|
Im using Visual Studio 2010.
My host is using Linux systems to host its sites, so ASP and ASP.Net is a no-go.
Thanks for helping me, Mike. 
Virtual Space Shuttle Astronaut
|
|
|
|
|
it never needs your username/password; it needs to log into the sender's email service, not yours.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
No i mean the username/password to access my http server.
Virtual Space Shuttle Astronaut
|
|
|
|
|
It does not necessarily require user name/password. All you need to know on the server is: who and when the report was sent and what does the report say.
You could implement some sort of hash to filter out spam traffic at http end.
If ASP/.Net is no go and you have PHP skills, you can rustle up a simple form to accept the above information on your website. *Then* you could send an email or insert into database or whatever from the webserver.
You could then submit this form from your desktop application code.
It does seem daunting at first for a bug reporting mechanism - but this is a much reliable approach than trying to send the email.
Hope this helps.
Shreekar
|
|
|
|
|
No i do not have PHP skills, but i figure it would'nt be that hard to make an online form for the bug reporting?
Im also waiting for Mike's example.
Virtual Space Shuttle Astronaut
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry I was slow at getting back to you. Got sidetracked with my project and then it was all downhill from there.
I'm assuming you are still looking for some sort of solution to this. Are you interested in a method to create an execption report that can be emailed to you, or post to a web page?
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
That's ok.
Im looking for an online bug reporter form as an built-in reporter form in my application doesn't work very well. Users click the bug Reporter menuitem in my application at which point the online bug reporter form opens in their browser, from there, they can specify all the info and in addition upload an exception report. I have yet to find out how to produce such a report.
Thanks for your offer to help out. 
Virtual Space Shuttle Astronaut
|
|
|
|
|
Has anyone here had experiance using multiple barcode scanners with a USB interface? One of our applications currently use USB to COM emulator and we need to get rid this...too many problems configuring them. So I'm goign to remove all the code for that portion and start fresh to implement USB into our application. We'll need up to two barcode scanners each using there own session of our application on the same PC. I read up on the Microsoft.PointOfService assembly and it seem the way to go, but I was wanting all the input I can get. The main issue is to have both sessions going and remember which scanner goes to which session of the application. Thanks for your help.
|
|
|
|
|
please don't remove any messages, what remains of the thread makes no sense any more.
(indeed, the widget just should not be available at all once a reply has been posted)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
You may want to check out the HIDlibrary on SourceForge.net
I've used this library to build an application that integrates a MagTek USB magnetic swipe reader into a Point of Sales application. I did not require 2 USB swipe readers, but it should work.
Check it out ...
http://sourceforge.net/projects/hidlibrary/[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Seems the files are no longer available. Is it possible to get a copy from you?
Cheers,
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure I understand your problem; I assume you have peripherals (bar code scanners) with a serial interface, and are using USB-to-serial cables. If so, I don't see where the USBSerialEmulator comes in:
1.
a USB-to-serial cable comes with its driver, making the serial port available to Windows and all interested apps. You typically can have as many as you want, and choose the port name.
2.
bar code readers just emulate a keyboard, all they do is emit a string corresponding to the bar code, so a little code snippet based on SerialPort should be good.
3.
furthermore most bar code scanners can be taught to add a prefix and a postfix string of your choice, so you could e.g. prefix something that identifies the scanner, and postfix a newline combination.
If all the above applies, simply have one serial data receiver handle all the scanners, look for the prefix, and dispatch the actual data to the appropriate destination.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry....We have USB scanners and connect them as USB then use the USBSerialEmulator.
|
|
|
|
|
I may have to read up on this a bit.
Who created USBSerialEmulator? and what is the scanner's vendor, make and model?
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
Honeywell 3820...the emulator is Honeywell also. We have delt with Honeywell support on this and their response is "You cannot connect two scanners to the same PC using the USBSerialEmulator." We've tried, but it's just flaky. And when they switch the scanners around...its messy. We'd like plug and play with the ability to use both sections of the application at the same time on the same PC with two different scanners....that is why I think the original programmer tried the COM port.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, if they are positive it isn't supposed to work for more than one, you should drop them and go for regular, non-USB, scanners, with a good old RS232C interface; then use USB-to-serial cables, with its driver, etc, as I laid out in my original reply. Make sure the model you choose has prefix/postfix capability.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
The problem with that is we have about 35 scanners at $200+ each. I had a simliar idea.
|
|
|
|
|
If Honeywell can't solve it, it will cost you.
With what you have, it is either keep the hardware and have new software, maybe a totally new USB driver or something (is anyone going to do that with a total cost of ownership significantly less than 7000$?); or replace the hardware, add USB cables (15 to 25$ each), and a little piece of code in your app.
I have done some bar code projects before, and I know which way to choose here; rather than spending money locking you deeper into a suboptimal choice, I'd go for the open approach that works just fine.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
That is why I want to use USB and get rid of the com port configuration in our custom .NET pack&ship appl. I don't think your following my post. I've already came to the conclutions you've suggested. The com port configuration is what is the problem. I would like to implement USB into the application and if you have any suggestions on how then please suggest something
|
|
|
|
|
AFAIK you need a good USB driver then; and that would be specific to both the peripheral and the operating system (some drivers survive a single major Windows upgrade). I don't think it is up to a customer to create drivers for a manufacturer's hardware, but if you were to go that route: I wish you good luck. And I wouldn't mind reading a CP article when it's done.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi!
I have some problems with the BackGroundWorker. The code can make the DoWork fire, but when the DoWork complets the RunWorkerComlpeted do not fire.
What is wrong?
Peter Schwennesen
Public Class Test
Public WithEvents BGW As System.ComponentModel.BackgroundWorker
Private Test As Boolean
Public Function FindAllMachines() As Boolean
Test = False
BGW = New System.ComponentModel.BackgroundWorker
AddHandler BGW.DoWork, AddressOf BGW_DoWork
AddHandler BGW.RunWorkerCompleted, AddressOf BGW_RunWorkerCompleted
BGW.RunWorkerAsync()
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(30000)
Return Test
End Function
Private Sub BGW_DoWork(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As System.ComponentModel.DoWorkEventArgs)
e.Result = True
End Sub
Private Sub BGW_RunWorkerCompleted(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As System.ComponentModel.RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs)
Test = True
End Sub
End Class
|
|
|
|
|
I see nothing wrong. Try adding a Console.WriteLine("BGW done") in the completion handler.
BTW: rather than waiting a fixed amount of time, you should use proper synchronization; have a look at AutoResetEvent, and its Set() and WaitOne() methods.
|
|
|
|
|
You do realize that you put your main thread to sleep for 30 seconds, right? In that time, your main thread cannot respond to the Completed event that returns immediately upon execution. So, you're async method is going to return True to the Completed event, but since the main thread is asleep for 30 seconds, nothing will happen until then.
Anyway, your function FindAllMachine should not be returning a value, it should be a Sub. You should be getting that value form the RunWorkerCompleted event. After all, why would you sleep the main thread so it can't respond to mouse events while you're looking for machines??
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
