Skip to content

fix(setup-universal): call app.use() instead app.get() for express-static#571

Open
ndrsg wants to merge 1 commit intonestjs:masterfrom
ndrsg:fix/serve-static
Open

fix(setup-universal): call app.use() instead app.get() for express-static#571
ndrsg wants to merge 1 commit intonestjs:masterfrom
ndrsg:fix/serve-static

Conversation

@ndrsg
Copy link

@ndrsg ndrsg commented May 5, 2021

Should be app.use() instead of app.get().
Otherwise there are problems with resolving files in serve-static, because the path gets not stripped with app.get().
https://github.com/expressjs/serve-static

PR Checklist

Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:

PR Type

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

[ x ] Bugfix
[ ] Feature
[ ] Code style update (formatting, local variables)
[ ] Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
[ ] Build related changes
[ ] CI related changes
[ ] Other... Please describe:

What is the current behavior?

If a root-static path other than . is used, file resolving in express-static does not behave as expected (404)

Issue Number: N/A

What is the new behavior?

rootStaticPath behaves as expected and resolves relative to viewsPath.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

[ x ] Yes
[ ] No

Users that somehow worked-around the file resolving issue need to undo their workaround.

Other information

Should be app.use() instead of app.get(). 
Otherwise there are problems with resolving files in serve-static, because the path gets not stripped with app.get().
https://github.com/expressjs/serve-static
@ndrsg ndrsg changed the title Update setup-universal.utils.ts fix(setup-universal): call app.use() instead app.get() for express-static May 5, 2021
@tincho-despegar
Copy link

Hi! Any news about this PR? I really need this to be in a release. Can I be of any help?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants