[dotnet-cache]: Architecture is prefixed to the --output argument
See original GitHub issueRun dotnet cache –output <dotnet-install-dir>\packages ..
Expected: The <dotnet-install-dir>\packages
has the right layout (e.g. <dotnet-install-dir>\packages\netcoreapp2.0\..
) for the package cache to work
Actual: There’s an additional x64
in the output path e.g. <dotnet-install-dir>\packages\x64\netcoreapp2.0\..
which causes the packages to not be found.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 7 years ago
- Comments:16 (16 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Troubleshoot .NET tool usage issues
The new guidance is that all Microsoft tools be prefixed with "Microsoft." This prefix is reserved and can only be used for packages...
Read more >Improvements to the Caching Abstraction in ASP.NET Core
We are improving the caching abstraction in .NET to make it more intuitive and reliable. This blog showcases a sample project with reusable ......
Read more >Breaking changes in .NET 7
Navigate to the breaking changes in .NET 7. ... ASPNET-prefixed environment variable precedence, ✔️ ... Output caching API changes, ❌, ❌.
Read more >ASP.NET Core updates in .NET 7 Preview 6
Output caching is a new middleware that helps you store results from your web app and serve them from a cache rather than...
Read more >ASP.NET Output Cache Provider for Azure Cache for Redis
The Redis Output Cache Provider is an out-of-process storage mechanism for output cache data. This data is specifically for full HTTP responses ...
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Why can’t we just use this one? It’s already filed, assigned to @ramarag, and describes the issue.
Yes, it’s in, but it’s not the part of the scenario we wanted necessarily the focus to be on, since building a cache will be relatively infrequent in comparison with running or publishing against one. Since
dotnet-cache
is already in, we’re not likely going to yank it out, but what we might do is rename it to reflect the terminology that we settled on: “runtime package store” for the package location, and “target profile” for the file that will describe its contents and that users will be able to publish against. I’ll try to find you sometime today.