.

Regards ... Chris

PS: these things were pointed out in a previous posting.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Chris,

Sybase documentation refers to these functions as 11.5 .NET and everything I read say Classic and .NET are created from the same IDE.

I am creating 11.5 ".NET Web Forms" targets.  I am running the resulting application on the web and not as a client/server application.

PowerBuilder.Net only supports Client-Server?

Why Sybase would call it .net and you say it is not is a bit of a head scratcher.  If there is a better description of what you are saying, then could you please provide a link - I would be interested in reading that.

Thanks,

H

Former Member
0 Kudos

There are two IDE's now ... PB Classic and PB.Net.

Only PB Classic can create a Webforms application - which is based on .Net 2.0 code. However, SAP removed the Webforms feature in v12.5.2 (EOL).

Former Member
0 Kudos

OK, I understand...  You are speaking of "current" and I am speaking of previous versions.   Thanks for the input and clarification.