I am create a next build with standalone output. I follow this answer- How to deploy NextJs (SSR) using "Output File Tracing" feature to Azure App Service?
After setting up I run my server like this node server.js
It works perfectly. But here image optimization not working. I found one error-
Error: 'sharp' is required to be installed in standalone mode for the image optimization to function correctly
I recheck package.json and I can see sharp is already installed. Then I add this to my .env file-
NEXT_SHARP_PATH=/tmp/node_modules/sharp
But not working. Please any help me. I need image opmization feature in standalone mood.
***Note: I use linux subsystem on windows. In linux subsystem, When I run production mode npm run start. Image optmization automatically work in this mode, I haven't to give .env also. When I start my project in standalone mood, image optimization is not working. Even when I give .env it's not working.
Here is my next.config.js-
/** #type {import('next').NextConfig} */
const withPWA = require("next-pwa")({
dest: "public",
register: true,
disable: process.env.NODE_ENV === "development"
});
const nextConfig = {
reactStrictMode: true,
swcMinify: true,
output: "standalone",
images: {
minimumCacheTTL: 2592000,
domains: ["dzzoo94ozikw5.cloudfront.net", "lh3.googleusercontent.com", "platform-lookaside.fbsbx.com"]
},
}
module.exports = withPWA(nextConfig)
yarn add sharp
or
npm install sharp
https://nextjs.org/docs/messages/sharp-missing-in-production
Related
I am using next 12.1.*
I have both frontend components, as well as backend APIs served using next.
I have enabled the output file tracing, by adding output: 'standalone' to my next.js config
After next build, the standalone folder is not created, nor the minimalist server.js file mentioned.
What do I need to do to enable this?
I ran into this same issue today. Use the previous experimental attribute outputStandalone. I just tacked it on along with the proposed new way.
/** #type {import('next').NextConfig} */
const nextConfig = {
reactStrictMode: true,
output: 'standalone',
experimental: {
outputStandalone: true,
}
}
module.exports = nextConfig
Checked the issues and PRs for the repo and came across an update (https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/37994/commits/96d8e175c6e3679b3a4a26d224dd5fe6b6c39338) that was only a few days old so it hadn’t made its way into 12.1.6 yet. Then I also happened to notice the link to the with-docker example was on the canary branch.
Let's say I am deploying Next.js in different env, for example.
local development
staging deployment
production deployment
Previously I hand used .env file with one of the framework where I could easily name the file like .env.local, .env.stage & .env.prod and when I run node app locally it would load .env.local, with export STAGE=stageframework would use.env.stage`, like wise fro productoin.
Is that such support in Next js where I can have different .env file for different stage. If it is supported then how would I specify which stage Next.js is running.
You can have different environments, just need to follow this
For production
// .env.production.local
// This file is for production and run with next start or npm run start
// NODE_ENV=production
For development
// .env.development.local
// This file is for development and run when next dev or npm run dev
// NODE_ENV=development
For tests
// .env.test.local
// This file is for tests with jest or cypress for example
// NODE_ENV=test
If you want know more about this, here is the complete info about environments in next js
Update:
If you want to run more environments without next standard, you can do this manually:
// package.json
"scripts": {
...
"dev:staging": "APP_ENV=staging next dev",
}
...
// next.config.js
require('dotenv-flow').config({
node_env: process.env.APP_ENV || process.env.NODE_ENV ||
'development',
});
const env = {};
Object.keys(process.env).forEach((key) => {
if (key.startsWith('NEXT_PUBLIC_')) {
env[key] = process.env[key];
}
});
module.exports = {
env,
};
And when you run npm run/yarn dev:staging your staging environment from .env.staging.local will be loaded, my reference is from flybayer and you can read more here
I am new to Next.js, I built a simple landing page and wanted to generate a static page using npm run build which I set in package.json to "build": "next build && next export".
But I get this Error:
Error: Image Optimization using Next.js' default loader is not compatible with `next export`.
Possible solutions:
- Use `next start` to run a server, which includes the Image Optimization API.
- Use any provider which supports Image Optimization (like Vercel).
- Configure a third-party loader in `next.config.js`.
- Use the `loader` prop for `next/image`.
Can someone help me, I read the documentation and I created next.config.js in the root and pasted this:
module.exports = {
images: {
loader: 'imgix',
path: '/images/',
},
}
I think that I need a path, but the thing is I am not using hosted images, I have an images folder in the the public folder.
I know this is probably a stupid question, but I'm stuck.
I hosted them on https://imgbb.com and wrote this in next.config.js
module.exports = {
images: {
domains: ['i.ibb.co'],
},
}
and it worked.
