Confirm we're using Corepack in preinstall hook #9791
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Size Change: 0 B Total Size: 730 kB ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
JamieB-gu
approved these changes
Dec 5, 2023
|
Rebasing on/merging |
sndrs
force-pushed
the
sndrs/detect-corepack
branch
from
941eb04
to
95fdf9c
Compare
mxdvl
approved these changes
Dec 5, 2023
sndrs
force-pushed
the
sndrs/detect-corepack
branch
from
95fdf9c
to
b330a2f
Compare
updated the logging, and added a screen shot to the description |
sndrs
force-pushed
the
sndrs/detect-corepack
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8fcc54f
to
5e4bb5b
Compare
sndrs
force-pushed
the
sndrs/detect-corepack
branch
from
5e4bb5b
to
b15a422
Compare
and provide some guidance if not Co-authored-by: Charlotte Emms <[email protected]>
sndrs
force-pushed
the
sndrs/detect-corepack
branch
from
b15a422
to
717ea8f
Compare
|
I'm not having much joy with this setup. Can anyone think what might be happening? |
|
Hi @georgeblahblah - I'll give you a shout |
arelra
reviewed
Dec 7, 2023
Comment on lines
+40
to
+43
| if (process.env.npm_execpath?.includes('node_modules')) | ||
| command(`npm uninstall -g ${packageManager}`); | ||
| if (process.env.npm_execpath?.includes('brew')) | ||
| command(`brew uninstall ${packageManager}`); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could this cause confusion for developers who work on other projects other than dotcom-rendering? If you uninstall the global package manager then it would be removed for other projects that the user might be relying on.
When I ran this on dotcom-rendering I then also had to run corepack enable in the commercial repo, I assume because it was on a different node version (?).
Perhaps some comms might help to explain that once you've removed the global package manager you (might) need to run corepack enable in all other repos that use the same package manager?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah you'd need to run it for each version of node you use. i'll raise a PR adding a note to that effect to the message.
ideally this would be in the recommendations repo too but i'd like to confirm it works well enough in DCR before getting to that next stage
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this change?
preinstallscript (@cemms1's idea) to make sure the current installation is being done by a corepack-managed package managerpreinstallscript from wherever you runyarnWhy?
it turns out a lot of people manually run
yarnfrom the root, rather than relying on themakefileto manage deps for them. this means simply checking in themakefileis not enough.the preinstall hook will catch any
yarncall, whatever its origin.also, some earlier versions of
yarnare not overridden by runningcorepack enable, which means that the current advice (to just enable corepack) does not help people with affected versions of yarn already globally installed.addresses issue that arose after merging #9466...
Screenshots