xmlbuilder
I need to package the xmlbuilder module (it's a new dependency for another module I own) but packaging it has raised some interesting questions. The javascript source in the npm package, which is what the packaging guidelines tell us to use as the source, is compiled from coffee script and also doesn't include any source. We've worked around similar situations in the past by having a second source archive which contains the tests pulled from github, but in this case there's an extra issue - the tests work on the original coffee script source not the compiled javascript. In any case the coffee script is the real source, so shouldn't I really be packaging the github tar ball and building the js from that as part of the rpm? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/nodejs
Re: nodejs-packagiing improvements
On 27/05/14 22:37, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: FWIW Jamie submitted the nodejs-nan0 package and it was already approved for awhile, I just noticed it was sitting around and did the legwork to make it functional. :-) Yes I approved nan0 last week, and did remind Jamie that he would need to fix nan at the same time as pushing it. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/nodejs
Re: lodash-node
On 14/08/14 22:41, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: What do people think about this approach? Looks nice. I was having nightmares about texlive.spec but your lua magic here is much nicer and easier to see what's going on. Excellent work! Please commit. I've pushed it in rawhide and F21 now. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/nodejs
Re: anyone available for package reviews?
On 12/10/14 06:36, Parag Nemade wrote: I got a few nodejs package review requests submitted, can someone help to review them? If you need any package review from me, I will be happy to do it. I've taken 1144658 which is another one of yours that wasn't on the list you sent. I have a couple awaiting review in return: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123069 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1123071 Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/nodejs
Mixed case module names
I'm working on a review (BZ#1086245) for nodejs-jsonstream. Now the interesting thing is that the module it is packaging is actually called JSONStream in the npm registry and there is in fact a separate jsonstream module. The general naming rules say that You should generally use lowercase but I guess this is a case where the node naming rules should take precedence, especially given that there is a conflict and we may need have both at some point? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/nodejs
Re: Self-introduction + package review swaps
On 08/10/15 15:51, Jared K. Smith wrote: I have the following outstanding package review requests, and would be happy to swap reviews with anyone else to help push some of these packages forward. As you're aware I've already done a couple of our packages, and I'll try and look at some more this evening. I've got a couple of nodejs packages awaiting review if you'd like to help out in return: 1223550 nodejs-fill-keys 1257707 nodejs-should-http Beyond that I have some C++ based packages awaiting review if you're up for dealing with that. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/nodejs
Re: Plans for Node.js
On 07/12/15 13:41, Stephen Gallagher wrote: nodejs-millstone-0.6.16-4.fc24 reports: DEBUG util.py:393: Error: nothing provides nodejs(v8-abi) = 4.6 needed by nodejs-zipfile-0.5.9-3.fc24.aarch64 This was due to a typo that I added to the nodejs-4.2.2 series of builds; the nodejs(v8-abi) was supposed to be 4.5, not 4.6. As a result, anything that was built against 4.2.2 needs to be rebuilt against 4.2.3. Sorry about that. The -3 release of zipfile was a rebuild for that reason though. The x86_64 build of it has: nodejs(v8-abi) = 4.5 My guess is the rebuilds of the binary extensions on aarch64 were done too early, before nodejs 4.2.3 was built. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Plans for Node.js
On 02/12/15 15:28, Stephen Gallagher wrote: Looks like the ARM build from upstream is broken for the Debug builds but works fine for the Release builds. For the moment, I just disabled the Debug builds (and the node_g binary) for ARM. That has now built to completion in the side-tag. Now in the build root as well, but I notice that it is still providing nodejs(abi) as 0.10 and /usr/lib/rpm/nodejs_native.req is adding that as the require for native modules as well. The nodejs(v8-abi) has changed, but before I start trying to rebuild my native modules should be changing nodejs(abi) as well? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Plans for Node.js