Usage:
<Image src="https://i.ibb.co/TMBV2KP/Akwagroup.jpg"
alt="ESMASA TRAVAUX"
width={1050}
height={500}
/>
I got this error when deploying Next.js to Netlify.
Error: Image Optimization using Next.js default loader is not compatible with `next export`.
Possible solutions:
6:47:15 AM: - Use `next start`, which starts the Image Optimization API.
6:47:15 AM: - Use Vercel to deploy, which supports Image Optimization.
6:47:15 AM: - Configure a third-party loader in `next.config.js`.
6:47:15 AM: - Read more: https://err.sh/next.js/export-image-api.
6:47:15 AM: at exportApp (/opt/build/repo/node_modules/next/dist/export/index.js:14:712)
The problem does not occur when deploying to Vercel.
use akamai
setting images.loader to 'imgix' caused dev and build errors.
i used this instead:
// next.config.js
module.exports = {
images: {
loader: 'akamai',
path: '',
},
}
it just works for all i care about.
possible values for images.loader are: [ default, imgix, cloudinary, akamai, custom ]
reference: https://nextjs.org/docs/api-reference/next/image#built-in-loaders
From Next.js 12.3, you can completely disable next/image Image Optimization using the unoptimized configuration in next.config.js. This avoids having to use a third-party provider to optimize the image when using next/export.
From the next/image documentation:
unoptimized - When true, the source image will be served as-is
instead of changing quality, size, or format. Defaults to false.
module.exports = {
images: {
unoptimized: true
}
}
Before Next.js 12.3 and from 12.2, the unoptimized configuration was still experimental and could be enabled under the experimental flag.
module.exports = {
experimental: {
images: {
unoptimized: true
}
}
}
Seems you use next/images.
But next/images don't work with static pages (generated with next export)
For static pages use this image-optimizer : next-optimized-images instead
I faced the same problem when using next export command. I still receive this error:
Error: Image Optimization using Next.js' default loader is not compatible with next export.
Possible solutions:
Use next start to run a server, which includes the Image Optimization API.
Use any provider which supports Image Optimization (like Vercel).
Configure a third-party loader in next.config.js.
Use the loader prop for next/image.
So, to make my custom loader working correctly, I needed
to set a path to an empty string:
module.exports = {
// https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/21079
// Remove this workaround whenever the issue is fixed
images: {
loader: 'imgix',
path: '',
},
}
BUT, when I open the resultant index.html file, none of the images or JS loaded.
So, for those who facing this also, please try to set the path to a / as such:
module.exports = {
// https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/21079
// Remove this workaround whenever the issue is fixed
images: {
loader: 'imgix',
path: '/',
},
}
This error is regarding Image/next, I was facing same error while "next build", than i use <img/> instead of <Image/> in the project and re-build it by npm run build and it resolves the error.
What am I doing wrong? I'm trying to deploy my Telescope app. I'm using this to do that: https://github.com/arunoda/meteor-up. It gives me an error when I try to deploy using Mup. Here's my mup.json config file:
{
// Server authentication info
"servers": [
{
"host": "52.25.228.14",
"username": "ec2-user",
//"password": "password"
// or pem file (ssh based authentication)
"pem": "~/Documents/appname/appname.pem"
}
],
// Install MongoDB in the server, does not destroy local MongoDB on future setup
"setupMongo": true,
// WARNING: Node.js is required! Only skip if you already have Node.js installed on server.
"setupNode": true,
// WARNING: If nodeVersion omitted will setup 0.10.36 by default. Do not use v, only version number.
"nodeVersion": "0.10.36",
// Install PhantomJS in the server
"setupPhantom": true,
// Show a progress bar during the upload of the bundle to the server.
// Might cause an error in some rare cases if set to true, for instance in Shippable CI
"enableUploadProgressBar": true,
// Application name (No spaces)
"appName": "appname",
// Location of app (local directory)
"app": "~/Documents/appname/Telescope",
// Configure environment
"env": {
"ROOT_URL": "ec2-52-25-228-14.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com"
},
// Meteor Up checks if the app comes online just after the deployment
// before mup checks that, it will wait for no. of seconds configured below
"deployCheckWaitTime": 15
}
Common pitfalls :
Are sure you ran mup setup before deploying ?
Try using a relative path to setup the app location, ie replace ~/Documents/appname/Telescope by . if your mup.json is located at the root of your Telescope instance.
I did run mup setup, did use http://, and tried many times to get it to connect/deploy.
I gave up and just went with a Wordpress theme and am customizing it how I want it. The other way was way too complicated. It didn't allow me to do what I wanted in a timely manner. Thanks for trying to help though guys.