|
It's an open source application. Just host it yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Can you please elaborate? Your question is not quite clear.
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of us use Skype. Don't reinvent the wheel here. Also, your question is very vague. Are you a teacher and want to teach students over the web, or are you a programmer trying to write an application to host online classes, or are you trying to put the content of the class online as a self-learning thing, or what?
Also, are you even using the word "class" in the educational sense? Or are you trying to create a code-model for an object in some language that calls THAT a "class" ?
Be more specific. Do not be afraid to type. Proper questions have at least 50 words, maybe more.
|
|
|
|
|
yes, I am a teacher and I used skype before.
but skype is locked in Iran with goverment now and I need to program an online class (web base) myself.
please help me.
|
|
|
|
|
I think you need to make a proxy so you can use Skype and get around that stupid law. There is no reason for a government to restrict communication between its citizens and the rest of the world, unless they are trying to oppress the citizens. What harm would Iranians using Skype do?
I am sorry you are in this position. It is a violation of your god-given human rights.
I suggest you take a look at this: http://www.tokbox.com/[^]
|
|
|
|
|
no, that link can't help me. becuase that will be lock soon. I need to make it myself and upload it in a Iranin host. if I used a site or app like that that will be locked soon.
|
|
|
|
|
It is OPEN SOURCE. Just get a copy and host it yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I am a Newby on SQL, but trying to learn. I am not new to computing.(30 year experience).
Is it possible to restrict Raw DB access to DB Administrators, and have other staff restricted to using Stored Procedures according to their particular function in the organisation.
A Particular Example:-
In a banking environment, a teller at the counter can accept say a £100.00 lodgement to an account. The Stored procedure would credit the amount to the requisite account, and to her cash drawer. At the same time, she would not have access to either her cashdrawer table, nor to the account the money is lodged to,but she is authorised to perform the stored proceure that accomplishes the transaction.
Bram van Kampen
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty certain it is - depends on 'which SQL variant' as to how you do it.
It's also reasonably common to create materialised views, mirror databases etc for reporting, and let the average joe or jill blow access those instead of the 'raw tables'
'g'
|
|
|
|
|
Yes - most databases implement the EXEC permission on individual stored procedures. So, you create a user that has ZERO permissions to do anything, and then you simply GRANT EXEC to the procs you want. Better to do this with roles of course, so you don't have to grant each proc to each new user.
GRANT EXEC on dbo.MyStoredProc to MyDomain\MyUser
|
|
|
|
|
Bram van Kampen wrote: Is it possible to restrict Raw DB access to DB Administrators
Yes, but it tends to be problematic.
Factors
- The application is not the database, so there might and probably will be other concerns for security
- The users must either be managed entirely in the database or they must be mapped. The former is a potential licensing issue along with a potential operations management issue. The latter requires a user management application which adds complexity without necessarily solving anything that just a application based system wouldn't solve also.
|
|
|
|
|
I have the following code fragment:-
public static bool SetCurrentUser(String UserKey, String Password)
{
System.Data.SqlServerCe.SqlCeConnection con =
new System.Data.SqlServerCe.SqlCeConnection();
con.ConnectionString = DBConnectionstring;
con.Open();
DataSet ds1 = new DataSet();
System.Data.SqlServerCe.SqlCeDataAdapter da =
new System.Data.SqlServerCe.SqlCeDataAdapter();
String sQueery = "SELECT * FROM Users WHERE UserKey=" + UserKey +
"AND Password=" + Password;
da = new System.Data.SqlClient.SqlDataAdapter(sQueery, con);
con.Close();
return false;
}
It fails on the line with:
da = new System.Data.SqlClient.SqlDataAdapter(sQueery, con);
2 errors:
Error 1 The best overloaded method match for 'System.Data.SqlClient.SqlDataAdapter.SqlDataAdapter(string, string)' has some invalid arguments C:\Users\Bram\Documents\Visual Studio 2012\Projects\SgCntr\SgCntr\Program.cs 59 18 SgCntr
Error 2 Argument 2: cannot convert from 'System.Data.SqlServerCe.SqlCeConnection' to 'string' C:\Users\Bram\Documents\Visual Studio 2012\Projects\SgCntr\SgCntr\Program.cs 59 68 SgCntr
Why does this happen! I had thought that the type of 'con' was adequately specified, and that
public SqlDataAdapter(
string selectCommandText,
SqlConnection selectConnection
)
should have been choosen by the compiler.