On 02/12/15 17:04, Stephen Gallagher wrote: Should be all set now. Thanks for catching that. So current status of the binary modules is as follows. Firstly ones that were using nan v2 and have been rebuilt successfully in the side tag: nodejs-fs-ext nodejs-gdal nodejs-iconv nodejs-node-expat nodejs-sqlite3 nodejs-zipfile Ones which have been updated to new upstream releases and/or patches from upstream and built in the side tag: nodejs-i2c nodejs-libxmljs One where work is still needed: nodejs-node-stringprep has a patch on github but the comments suggest it still has issues so it will need more investigation. nodejs-mapnik is mine, and will need to be updated, but that needs an update to mapnik 3 which I am currently working on in a copr. nodejs-pg - this is very out of date, and is now noarch with the optional C bindings in the libpq module. I think there are also a number of new dependencies that will need packaging. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Builds failing on EPEL7 ppc builders
On 04/12/15 08:31, Piotr Popieluch wrote: Since about one week I have many failed builds of nodejs-packages on EPEL7. The failed builds happen on ppc builders, the builds fail with: EBUG util.py:393: Getting requirements for nodejs-grunt-contrib-internal-0.4.9-4.el7.src DEBUG util.py:393: --> nodejs-packaging-7-1.el7.noarch DEBUG util.py:393: Error: Package: nodejs-packaging-7-1.el7.noarch (build) DEBUG util.py:393: Requires: nodejs(engine) >= 0.10.12 DEBUG util.py:393: You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem DEBUG util.py:393: You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12048804 Which makes sense as nodejs is not available on PPC. Do we need to set a BuildArch? Well the BuildArch is, in most cases, noarch. The trick is the ExclusiveArch line which is what stops it build on unsupported platforms. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js#ExclusiveArch Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: lodash
On 06/12/15 13:52, Jamie Nguyen wrote: On 05/12/15 07:50, Tom Hughes wrote: I've knocked up a prototype now: https://tomh.fedorapeople.org/lodash.spec https://tomh.fedorapeople.org/lodash-3.10.1-1.fc23.src.rpm The precise details are slightly different than I described because I was looking at the current head not the 3.10.1 release when I wrote that. So this has now become rather more urgent because Jared uploaded a new version of nodejs-argparse last night requires lodash 3 and, judging by the test failures, it really does need it and can't be fixdeped. Jamie - as you're the owner of nodejs-lodash (the only one of the three existing packages that isn't mine) do you have any objection to this plan? I have no objections at all. Thanks for your hard work! :-) I've opened https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1288858 for this now. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Plans for Node.js
On 03/12/15 00:55, Tom Hughes wrote: Ones which have been updated to new upstream releases and/or patches from upstream and built in the side tag: nodejs-i2c nodejs-libxmljs One where work is still needed: nodejs-node-stringprep has a patch on github but the comments suggest it still has issues so it will need more investigation. These three are all built in the side tag now. nodejs-mapnik is mine, and will need to be updated, but that needs an update to mapnik 3 which I am currently working on in a copr. This is all ready and will be updated once the python-mapnik review is complete. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: lodash
On 17/11/15 19:30, Tom Hughes wrote: On 16/11/15 16:46, Jared K. Smith wrote: On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Tom Hughes <t...@compton.nu <mailto:t...@compton.nu>> wrote: So, what do people think? Sounds reasonable to me. I've knocked up a prototype now: https://tomh.fedorapeople.org/lodash.spec https://tomh.fedorapeople.org/lodash-3.10.1-1.fc23.src.rpm The precise details are slightly different than I described because I was looking at the current head not the 3.10.1 release when I wrote that. So this has now become rather more urgent because Jared uploaded a new version of nodejs-argparse last night requires lodash 3 and, judging by the test failures, it really does need it and can't be fixdeped. Jamie - as you're the owner of nodejs-lodash (the only one of the three existing packages that isn't mine) do you have any objection to this plan? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Plans for Node.js
On 03/12/15 17:29, Tom Hughes wrote: If you load index.html in a browser it will run the tests, but I can't see any obvious way to run it from the command line and it relies on injecting methods into the window object. So you can do it with node-qunit... But it's a bit fiddly... npm install qunit then: node_modules/qunit/bin/cli.js -c jschardet:./index.js -t ./tests/jschardet.js except you also have to change module to QUnit.module (because module is reserved in node) and equals to equal (because this is a newer qunit version) in the tests. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Plans for Node.js
