"bundleSfx: true" still returns config.js

[techniq]

Currently I'm get "System is not defined" when performing a bundleSfx: true because the config.js is in the pipeline. Unless I'm mistaken, should this not be the case.

Semi-related, it seems like it would be useful to have system.js bundled for buildleSfx: false build (as long as the system.js, config.js, some-bundle.js order was maintained?

[OliverJAsh]

If SFX, don't output the config, as it isn't necessary?

[techniq]

Correct, as neither is system.js. It's all self contained.

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015, 5:21 PM Oliver Joseph Ash notifications@github.com
wrote:

If SFX, don't output the config, as it isn't necessary?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#8 (comment)
.

[buddhike]

@techniq Thanks for getting to the bottom of this. I was wondering why this happens to some users.
Bunding system.js for non sfx would be a handy feature (I will no longer have to copy jspm_packages dir to build output then ;-))

BTW: What would happen if you generate many non-fx bundles? Each of them should not have systemjs and configjs right?

[buddhike]

I bumped into this issue recently. This is what I discovered.

• System not defined error was because my sfx bundle wasn't produced correctly. This was because I has sfx option specified at the wrong level so it was producing a true sfx bundle.
• config.js is produced in the output although it's not necessary. However having config.js does not cause System is not define error.

Will leave this issue open until we get rid of config.js from the output.

[dwhu]

+1