Be aware to make a decision about Extensions 2000 *OR* 2002 - I think 2002 is much more safe - and may be strongly recommened for that - but requires a httpd-Patch!
That is a very big reason for nontaking frontpage. Others are the blowing up of html-pages with ms-special-commands. And the third, relating to the last - you need extensions to execute such sites and you can only upload the
The problem is not the patch, it is to get a recent version of apache that runs with that patch. Sometimes your distribution comes with special compilefeatures and is mostly patched by online updates. This makes it difficult to compile apache with all features the distribution provided it. In most cases you will not need all this features, so look, which features you really need and compile with the minimum you need. pages
from frontpage.
Blown up code - maybe! Some of our admins say it's damaged code :-) Why use such feature, if you can build virtual Hosts with DNS-alias? You set home of User XY as webroot for virtual Server x.y.net. Were is there the need of fp-extensions, unless fp in all versions supports ftp-upload? The only benefit is the uploadfeature. Even webDAV is supported by fp.
Other editors (Dreamweaver, Quanta, asWedit, ...) produces normal site without the above mentioned bullshit of extensions and you need not especially ms-extensions for running and you can upload the pages via ftp.
So why use the extensions anyway and give some kiddies more chances to get your server hacked? I use lamp and perl on all my servers. This fits all my needs and everything is running well without the need of fp-extensions. Philippe