On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 3:11 PM Troy Dawson <tdaw...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 1:15 PM Troy Dawson <tdaw...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 6:31 AM Ben Rosser <rosser....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 10:56 AM Tom Hughes via nodejs
> > > <nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 21/07/2020 15:39, Troy Dawson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Problem2: Many of the bundled libraries are archful, meaning they need
> > > > > to be compiled. What if an essential nodejs library was originally a
> > > > > noarch?
> > > > > Solution2: All bundled nodejs library packages will be treached as
> > > > > archful, meaning they will need to be built on each supported arch.
> > > >
> > > > I think "many" is stretching things.
> > > >
> > > > There were never more than about a dozen or so archful modules in
> > > > Fedora and most of them were not widely used.
> > > >
> > > > I suspect that archful modules are probably best kept packaged as
> > > > they are now mostly just because trying to build them as part of
> > > > a large bundled tree is going to be incredibly painful.
> > >
> > > I think this makes sense as well. Essentially, we should just say that
> > > archful nodejs modules are "essential" (in the words of the proposal)
> > > and therefore need to be packaged and shipped separately.
> > >
> > > I think a "npm2rpm" script would have to do a couple things-- does
> > > this sound about right?
> > >
> > > a) recursively parse package.json to get a list of all dependencies
> > > and tarballs, and use this to write out a list of Sources.
> > > b) for each package, also look at package.json to see what files need
> > > to be installed, and write out instructions for the %install section.
> > > c) generate a "License" field for the package and also install all the
> > > relevant licenses in %license.
> > >
> > > There should probably be a way to specify that a given dependency is
> > > not being bundled too, to stop the parser from descending into that
> > > dependency tree. I imagine that (at least during the transition to
> > > this and maybe afterwards, in the case of archful or essential
> > > modules) it would be very useful to have packages with a mixture of
> > > bundled and unbundled dependencies.
> > >
> > > Ben Rosser
> > >
> >
> > Hi Ben,
> > Sorry it's taken so long for me to properly reply to this.
> > I'm going to refer to your last paragraph (having a mixed bundled and
> > unbundled) as (d)
> >
> > For section (a) and (b), would you rather write our own script, or use
> > npm or yarn ?
> >
> > In my mind I was thinking of doing something like "npm install" then
> > using the resulting node_modules directory.
> > Turn that into one tarball.
> >
> > It sounds like you would like a seperate source for each package, at
> > least for the top level package.
> > I can see some pro's and con's for both.
> >
> > Single Tarball - Good Things:
> > - Don't have to write a new script for downloading.
> > - Everything in one place.
> > - It's laid out how npm would lay it out.
> > Single Tarball - Bad Things:
> > - Harder to do mixed bundles (d)
> > - Have to redo the entire tarball for any update to any part of it.
> >
> > Multi Sources - Good Things:
> > - Have everything parsed and labeled at creation time.
> > - Easier to do "this is only for build/test" and remove them for runtime.
> > - Easier to do mixed bundles (d)
> > Multi Sources - Bad Things:
> > - Have to create our own script (?)
> > - Complicated "Sources" section in spec file (100's to 1000)
> >
> > I'm going to research this some more. But if you already have some
> > idea's, I'd love to hear them.
> >
> > Troy
>
> I've got a package that won't install anymore, and finally got some
> time, so I've been taking a swipe at a bundling script, see how it
> goes.
> This isn't a complete npm2rpm. I already have a spec for this rpm.
> But here is what I currently have
>
> PACKAGE="node-static"
> VERSION="$(npm view ${PACKAGE} version)"
> TMP_DIR=$(mktemp -d -t ci-XXXXXXXXXX)
> mkdir ${TMP_DIR}
> pushd ${TMP_DIR}
> npm pack ${PACKAGE}
> tar xfz *.tgz
> cd package
> npm install --no-optional --only=prod
> # FIND SOMEWHERE TO PUT LICENSES
> # FOR NOW JUST PRINT THEM OUT
> find . -name "package.json" -exec jq .license {} \; | sort -u
> mv node_modules/ node_modules_prod
> npm install --no-optional --only=dev
> mv node_modules/ node_modules_dev
> tar cfz ../${PACKAGE}-${VERSION}-nm-prod.tgz node_modules_prod
> tar cfz ../${PACKAGE}-${VERSION}-nm-dev.tgz node_modules_dev
> cd ..
> cp ${PACKAGE}-${VERSION}* $HOME/rpmbuild/SOURCES
> popd
> rm -rf ${TMP_DIR}
>
> This is a completely noarch package.
> What I have in my %install section is this.
>
> %install
> mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{nodejs_sitelib}/%{npm_name}
> cp -pr benchmark bin examples lib package.json test
> %{buildroot}%{nodejs_sitelib}/%{npm_name}
>
> # Setup Binaries
> mkdir %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
> ln -s %{nodejs_sitelib}/%{npm_name}/bin/cli.js %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/static
>
> # Setup node modules
> cd %{buildroot}%{nodejs_sitelib}/%{npm_name}
> tar xfz %{SOURCE1}
> mkdir -p node_modules
> cd node_modules
> ln -s ../node_modules_prod/* .
> ln -s ../node_modules_prod/.bin .
>
> This builds just fine, which is great, except for one thing.
> The current rpm macros file that is figuring out the bundled
> dependencies, is only looking to see if something is a link or not.
> If it's a link, it thinks it isn't a dependency.
> Why do I have links to this node_modules_prod directory?
> That allows updates for non-bundled rpm's that have a node_modules directory.
> For dnf, if a directory was a link, and you try to replace it with a
> regular directory, it's not happy and fails. But if it's a link and
> you replace it with another link to someplace else, everyone is happy.
>
> Anyway, this is working fine, but the provides script needs a bit of
> tweaking to handle the links.
>
> Troy
Nevermind. It works much better if I build it on Rawhide
(nodejs-packaging-23) instead of RHEL8 (nodejs-packaging-17)
Thank you to those who helped offline.
Troy
_______________________________________________
nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