On 03/12/15 20:52, Jared K. Smith wrote: Wow, not sure I would have figured that out on my own. I got as far as packaging up the dependencies for qunit, but there's obviously something wrong in my qunit package because it was giving me a different error. When I use the qunit installed by npm, the tests run, but I get five failing tests. :-( Sure, but the same five that fail if you just load index.html in a browser ;-) I didn't dig into that... Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Plans for Node.js
On 02/12/15 00:54, Stephen Gallagher wrote: OK, the f24-nodejs4 side-tag now has all the pieces up to and including the nodejs-4.2.2-1.fc24 package. (This does not include npm). Basically, I needed to build three packages: libuv 1.7.5, http_parser 2.6.0 and Node.js 4.2.2 Actually the nodejs build failed on ARM with an undefined reference when linking: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12026059 https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/work/tasks/6059/12026059/build.log Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Plans for Node.js
On 07/12/15 12:55, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
nodejs-fs-ext
ExclusiveArch only for primary instead of %{nodejs_arches}
I've pushed a fix for this and it's building in the side tag now.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
___
nodejs mailing list
nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: sntp
On 14/12/15 12:08, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
I'd go so far as to say that we should propose a modification to the packaging
guidelines to state this explicitly. Would you like me to prepare a draft?
Sounds good to me.
Sometimes modules have extra entry points that can be loaded with variants of
require in which case those could be test loaded as well.
Could you give me an example of those variants?
I was going to say readable-stream, where you can do:
require('readable-stream/transform')
but it turns out the main entry point also requires and exports that, so
it is equivalent to:
require('readable-stream').Transform
It illustrates the basic point though, that there can be other top level
js files that you can require as module/file or test as:
node -e "require('./file')"
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
___
nodejs mailing list
nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: sntp
On 14/12/15 15:25, Jared K. Smith wrote: I have packages either built or in process for the following: balanced-match brace-expansion builtin-modules concat-map escape-string-regexp graceful-readlink has-ansi is-builtin-module jju json-parse-helpfulerror os-homedir spdx-correct spdx-exceptions spdx-expression-parse validate-npm-package-license I'll double-check each of them and start creating review requests for them today. We should probably create a wiki page with list of all the packages and package updates that we know are needed along with bug numbers and/or who is working on them? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Review request
Could somebody have a look at reviewing 1274512 please, only I just accidentally pushed a nodejs-tape update that requires it... Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: pnemade pushed to nodejs-deep-extend (el6). "Specify exclusively arch list as per nodejs packaging guidelines"
On 13/01/16 13:09, Piotr Popieluch wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Tom Hughes <t...@compton.nu
<mailto:t...@compton.nu>> wrote:
On 13/01/16 11:43, notificati...@fedoraproject.org
<mailto:notificati...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
From 393558883ad677a3e3b6dcb74ce42a189d712576 Mon Sep 17
00:00:00 2001
From: Parag Nemade <pnem...@redhat.com <mailto:pnem...@redhat.com>>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:43:33 +0530
Subject: Specify exclusively arch list as per nodejs packaging
guidelines
---
nodejs-deep-extend.spec | 7 +--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/nodejs-deep-extend.spec b/nodejs-deep-extend.spec
index e34ec94..dbe09a0 100644
--- a/nodejs-deep-extend.spec
+++ b/nodejs-deep-extend.spec
@@ -5,14 +5,14 @@
Name: nodejs-%{module_name}
Version:0.3.2
-Release:1%{?dist}
+Release:2%{?dist}
Summary:Recursive object extending
License:MIT
URL: https://github.com/unclechu/node-deep-extend
Source0:
http://registry.npmjs.org/%{module_name}/-/%{module_name}-%{version}.tgz
BuildArch: noarch
-ExclusiveArch: %{nodejs_arches} noarch
+ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64 %{arm} noarch
This is the exact opposite of what the guidelines say surely?
