Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

asset-manifest.json generated by CRA2 is not useful

See original GitHub issue

As mentioned in the discussion in #5306, asset-manifest.json generated by CRA2 is less than useful. As an example, this is asset-manifest.json as generated by yarn build for my project:

{
   "main.css": "/static/css/main.7263860d.chunk.css",
   "main.js": "/static/js/main.1d09f064.chunk.js",
   "main.js.map": "/static/js/main.1d09f064.chunk.js.map",
   "static/css/1.a7cf09a2.chunk.css": "/static/css/1.a7cf09a2.chunk.css",
   "static/js/1.f5aeaa31.chunk.js": "/static/js/1.f5aeaa31.chunk.js",
   "static/js/1.f5aeaa31.chunk.js.map": "/static/js/1.f5aeaa31.chunk.js.map",
   "runtime~main.js": "/static/js/runtime~main.229c360f.js",
   "runtime~main.js.map": "/static/js/runtime~main.229c360f.js.map",
   "static/css/1.a7cf09a2.chunk.css.map": "/static/css/1.a7cf09a2.chunk.css.map",
   "static/css/main.7263860d.chunk.css.map": "/static/css/main.7263860d.chunk.css.map",
   "index.html": "/index.html",
   "precache-manifest.981d9ec8b3a8232e0184126d691edb97.js": "/precache-manifest.981d9ec8b3a8232e0184126d691edb97.js",
   "service-worker.js": "/service-worker.js"
 }

It was quite an unpleasant surprise when I upgraded to CRA2. Here are some obvious problems with this file:

it contains no information on which files are chunks of the same package
there is no way to identify chunks (except the ‘main’ chunk) by key (random strings in keys? seriously?)
there is absolutely no information on the order in which chunks are to be loaded

It can of course still be parsed by pattern matching file names but there are obvious disadvantages:

any such parsing will rely on heuristics
parsing will break if file naming scheme is ever changed
what is the point of having this file at all? you could listdir() the build directory and obtain basically the same information

Here is a suggested asset-manifest.json format that could make it usable:

{
   "main.js": [
       "/static/js/1.f5aeaa31.chunk.js",  // <-- order is significant
       "/static/js/main.1d09f064.chunk.js",
   ],
   "main.js.map": [
       "static/js/1.f5aeaa31.chunk.js.map",   // <-- same order as in "main.js"
       "/static/js/main.1d09f064.chunk.js.map",
    ]
   "runtime~main.js": "/static/js/runtime~main.229c360f.js",
   "runtime~main.js.map": "/static/js/runtime~main.229c360f.js.map",
   "precache-manifest.js": "/precache-manifest.981d9ec8b3a8232e0184126d691edb97.js",
   "service-worker.js": "/service-worker.js"
   "main.css": [
       "/static/css/1.a7cf09a2.chunk.css"
       "/static/css/main.7263860d.chunk.css"
    ],
   "main.css.map": [
       "/static/css/1.a7cf09a2.chunk.css.map"
       "/static/css/main.7263860d.chunk.css.map"
    ],
 }

Issue Analytics

State:
Created 5 years ago
Reactions:21
Comments:16 (4 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

24reactions

gaearoncommented, Oct 21, 2018

I think we should just change it to only include “initial” scripts in the order they should be in HTML. Since the only purpose of this file is to reconstruct the HTML.

Does that make sense?

16reactions

ivarnecommented, Jan 12, 2019

Sad to see #5955 and similar pull requests and issues being closed by stale bot. Is parsing the generated index.html file the only option forward when including CRA components on a site with a backend?

Top Results From Across the Web

Serving a modified asset-manifest.json in CRA using CRACO ...

Whenever I build the application, my new assets.json file is generated as expected. However, I can't get CRA, or webpack-dev-server I assume, to ......