dotnet pack build folders output instead of lib folder when specifying nuspec file
I am attempting to add a step to our CI process that is a powershell script that will automatically pack and push a nuget package for a .NET standard 2.0 project after a previous step builds it. The original command I used was:
dotnet pack $project.csproj -c $configuration -p:PackageVersion=$version
This gave me the exact project output I wanted. As seen here:
dotnet pack without nuspec specified.
However, in our previous nuget packages, we have nuspec files that are important and dotnet pack will not pick it up by default even if it is in the same directory as the project file, it will generate a default one. To get around this issue, I found you can specify the nuspec file and updated the command to:
dotnet pack $project.csproj -c $configuration -p:PackageVersion=$version -p:NuspecFile=$project.nuspec
This will correctly now add the nuspec file that is desired, but now the nupkg has undesired contents without the lib folder, it appears to be the output of building the project. As seen here: dotnet pack with nuspec file specified.
- Is there a way to get the desired output from the first command and
the nuspec file specified in the second command purely through the dotnet pack command? I tried
--no-build and verbose detailed logging to acquire more information, but so far no luck. - Is there an alternative to the nuspec file that would achieve the same effect, such as specifying more information in the project file and removing the nuspec file entirely?
Thanks!
.net-core nuget .net-standard .net-standard-2.0
asked Nov 25 '18 at 19:18
Joe MJoe M
12
add a comment |
I am attempting to add a step to our CI process that is a powershell script that will automatically pack and push a nuget package for a .NET standard 2.0 project after a previous step builds it. The original command I used was:
dotnet pack $project.csproj -c $configuration -p:PackageVersion=$version
This gave me the exact project output I wanted. As seen here:
dotnet pack without nuspec specified.
However, in our previous nuget packages, we have nuspec files that are important and dotnet pack will not pick it up by default even if it is in the same directory as the project file, it will generate a default one. To get around this issue, I found you can specify the nuspec file and updated the command to:
dotnet pack $project.csproj -c $configuration -p:PackageVersion=$version -p:NuspecFile=$project.nuspec
This will correctly now add the nuspec file that is desired, but now the nupkg has undesired contents without the lib folder, it appears to be the output of building the project. As seen here: dotnet pack with nuspec file specified.
- Is there a way to get the desired output from the first command and
the nuspec file specified in the second command purely through the dotnet pack command? I tried
--no-build and verbose detailed logging to acquire more information, but so far no luck. - Is there an alternative to the nuspec file that would achieve the same effect, such as specifying more information in the project file and removing the nuspec file entirely?
Thanks!
.net-core nuget .net-standard .net-standard-2.0
asked Nov 25 '18 at 19:18
Joe MJoe M
12
add a comment |
I am attempting to add a step to our CI process that is a powershell script that will automatically pack and push a nuget package for a .NET standard 2.0 project after a previous step builds it. The original command I used was:
dotnet pack $project.csproj -c $configuration -p:PackageVersion=$version
This gave me the exact project output I wanted. As seen here:
dotnet pack without nuspec specified.
However, in our previous nuget packages, we have nuspec files that are important and dotnet pack will not pick it up by default even if it is in the same directory as the project file, it will generate a default one. To get around this issue, I found you can specify the nuspec file and updated the command to:
dotnet pack $project.csproj -c $configuration -p:PackageVersion=$version -p:NuspecFile=$project.nuspec
This will correctly now add the nuspec file that is desired, but now the nupkg has undesired contents without the lib folder, it appears to be the output of building the project. As seen here: dotnet pack with nuspec file specified.
- Is there a way to get the desired output from the first command and
the nuspec file specified in the second command purely through the dotnet pack command? I tried
--no-build and verbose detailed logging to acquire more information, but so far no luck. - Is there an alternative to the nuspec file that would achieve the same effect, such as specifying more information in the project file and removing the nuspec file entirely?
Thanks!
.net-core nuget .net-standard .net-standard-2.0
asked Nov 25 '18 at 19:18
Joe MJoe M
12
I am attempting to add a step to our CI process that is a powershell script that will automatically pack and push a nuget package for a .NET standard 2.0 project after a previous step builds it. The original command I used was:
dotnet pack $project.csproj -c $configuration -p:PackageVersion=$version
This gave me the exact project output I wanted. As seen here:
dotnet pack without nuspec specified.
However, in our previous nuget packages, we have nuspec files that are important and dotnet pack will not pick it up by default even if it is in the same directory as the project file, it will generate a default one. To get around this issue, I found you can specify the nuspec file and updated the command to:
dotnet pack $project.csproj -c $configuration -p:PackageVersion=$version -p:NuspecFile=$project.nuspec
This will correctly now add the nuspec file that is desired, but now the nupkg has undesired contents without the lib folder, it appears to be the output of building the project. As seen here: dotnet pack with nuspec file specified.
- Is there a way to get the desired output from the first command and
the nuspec file specified in the second command purely through the dotnet pack command? I tried
--no-build and verbose detailed logging to acquire more information, but so far no luck. - Is there an alternative to the nuspec file that would achieve the same effect, such as specifying more information in the project file and removing the nuspec file entirely?
Thanks!
.net-core nuget .net-standard .net-standard-2.0
.net-core nuget .net-standard .net-standard-2.0
asked Nov 25 '18 at 19:18
Joe MJoe M
12
asked Nov 25 '18 at 19:18
Joe MJoe M
12
asked Nov 25 '18 at 19:18
Joe MJoe M
12
asked Nov 25 '18 at 19:18
Joe MJoe M
12
asked Nov 25 '18 at 19:18
Joe MJoe M
12
12
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
I was able to resolve this by simply deprecating the need for a nuspec file. Everything needed can be done in the csproj, which translates to the nuspec file generated by dotnet pack without issue.
answered Nov 26 '18 at 16:04
Joe MJoe M
12
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53471007%2fdotnet-pack-build-folders-output-instead-of-lib-folder-when-specifying-nuspec-fi%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I was able to resolve this by simply deprecating the need for a nuspec file. Everything needed can be done in the csproj, which translates to the nuspec file generated by dotnet pack without issue.
answered Nov 26 '18 at 16:04
Joe MJoe M
12
add a comment |
I was able to resolve this by simply deprecating the need for a nuspec file. Everything needed can be done in the csproj, which translates to the nuspec file generated by dotnet pack without issue.
answered Nov 26 '18 at 16:04
Joe MJoe M
12
add a comment |
I was able to resolve this by simply deprecating the need for a nuspec file. Everything needed can be done in the csproj, which translates to the nuspec file generated by dotnet pack without issue.
answered Nov 26 '18 at 16:04
Joe MJoe M
12
I was able to resolve this by simply deprecating the need for a nuspec file. Everything needed can be done in the csproj, which translates to the nuspec file generated by dotnet pack without issue.
answered Nov 26 '18 at 16:04
Joe MJoe M
12
answered Nov 26 '18 at 16:04
Joe MJoe M
12
answered Nov 26 '18 at 16:04
Joe MJoe M
12
answered Nov 26 '18 at 16:04
Joe MJoe M
12
12
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53471007%2fdotnet-pack-build-folders-output-instead-of-lib-folder-when-specifying-nuspec-fi%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
