SOLVED Setup complete but can't login or see site

[jakob]

I just setup GS 3.3.5. It is my first setup. I got an email saying setup complete but I can't log on admin or see the site at all. It is on a remote server. Depending on browser I get a HTTP 404 or a page saying: No input file specified.
I turned on debug mode.

Any help will be most welcome

EDIT: On the admin page that told that the site had been set up everything was "ok" and written in green - but I still can't call any files in any folders in the GS root folder in a browser. I can see that the files are there in my ftp-program.
I made another test site to test if it had the same problem and that is the same.

[Tyblitz]

Have you tested on localhost before, and if so, what were the results there? On the remote, did you navigate to the yourdomain.com/admin subdirectory? What is the FTP folder structure of your remote and in what did you install (eg public_html or www?

Evidently you're not reaching the correct path.

[jakob]

Thank you very much for trying to help. I hope I can answer your questions. I have close to no experience with servers - except just uploading html files etc to web hosts that just work - and I didn't make the settings for this domain at the web hotel - but I do have access to changing them.

Is localhost a local server? No I didn't try that.
I made a new GS test site from a new download of GS just to test - but with the same result.
The GS test site is at capelle.dk/test3

I think I am actually reaching the correct folders - cause when I call (in a browser) a folder or a file (at capelle.dk) that doesn't exist, I get a different error message. It seems like GS (combined with the server php-settings or something?) is blocking access to everything under the GS root. The main site capelle.dk (with html files, images etc) works as normal including all subfolders except the GS folder.
On the server the path to capelle.dk is /www/capelle.dk

[Tyblitz]

Aha, it seems your server is configured with CGI. See the answer to the question in this link: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14555...-specified. It seems quite complicated to setup correctly (I have no experience with it).

Now I think you're very likely running on Windows/IIS (not Linux/Apache), because the error 'No input file specified' is linked to this setup. Can you verify this? If it is the case, have a look at http://get-simple.info/wiki/installation:requirements; which says you need a Linux host with Apache for GS to work.

[jakob]

I temporarily solved the problem by removing the htaccess file from the GS root folder on the server. Seems it was blocking the access. Of course I will have to solve the problem permanently in a different way.
I will post a new thread that address this problem directly. EDIT: I will not do that anyhow for now.

And to answer your questions: I'm not sure if you are asking about the server or my local pc that I'm using to connect to the site.The server is running Linux with Apache. My local machines are running windows and Linux and the page I got was identical on both machines. In SeaMonkey/Firefox/Chrome the page says "No input file specified." and in Explorer it was a HTTP 404 page "Explorer-style" (in Windows).

Thanks again

[Tyblitz]

I don't know a great deal about servers either, just the basics. Was asking about your server; and if it's Linux/Apache that's not the problem. And yes, localhost is a local server; you should take a look at WAMPserver to test your sites locally before uploading them. If I were you I'd have a look at the stackoverflow answer I linked to in this thread before, you never know it might come in handy. Sorry I couldn't help any more =)

[jakob]

I already read the stackoverflow thread you linked to. I didn't understand much of it but I think it was that way I got the idea that the htaccess was a key element in the problem so it was useful Hope I'm closer to solving the problem - and learning something in the process.

I don't see the advantage of testing locally instead of on the web server? In this case I'm creating the site in a subfolder and then plan to move it when it's ready to publish and replace the site as it is now. This way I make a site that works on the server ... if I get it to work Anyway it has to be online if you want others (client, coworkers) to be able to see it while the work is in progress.

[Tyblitz]

Well, yes that's the upside of it; & should be fine if you're doing nothing risky. But on the other hand, you win much more time by not having to wait for slow server loading times, simply copy-pasting your files in a local folder instead of uploading them through FTP each time. So the argument is speed, most importantly (for me), especially when you code the template. 
And also for debug, plugin development or trying new features. 

Anyhow, any self-respecting developer will get a local server to test stuff on at one point

[jakob]

Ah, yes of course - the workflow of working locally will be much easier when I get that far. It's been a while since I worked with anything web related and normally it's just html, css, client-side javascript, where I by default is working locally, so that difference wasn't very relevant - and I didn't need a local web server. I appreciate your advice.
Can you recommend a local web server for Windows that is especially easy to setup and work with or in any way is a better choice than the others? I thought of choosing one of these suggestions from here: http://get-simple.info/wiki/installation...cal_server

[datiswous]

Can you recommend a local web server for Windows that is especially easy to setup and work with or in any way is a better choice than the others? I thought of choosing one of these suggestions from here: http://get-simple.info/wiki/installation...cal_server

XAMPP usually just works out of the box. Others might be better ui wise, but less documentation, less frequently updates, etc.

[jakob]

Thanks

[shawn_a]

easyphp, there is a thread with more suggestions

[Tyblitz]

TBH mine was a slightly biased choice because I saw the 'W' in WAMP and thought: "Well it's made specifically for Windows, so that one must fit my requirements best, right?"  . Had a go at EasyPHP before, found it somewhat complicated (that's 3 years back). Never tried XAMPP (I should), might be good.

Some limited research revealed:

• XAMPP: pretty feature-packed, mostly good. Updates wouldn't (reportedly) be very frequent. One minor setback: if you have Skype or another app using the default port :80, you must change the port in XAMPP (or that app). Reportedly XAMPP also automatically makes your local server available to the network, whereas WAMP does not.
  