The whole point of adding the nodejs_arches macro was to avoid
having the list of supported architectures embedded in all the spec
files, so
that they could be extended in future without changing every spec.
This macros is unavailable on el6. (but is available on epel7 and all
active Fedora branches).
I'm using:
%if 0%{?rhel} == 6
ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64 %{arm} noarch
%else
ExclusiveArch: %{nodejs_arches} noarch
%endif
The previous version of the guidelines had an conditional on rhel
(without version), I don't know why it is removed.
But that commit was on the epel7 branch wasn't it? Which should have the
macro?
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
___
nodejs mailing list
nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: pnemade pushed to nodejs-deep-extend (el6). "Specify exclusively arch list as per nodejs packaging guidelines"
On 13/01/16 11:43, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
From 393558883ad677a3e3b6dcb74ce42a189d712576 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Parag Nemade <pnem...@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:43:33 +0530
Subject: Specify exclusively arch list as per nodejs packaging guidelines
---
nodejs-deep-extend.spec | 7 +--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/nodejs-deep-extend.spec b/nodejs-deep-extend.spec
index e34ec94..dbe09a0 100644
--- a/nodejs-deep-extend.spec
+++ b/nodejs-deep-extend.spec
@@ -5,14 +5,14 @@
Name: nodejs-%{module_name}
Version:0.3.2
-Release:1%{?dist}
+Release:2%{?dist}
Summary:Recursive object extending
License:MIT
URL:https://github.com/unclechu/node-deep-extend
Source0:
http://registry.npmjs.org/%{module_name}/-/%{module_name}-%{version}.tgz
BuildArch: noarch
-ExclusiveArch: %{nodejs_arches} noarch
+ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64 %{arm} noarch
This is the exact opposite of what the guidelines say surely?
The whole point of adding the nodejs_arches macro was to avoid having
the list of supported architectures embedded in all the spec files, so
that they could be extended in future without changing every spec.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
___
nodejs mailing list
nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Builds failing on EPEL7 ppc builders
On 12/01/16 14:45, Piotr Popieluch wrote: Apparently the ExclusiveArch line is incorrect. The "noarch" shouldn't be there. See releng trac: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6329 As I recall we took advice from all the experts at the time and it was carefully crafted the way it is because of what they advised... Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F24 and npm
On 10/06/16 14:12, Tom Hughes wrote: I'm not sure what happens if you update with dnf system-upgrade but if you have both nodejs and npm installed and try and distro-sync to F24 then you will fail with: I've tried system-upgrade and it fails in the same way. The good news is that --allowerasing, which is suggested by system-upgrade when it fails, works with both distro-sync and system-upgrade and appears to do the right thing in allowing nodejs to replace npm. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: pnemade pushed to nodejs-deep-extend (el6). "Specify exclusively arch list as per nodejs packaging guidelines"
On 13/01/16 13:58, Parag Nemade wrote: Yes you are right. The guidelines are not clear. I am not sure if someone removed EPEL7 specific information but as of these days I am not able to find that information in the nodejs packaging guidelines. Therefore, I started adding dependency generator, expanded macro to epel7 as well. The problem I found is that if I use that macro and build the package then only srpm will appear in epel srpm repository and corresponding binary noarch rpm will not get composed in repository at all. See this ticket https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6323 That ticket is about EPEL6 though, where the macro isn't defined! I don't have an EPEL7 machine to check, but does it not have a redhat-rpm-config that contains /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.nodejs-srpm which defines the nodejs_arches macro? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: npm deps broken in Rawhide
On 18/01/16 14:58, Stephen Gallagher wrote: Probably not worth it in that case. I think we're only a couple packages away from being able to merge the side-tag in, so maybe we should just hold off and then do the frenzied fixup as soon as npm is done. I've cancelled the build I started for npm-registry-client... Are you available to join Jared and I on IRC today? (What's your nick?) We're coordinating our efforts to get as much done as possible. I'm tomhughes on freenode. I've just jumped in to #fedora-devel. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Builds failing on EPEL7 ppc builders
On 14/01/16 20:24, Piotr Popieluch wrote: Update: It has now been discussed at FPC and currently there is no good solution. There are two options: 1) Make all modules archfull (which will result much more packges built) 2) Resubmit until a non PPC builder gets the job. The other option of course is to enhance koji so that there is a better way to do it ;-) Presumably the issue is that if BuildArch is noarch then koji will allow it to build anywhere? This specific issue will stop being a problem when node 4 is merged anyway as I understand it, as that has PPC support? Incidentally, is there a good reason why we don't merge the side tag given that all the binary issues are sorted and we seem to be doing the npm stack in the main tag anyway? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Node.js 5.7.1
On 10/03/16 16:20, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
I've just pushed a new update to the repository that also includes Node.js 5.8.0
(released yesterday). Of course, since the minor version jumped, binary packages
may need a rebuild.