Why am I struggeling here!
Kind Regards,
Bram van Kampen
|
|
|
|
|
It doesn't work because SqlCeConnection does not derive from SqlConnection and that's what the SqlDataAdapter is expecting.
You have to use the SqlCeDataAdapter class in the System.Data.SqlServerCe namespace.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks,
That was helpfull.
In general, how does one find out 'what' derrives from 'what'
Also, what's the difference between the 'Ce' marked SQL funcionality, and the Not 'Ce' marked.
Does it mean that when I move to a comercial SQL DB that I have to re-write tons of code.
Bram van Kampen
|
|
|
|
|
Bram van Kampen wrote: In general, how does one find out 'what' derrives from 'what'
The MSDN documentation on the class in question. It's the Inheritence Hierarchy at the top of the page.
Bram van Kampen wrote: Also, what's the difference between the 'Ce' marked SQL funcionality, and the
Not 'Ce' marked.
You appear to be using Sql Server COMPACT EDITION. If you move this code to using a full SQL Server, yes, you would have to rewrite everything that uses Sql Server CE.
Unless you're writing code to run on a device instead of a PC, I would suggest using Sql Server Express and not CE. CE is for running on devices, such as Windows CE.
|
|
|
|
|
Is possible make a connection to another Pc using modem like HyperTerminal o a Dialup connection and access can access to share folders, navigate...
Thx
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but it's incredibly slow.
A modem in Windows is just another network gateway.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello.
I have built two projects that contains the following:
Project One
A native C++ DLL that exports a class.
A managed C++ DLL that allows the native DLL to be used by adding a reference to this managed DLL in a .NET Project.
Project Two
And a C# test application to test it all.
When I run the Test application everything works as expected. But when I copy the native.dll, managed.dll and Test.exe to another machine the test.exe fails to start complaining that it can find managed.dll or one of its components! But both the native.dll and managed.dll are in the same physical directory as test.exe, to say I'm confused is a bit of an understatement.
The projects were built as two solutions using Visual Studio 2012 Pro, native.dll and managed.dll as one solution and the tester in its own solution. The managed.dll and test.exe have a dependency on .NET 4.
Has anyone came across this behaviour before, and how was it fixed?
Bubba
|
|
|
|
|
.Net 4 comes in a few flavors ("Framework 4" or "Framework 4 Client Profile"). The Client Profile lacks some of the dlls of the full version. Try to install the full version on the target computer.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for the reply, but I have already installed this. When I originally copied the files over and ran the test.exe I was informed that I needed the .NET runtime installed.
So I downloaded dotNetFx40_Full_x86_x64 from Microsoft to address this, which of course adds to the confusion. The system (Windows 2008R2 x64) is up to date with service packs and updates so I don't really know where to go with this.
Bubba
|
|
|
|
|
Could also be an issue of bit-ness. Did you built for "Any CPU" or x86 or x64? The target system is 64 bit, and what about your development machine?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Bernard, thanks again for the reply.
The DLL projects are built for x86 and the test application was built for AnyCPU. I've been of the understanding the x86 will work on x64 without issue, so I've no reason to suspect the DLLs in this case. I used the AnyCPU option for the test as I assumed I could then use a single test.exe to test either x86 or x64 builds of the DLL. But are you tell me this isn't the case?
Bubba
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, x86 works fine on x64. The problem is that you cannot mix 32- and 64-bit code in the same process, which is what it appears that you're doing.
Your .DLL's are all 32-bit and since you compiled the app that uses them as AnyCPU, it'll run as 64-bit on a 64-bit machine. You have to go into your project properties and, on the Compile tab, change the TargetCPU to x86.
The bitness (architecture-SA!) must match between your .EXE and your .DLL's. If you compiled the .DLL's as AnyCPU, it would have worked.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Dave,
Thanks for the reply, and as a result I am wiser now than I was 5 minutes ago. I've built the test.exe as x86 and all is well. So the whole thing was down to my misunderstanding of the "AnyCPU", a lesson learned and a mistake I hope never to repeat.
Thanks.
Bubba
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