• WAMP: less feature-packed, mostly good. Particular asset: dead-easy to change the server's PHP/ Apache version (I can confirm this, great for plugin dev). Some reports of not getting it to work. Can also confirm updates are not very frequent. Note: If you go for this & need to test PHP 5.3-, take Wamp 2.2 (not 2.5, incompatible).
  
• EasyPHP: hard to find accurate info about. Pro: lightweight, con: less intuitive UI than 2 previous ones (reportedly).
  

References:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/55803...lternative
http://forums.serif.com/showthread.php?t=140337
http://lexfridman.com/blogs/research/201...3-edition/
http://www.designerstalk.com/forums/web-...ampps.html
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10554...s-the-best

Basically I guess it's primarily a matter of preference/habit.

[shawn_a]

I use easyphp mostly because for developers, it allows on the fly php version switching, and plugins for xdebug and profilers.
Ans i find the interface to be pretty decent, and lots of updates, i found most others to be bloated and hard to maintain after install. But I have not tried them all recently. I used to use xamp exclusively but i think its community is pretty lame these days.

[jakob]

Thanks for the advice everyone.
It turns out that the reason I couldn't get access to the GS root folder (and sub folders) was that the web host doesn't allow FollowSymLinks command (and a couple of others). The FollowSymLinks is on by default but it is not allowed to use it in your own htaccess. So they somehow shut down the http access to the folder. I didn't get a warning message or email or anything like that. And it was not stated in their informational material. Is that good - or even normal - procedure?! It cost me hours to search for the error. It is the Danish webhost, gigahost.dk.

[shawn_a]

Your host should have sent a 500 error in this circumstance...
Some hosts detect security violations and then change their perms or owners on stuff, making this hard to figure out.

always check your host error logs, it is out of the scope of GS or what we can detect.

There is a hosts issues section on the wiki that we use to keep track of these things, to help others.

We have Followsymblinks on because some apache installs require it for mod rewrite... but it sounds like this is more likely, perhaps we can remove it.

https://github.com/GetSimpleCMS/GetSimpleCMS/issues/580


Here is the wiki
http://get-simple.info/wiki/installation...webhosters
maybe someone will add this information for gigahost

[jakob]

Thanks for your reply. I'm not sure I fully understand it - I have no previous experience with php - and I don't need it right now for practical reasons, since the project I worked on has been canceled. I just wanted to ask this to find out if the webhost was wrong in doing what they did - and in to warn others. Gigahost send me a reply saying that the are working on it so they won't have to disallow it in the future. I'm not really dissatisfied that they don't allow it - but I'm am very dissatisfied that I was not warned/informed about this properly by them.
So I don't need GS right now - and I didn't get to use it very much - but my impression of it is really positive and I will have that in mind if I want to use a file-based CMS again. Thumbs up for the great work

[shawn_a]

yeah nothing to do with php, this is a hosting issue.

I have has hosts like this before that would just change stuff and delete shit without sending any notice, or even knowing it happened when i contacted them about it. Bad hosts are a dime a dozen.

[jakob]

I would have chosen a different host myself because their general info was so bad and because they have a really bad score at Trustpilot - but my client didn't want to change the host and I agreed to do the project anyway. From now on I will insist on a suitable host if I am to be involved in projects.

[jakob]

I got a reply from Gigahost saying (translated):
------
As previously stated, you can not use the following commands in .htaccess:

Options FollowSymLinks
Options SymLinksIfOwnerMatch
Options None
Options All

These settings are something each webhoster decide whether they want to support.
We have chosen not to do so, because the security risk inherent in doing so.

I agree with you that we are missing some documentation on our side, but we can
not cover or monitor all the possible errors that can occur with respect to installation of CMS.

Sorry, we're so far dependent on people write in with their problems,
we'll try to solve them.
------

If it's true that not supporting/disallowing certain commands used by GS is common - and poor/missing information is definitely common - I think it would be a great idea to include a warning about this in the GS installation instructions. It's so easy to avoid this malfunction if you know what causes it - but if you don't ... well, just look at this thread And - for me anyway - the rest of the installation was quite easy.

[shawn_a]

well the htaccess does say this
# The following require certain allow overrides, if getting 500 error comment them out one by one
# can be resolved in apache httpd.conf to ensure security alternatives


But i think thats the only place its noted.

[jakob]

I don't fully understand what that means - though I understand it much better now than before I started to set up GS Many php savvy people would never have the same problems I had - but this was the only thing that gave me any real trouble during installation - The rest was easy to understand even for me. And as the popularity of GS rises I guess it will attract more people like me - and one of the great things about GS is that it is so easy to install - except if you have this problem and don't know what it is - so I do think it would be of great value for some - maybe many - users to be warned about this in the installation instructions. It doesn't have to be more than a single or a few lines of text and a link to read more about how to solve the problem - and if it is stated clearly that this part of the instruction is only relevant if this particular situation occurs, people who doesn't experience the problem would easily ignore that part and wouldn't be troubled by it.

[shawn_a]

heh you keep saying php, this is web hosting knowledge of apache , has nothing to do with programming, if you run a website you should know 2 things first.

unix file system permissions
apache or nginx or iis configuration
and maybe some dns record stuff or virtual host

you should ideally run a local web server first to learn some stuff and mess around.

[jakob]

Ok. Thanks
Would you say that what you are suggesting is need to know or nice to know, to just set up GS or similar and do stuff like install plugins, use themes etc?

[shawn_a]

depends on use, if you expect to be doing this more and more, then its worth learning, plus it helps understand security issues more.

just a one off site , i wouldn't worry as much but expect to call your host every time you have issues. Or spend hours on forums trying to understand "permission denied" errors.