If we're going to look into supporting the rapidly-updating 5.x branch in F25, I
wonder if we should modify the automatic dependency-generation to do:
Requires: nodejs(abi) >= %{abi_major}.%{abi_minor}
Conflicts: nodejs(abi) >= %{abi_major+1}
Of course, I have no idea how this automatic dependency is created, so I don't
know how complicated it will be to fix. But I think we have to, since 5.x seems
to bump minor versions at least once every couple months. Assuming it's properly
following semantic versioning, the rebuild shouldn't actually be needed unless
we bump the major version.
Oh it's easy to do - the nodejs spec file creates nodejs_native.req in
the %install section with those rules.
Why makes the second conflicts though? Why not:
Requires: nodejs(abi) >= %{abi_major}.%{abi_minor}
Requires: nodejs(abi) < %{abi_major+1}
Which is what the dependency generator would do for a caret dependency
on a node module.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
___
nodejs mailing list
nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Node.js 5.7.1
On 10/03/16 16:20, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On 03/10/2016 06:32 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On Mar 10, 2016, at 4:43 AM, Tom Hughes <t...@compton.nu> wrote: - The npm doesn't work at all because all the bundled modules are in the node_modules.bundled directory and node_modules is empty - moving them fixes it Hmm, that's odd; it's supposed to contain symlinks to the bundled libraries. That's because the old NPM package had unbundled lobs symlinked in there and RPM can't replace a symlink with a directory. I'll look into it this morning. Aaand I forgot that in my testing I made this an "echo" statement instead of real symlinks. Oddly enough, `npm install ` was working for me locally. I have no idea how... So this is still not quite right in the latest version - the node_modules directory now contains a symlink called "*" that points at the bundled directory. What's the logic behind creating links anyway? Why not just put the modules in node_modules directly? or is what you're doing how upstream does it? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Plans for Node.js 6.x
On 02/05/16 19:31, Robert Van Voorhees wrote: When building Node for Fedora 23 I think I encountered the error you were alluding to with `libuv` [3]: Yes you will need to build a newer libuv package first. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: F24 and npm
On 29/06/16 12:41, Stephen Gallagher wrote: I suspect the problem may actually be the virtual 'Provides: npm(npm)' since we had to drop the epoch on that for other reasons. Since that virtual Provides went backwards and other packages in the transaction have explicit "Requires: npm(npm) >= something" in them, DNF is trying to pull in the package that satisfies the highest version of that virtual dependency available. There is only one package in the repo that requires npm(npm) though and that is kosmtik which currently requires: npm(npm) >= 2.15.5 npm(npm) < 3 Which matches the nodejs provided version. Note that it was broken and requiring v3 but I fixed that in a zero day update. Even without kosmtik installed you still hit the problem on upgrade though so long as you have both npm and nodejs installed. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Updating nodejs-bytes
On 17/02/17 04:41, Ben Rosser wrote: Thanks again for updating nodejs-bytes. Unfortunately, it seems that there is still an issue here: Error: nothing provides npm(iconv-lite) >= 0.4.15 needed by nodejs-raw-body-2.2.0-1.fc26.noarch I assume that the nodejs-bytes package now needs a %nodejs_fixdep in order to remove the versioned dependency on iconv-lite (or our iconv-lite package needs to be updated-- 0.4.15 is current upstream and we're shipping 0.4.13-- but given the fact that those version numbers are pretty close, I'd suspect this isn't necessary). I've built 0.4.15 into rawhide now. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: native modules in epel7 ftbfs
On 26/02/17 22:28, Piotr Popieluch wrote: Now I cannot get any of the native modules built. It seems they haven't been rebuild in years and are broken from at least the last update to 6.x. Well it would probably help if you pointed at a failed build so we could see what the problem is. I had a quick look at some in koji but I couldn't see any el7 builds. I tried to get them built again but there seem to be some issues with outdated versions of nan and node-gyp.. Well there are three separate nan packages - nan0, nan1 and nan, though you probably need nan (aka nan 2.x) for node 6.x support. You will of course also need a version of the binary module that has nan 2.x support. Is it forgotten to check/rebuild the native modules while updating to 6.x ? Does someone remember what was done in Fedora to get them working again? Well mostly just getting nan 2.x in and updating them to a version that supports nan 2.x I think. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Node 6.5.0
On 29/08/16 17:46, Tom Hughes wrote: The nodejs 6.5.0 build that is running now breaks v8 abi so binary extensions will need to be rebuilt. I've got my script ready to go and will run it for rawhide and f25 once the f25 build of nodejs completes - ideally we will then need to add those to the same bodhi update as nodejs for f25. Modules are now rebuilt and I submitted the update: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-128b62417f Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Newbie question . . fetch_kindle.js
On 18/09/16 06:39, p...@pricom.com.au wrote: This looks like a very low volume list so I guess if there is no response I should try the main Fedora user list . . Anyway, I am trying to get this working: https://gist.github.com/yangchenyun/a1c123935d82f5e25d57 on F25 x86_64 and I am getting a sqlite3 error so I did: dnf install nodejs-sqlite3 with no improvement - I did try: npm install sqlite3 --build-from-source but got a whole lot of errors and in any case, I would like to stick to just RPMs if I can . . If you want help with an error then the first step is to tell the people you're asking what the error is. I suspect that you just haven't linked the modules you need to your current working directory - node will not search the global modules for you so you need "npm link sqlite3" to make it available to your program. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Node 6.5.0
On 29/08/16 17:49, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On 08/29/2016 12:46 PM, Tom Hughes wrote: The nodejs 6.5.0 build that is running now breaks v8 abi so binary extensions will need to be rebuilt. I've got my script ready to go and will run it for rawhide and f25 once the f25 build of nodejs completes - ideally we will then need to add those to the same bodhi update as nodejs for f25. It is an actual ABI *break*? Isn't that supposed to be forbidden? Well the v8 version changed from 5.0.71.60 to 5.1.281.81 which means our v8-abi provide has changed from 5.0 to 5.1 and caused dependencies to break in the binary modules. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Node 6.5.0
The nodejs 6.5.0 build that is running now breaks v8 abi so binary extensions will need to be rebuilt. I've got my script ready to go and will run it for rawhide and f25 once the f25 build of nodejs completes - ideally we will then need to add those to the same bodhi update as nodejs for f25. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: zvetlik's nodejs-6.8.0-108.fc26 failed to build
On 13/10/16 10:23, notificati...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Package:nodejs-6.8.0-108.fc26 Status: failed Built by: zvetlik ID: 809331 Started:Thu, 13 Oct 2016 09:11:38 UTC Finished: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 09:23:09 UTC Closed tasks: - Task 16073443 on buildvm-aarch64-18.arm.fedoraproject.org Task Type: build (noarch) Link: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16073443 error building package (arch i686), mock exited with status 1; see build.log for more information This is fallout from OpenSSL 1.1 being in rawhide now. Upstream PR at https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/8491 but looks like it isn't merged yet... Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
nodejs-packaging repo
As fedorahosted is going away I have created a pagure repo to replace the nodejs-packaging repo on fedorahosted: https://pagure.io/nodejs-packaging I have also created a nodejs-sig group on pagure that has push access to that repo and added various SIG members to it. Issues and PRs from the repo should be notified to the sig list. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update jquery to 3.2.1?
On 28/03/17 18:00, Christopher wrote: I have a patch prepped to update js-jquery to 3.2.1, and was wondering if I should do it for F26. I'm not a javascript expert, and certainly not that familiar with nodejs stuffs, but jquery is a pretty simple package, and I need it for my web app. What are you updating from? and if it's a significant version change then what other dependants does it have that might get broken? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Update jquery to 3.2.1?
On 28/03/17 18:49, Christopher wrote: The current version in Fedora is 2.2.4 (which is quite old now). I don't know what it might break... I'm not even sure how to check which packages depend on js-jquery. I've only taken over js-jquery because it was orphaned for awhile, I need it for my package, and I didn't want it to get retired. One thing I know... it's not reasonable to keep packaging *every* major version of jQuery. Currently, there is js-jquery1 (which is the last version 1) and js-jquery (which is the last version 2). I would like to retire js-jquery1 eventually, and just keep js-jquery at the latest. Well rubygem-jquery-rails is a definite issue: rubygem-jquery-rails-0:4.2.2-2.fc26.noarch jquery = 1.12.4 jquery = 2.2.4 As far as I can see nothing else has an require that would actually be broken, and I don't think 2 to 3 is as big an issue as 1 to 2 so you might be ok. You need to talk to the rubygem maintainer though, as that always has to be updated in lockstep with the main package. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
nodejs module updates
I notice you've been uploading new versions of lots of nodejs modules to the lookaside cache today. Presumably you're planning to follow that up by pushing spec updates and builds? Can I ask what this is all about? The fallout from such a large set of updates is likely to be significant so the SIG should probably be aware of what's going on before it hits Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Node.js 8 officially in rawhide
On 29/06/17 09:55, Zuzana Svetlikova wrote: as announced, yesterday I built nodejs-8.1.2 in rawhide. Please, check that your packages work, especially native modules, as there seem to be a few incompatibilities. I rebuilt all (hopefully) of the native modules last night after you did the build of the engine. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Review swap
On 02/05/17 08:36, Parag Nemade wrote: I have got few nodejs packages which need reviews. Can it be possible for anyone to review them? I will be happy to review some of yours in exchange of this. here is link https://da.gd/UUqS1 I've made a start on some of them. I have one node module up for review at the moment: 1425074 - nodejs-humanize-ms and also a few C++ libraries that are needed to be able to update one of my node packages if you're up for doing them: 1440481 - mapbox-variant 1440489 - geometry-hpp 1440508 - wagyu Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: nodejs packaging in Fedora
Binary compiled ones probably also need to be kept. Presumably this also means identifying "top level" packages that are an end goal in themselves and need to be kept. Tom On 20/09/17 11:11, Stephen Gallagher wrote: That sounds like a Change Proposal for F28. So your idea would be to mass-retire all but the most common or security-sensitive NPMs from Fedora and rely on bundling in most cases? That will also mean coming up with a strategy for removing those unbundled packages on updates. Thoughts on that? On Wed, Sep 20, 2017, 4:59 AM Zuzana Svetlikova <zsvet...@redhat.com <mailto:zsvet...@redhat.com>> wrote: I was wondering, could we use bundling and clean up the mess that is current nodejs stack in Fedora? To be more precise, there are currently over 2000 packages and over 500 nodejs-* is available bugs, that nobody has time to fix and/or feels like fixing, because updating one module might/will break several others. For the sake of maintainability, I'd like to leave as little packages as possible. On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Stephen Gallagher <sgall...@redhat.com <mailto:sgall...@redhat.com>> wrote: On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 8:06 AM Stephen Gallagher <sgall...@redhat.com <mailto:sgall...@redhat.com>> wrote: I haven't had any time to work on it, but I'd very much like to develop an automatic RPM dependency generator that will recurse down the node_modules directories, read their package.json files and automatically create those Provides. If anyone else wants to take a crack at doing that, it would be an immense help. A big thank-you needs to go to Tomas Tomacek for https://pagure.io/nodejs-packaging/pull-request/2 which is now in effect on Fedora 28 (Rawhide) builds. So now any Node.js package that is built in Fedora will automatically have `Provides: bundled(nodejs-foo)` added automatically. ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org> To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org> ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org> To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org> ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ nodejs mailing list -- nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to nodejs-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Updating nodejs-grunt and friends in Rawhide
