-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Building a new project produces a refs folder in the output #7223
Comments
cc @pranavkm |
Also tagging @natemcmaster |
https://github.com/dotnet/cli/issues/10502 is the tracking issue for this. For preview3, the RazorSDK will use the flag specified here - dotnet/sdk#2122 to disable publishing the refs directory in the default scenario, with the runtime compilation package turning it back on. |
Closing this one, as it seems all the work necessary to handle this is already being tracked! |
I don't feel good that nothing is tracked in this repo. How do I know when this is fixed? Which bug should I track for the end to end? |
@pranavkm is this fixed? Also it seems the deps file for web projects in 3.0 preview3 are still massive by default and it looks like it's due to reference assemblies being preserved. |
Looks like it. Using the
|
OK I just installed the same SDK (preview4 even though you should be testing preview3 😄):
When I make an Empty ASP.NET Core application and build the deps file is 105KB which is massive for having 0 packages. Now if you look at the contents of the file https://gist.github.com/davidfowl/aa387f2cc5f322efe90a9d3777f82ec7. You'll notice compilation options which doesn't make sense unless PreserveCompilationContext or the equivalent hasn't been fixed. |
Describe the bug
Superfluous refs folder with a bunch of dll are put in the output folder on build.
To Reproduce
refs
folerExpected behavior
There should be no refs folder. We should have turned on PreserveCompilationContext by default in ASP.NET Core applications.
Screenshots
Additional info
3.0.0-preview-19102-04
(this is the latest 9f202fe)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: