V3.3.0 live reload broken when set hostname to `0.0.0.0:xxxx`

[njugray]

• Operating System: MacOS

• Node Version: v10.15.0

• NPM Version: 6.4.`

• webpack Version: 4.29.6

• webpack-dev-server Version: 3.3.0

• This is a bug

• This is a modification request

Code

webpack-dev-server/client-src/default/index.js

Line 210 in 99e8db0

port = self.location.port;

When start a node server like 0.0.0.0:8080, and load resources from 0.0.0.0:9000, Port was reset to self.location.port , which actually is 8080.

For Bugs; How can we reproduce the behavior?

• Start webpack-dev-server and listen at e.g. 0.0.0.0:9000
• Load resources from another local server like: 0.0.0.0:8080

Expected Behavior

Live reload should listen 0.0.0.0:9000

Actual Behavior

Live reload listen 0.0.0.0:8080

[alexander-akait]

@njugray Please create minimum reproducible test repo

[njugray]

@evilebottnawi

here: https://github.com/njugray/webpack-live-reload

[njugray]

1. Install dependencies and npm run dev

2. Visit: http://127.0.0.1:8080/

3. See network inspect, will get:
   

[alexander-akait]

Thanks!

[alexander-akait]

/cc @hiroppy can you investigate? Don't have time on this right now 😞

[ryank311]

This one also affects us because we run the dev server on a different port than our node server that is serving the page. It would be huge for us if the sockjs host was configurable/override-able, as it would let us do things like run the webpack-dev-server on a different host or in a container separate from our node server.

[alexander-akait]

Maybe sockHost and sockPort? Now we already support sockPath

[ryank311]

Yeah, I took a look and if we could set the sockHost and sockPort, that would work for us. Unfortunately with just sockpath, it doesn't give us enough control over the domain. Another alternative would be to utilize the publicPath, publicHost and publicPort that are already part of the config, but either would unblock us from upgrading.

Also, we should probably document the sockHost, sockPort and sockPath as I was only able to reason about them by stepping through the code.

[alexander-akait]

sockPort PR #1792, yep we will documented this in near future

[alexander-akait]

/cc @hiroppy i think we do breaking change here 2f7f052 😞

[ryank311]

I did see the PR and it looks like it would resolve my issue. Is there a reason why this is different from the public host and Port? Afaik there wouldn't be a scenario when those would be different.

[alexander-akait]

I think it is bug, and should be by default with public host and public port, previously main commiter don't add tests on many features and now we have many weird code and sometimes break something, now we increase tests and in future this problem will be less, sorry

[alexander-akait]

Any way PR welcome