问题
I am minifying an index.html file with gulp (note: took over this project, build system has been done by former dev).
It all works fine, but the gulp task generates a HTML file which has a cryptic extension to it, like:
index-bd2c7f58f0.html
I understand this must have it's advantage, but I can't grasp what...:) Because the disadvantage now is:
- The node server needs the presence of an
index.html
file to allow the'/'
route to work. - Thus so far, I either have to copy the file on every build or create a link which needs to be updated on every build
What am I missing? Should I just instruct gulp to create a plain index.html
file, or what are best practices here?
Also, which of the various plugin calls is actually responsible for attaching that extension to the file name?
EDIT: Seems to be the gulp-rev and revReplace calls
Here is the gulp task I am using:
gulp.task('html', ['styles', 'scripts'], function () {
var client = buildHTML('./client/index.html', './dist/public');
return merge(client);
});
function buildHTML(index, distFolder) {
var lazypipe = require('lazypipe');
var saveHTML = lazypipe()
.pipe($.htmlmin, {
removeComments: true,
removeOptionalTags: true
})
.pipe(gulp.dest, distFolder);
return gulp.src(index)
.pipe($.useref())
.pipe($.rev())
.pipe($.revReplace({replaceInExtensions: ['.js', '.css', '.html', '.ejs']}))
.pipe($.if('*.html', saveHTML()));
}
回答1:
One advantage that I'm familiar with is when it's used with assets, when you recompile the asset and create a new fingerprint for that file, the request won't return the cached response because it's a different file. As for your problem, you probably shouldn't be adding that has to your index, I think it's pretty unorthodox
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/37758372/gulp-minify-index-html-gets-cryptic-extension-in-file-name-how-to-take-advanta