Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

State of v16.4.0 #872

Closed
targos opened this issue Jun 23, 2021 · 5 comments
Closed

State of v16.4.0 #872

targos opened this issue Jun 23, 2021 · 5 comments

Comments

@targos
Copy link
Member

targos commented Jun 23, 2021

https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker-nobuild/1097/

@targos
Copy link
Member Author

targos commented Jun 23, 2021

Fix for underscore: #873

@targos
Copy link
Member Author

targos commented Jun 23, 2021

It looks like npm 7 doesn't like the @ in the prefix for pug: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker-nobuild/1097/nodes=fedora-last-latest-x64/testReport/junit/(root)/citgm/pug_v3_0_2/

The command that fails is:

npm pack https://github.com/pugjs/pug/archive/pug@3.0.2.tar.gz

Edit: I confirm this command works in npm 6

@targos
Copy link
Member Author

targos commented Aug 30, 2021

@nodejs/npm what do you think about the above error with npm pack?

@wraithgar
Copy link

wraithgar commented Aug 30, 2021

This is happening because npm@7 is a little more strict about what it can pack. That tarball isn't an actual published package (published packages must have a name and version attribute). That tarball appears to be a "release" which is not the same thing. npm is assuming it is sourcing tarballs from something that acts like a registry, i.e. something that is going to have name and version attributes in its package.json This github release is of the monorepo, of which the top level package.json doesn't have a proper version, because it's not published per se.

What npm@6 was doing was fetching the tarball and creating a bad tgz file with no version, an error state that npm@7 is now refusing to enter.

@targos
Copy link
Member Author

targos commented Sep 22, 2021

I suppose we should just replace npm pack url with a proper download of the tarball.

targos added a commit to targos/citgm that referenced this issue Nov 10, 2021
targos added a commit to targos/citgm that referenced this issue Nov 17, 2021
@targos targos closed this as completed Nov 17, 2021
targos added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 18, 2021
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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants