On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 3:18 PM Stephen Gallagher <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 10:36 AM Michael Dawson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Honza, correct. > > > > I was just trying to add that it's not just about consumption in RHEL > packages that use Node.js, but also customer applications and third party > applications that they might be running. > > > > On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 6:35 AM Honza Horak <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Unless I interpret it wrong, you're saying that we actually need some > flexibility in what /usr/bin/node means, which is the same thing I'm > saying. Of course, the implementation of how to achieve this might change. > >> > >> Honza > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 4:34 PM Michael Dawson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> My concern is the customer use case. They have installed a third party > application which will be expecting to use the name "node" versus one that > is tied to the version. We want them to be able to easily use versions > which are not the default because the default Node.js for a RHEL release > will be EOL long before the version of RHEL is. > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 3:42 AM Honza Horak <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Sure. My current use case is preparing a nodejs v20 container image > similar to previous versions at [1]. I want to use the latest stable fedora > and explicitly want only nodejs v20 in the container (which is not the > default one in F38). > >>>> > >>>> I also want to install nodejs-nodemon into the container to make the > feature set to be on pair with previous versions, but that ends up with > pulling nodejs 18 (the default) as well, because of the dependency on > /usr/bin/node. > >>>> > >>>> Having different versions of packages like nodejs-nodemon in Fedora > repos does not seem to be technically needed, one RPM build seems to be > fine for more nodejs versions. I believe we did it the same in previous > design with modules -- we only installed nodejs and npm from the module, > but had nodejs-nodemon available in the repos in a single instance and it > worked fine with all nodejs versions. > >>>> > >>>> Does that make more sense now? Maybe I'm trying to solve it too > complicated, feel free to suggest any other solution. > >>>> > >>>> [1] https://github.com/sclorg/s2i-nodejs-container/ > >>>> > >>>> Honza > >>>> > > Sorry for the long silence on this; I've been swamped (and had PTO). > > So, we have a number of competing requirements here: > > 1) Each Fedora release must have a default version of Node.js that is > pulled in when "nodejs" or "/usr/bin/node" is requested. > 2) Fedora needs to be able to upgrade to a new release, possibly also > upgrading the default version of Node.js in the process. > 3) Each Fedora release *may* have additional non-default Node.js > versions available in the repository. > 4) Per packaging rules in Fedora, additional software that depends on > Node.js must either support the default version (using /usr/bin/node) > or it must modify its packaging to use a non-default path > (/usr/bin/nodejsNN). This is so that installing any particular package > (even if it requires a non-default Node version) does not preclude > installing the default version. > > And now, from you: > 5) It must be possible to reassign the symlink "/usr/bin/node" to a > non-default version (e.g. /usr/bin/node-18) > > > I explored this option 5) when I originally demodularized Node.js, but > it's *extremely* complicated. Not least because we have multiple > applications that are codependent, such as NPM. If we change > /usr/bin/node, we also need to change /usr/bin/npm (and npx, and...) > to match. Initially, I used the "alternatives" subsystem to accomplish > this, but it ran into quite a few unexpected issues. (The complete > discussion is elsewhere on the fedora-devel and nodejs lists. Look for > "Node.js repackaging" threads) > Yes, "alternatives" are tricky, we learned it the hard way when introduced python into RHEL-8 as well. > I'm not ruling out the possibility of a solution, but at least one of > the above constraints would have to go away. My recommendation is that > we document instead that the recommendation for creating a non-default > Node container is to manually add the desired symlinks. Maybe we > (Fedora) could just ship a container base image that does this for the > user? > We already ship container images, e.g.: https://quay.io/repository/fedora/nodejs-18?tab=tags&tag=latest This thread was motivated by not being able to do the same for nodejs-20 when using F38 as a base. The problem is that creating a symlink does not help us to install nodejs-nodemon package. We can make it work by changing the requirements of nodejs-nodemon so it is ok with any nodejs version, to "Requires: nodejs(engine)". This, in compbination with creating symlinks /usr/bin/{node,npm,npx} in the container might fix my issue. Honza
_______________________________________________ nodejs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