On 29/08/2019 20:01, Ben Rosser wrote: Hm, does it make sense then to have a compatibility package for lodash3? I think we may have to multiversion it yes. Been thinking that for a while. I'll try and have a look at doing a lodash4 version of the spec over the weekend... dnf repoquery --whatrequires nodejs-lodash says: You need to look at all the nodejs-lodash-xxx modules as well which are built from the same source, although they don't make as much difference as I expected. That and BRs which I haven't looked at. My guess is also that at least *some* of these packages have a newer release which support lodash 4 but no one has updated the package, whether because the package is effectively unmaintained or the maintainer is overworked or worried about breaking dependencies. :( Oh probably quite a lot do, it's been a bit chicken and egg having to try and do everything at once, or even audit what is actually doable - ie what dependants have a new version with support. For instance, looking at the last package on this list... the current version of zip-stream is 2.1.2 and does not actually require lodash at all anymore. https://github.com/archiverjs/node-zip-stream/blob/master/package.json Somebody should update it then ;-) Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
Re: Updating nodejs-grunt and friends in Rawhide
On 30/08/2019 14:44, Ben Rosser wrote:
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 3:59 AM Tom Hughes wrote:
On 29/08/2019 20:01, Ben Rosser wrote:
Hm, does it make sense then to have a compatibility package for lodash3?
I think we may have to multiversion it yes. Been thinking that for
a while.
I'll try and have a look at doing a lodash4 version of the spec
over the weekend...
Great, thanks for looking into it!
So I now have a working spec for v4 and having now refreshed
my memory of how it all works I think the issues may not be as
bad as I remembered.
Anything which uses nodejs-lodash and loads the whole thing, or
a whole group, so things like:
require("lodash")
require("lodash/array")
should be fine, obviously modulo any changes to how the lodash
methods work or removal of old methods.
So should anything which uses one of the split out single method
modules like nodejs-lodash-pad.
Both nodejs-lodash-compat and nodejs-lodash-node go away but there
is appears to be nothing actually using them.
The remaining issue is things using nodejs-lodash and loading an
individual method with something like:
require("lodash/array/chunk")
which would now need to change to:
require("lodash/chunk")
Given all this I'm kind of tempted to just go for it and do the
update and then fixup the dependants, which are far less than my
memory suggested, maybe because so many things have been retired
now.
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
___
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
Re: Updating nodejs-grunt and friends in Rawhide
On 29/08/2019 14:37, Ben Rosser wrote: I can work on this and submit pull requests to the packages in question, if that would be helpful, but I wanted to check in here before doing so. As best as I can tell, the packages in question that need updating are: * nodejs-grunt * nodejs-grunt-legacy-log * nodejs-grunt-legacy-log-util Both legacy-log and legacy-log-util are mine and the reason that I haven't updated them is that the 2.x versions require lodash 4.x and we don't have that and getting to it is a major project because 3.x and 4.x are totally incompatible and lots of things use it. Plus lodash has a crazy system that packages the same code is lots of different variants. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
Re: Updating nodejs-grunt and friends in Rawhide
On 11/09/2019 16:08, Ben Rosser wrote: I'm certainly in favor of going ahead with this, and no one seems to have objected (at least not on this list). Let me know if I can do something to help. I've updated lodash in rawhide, and hopefully fixed the worst of the resulting fallout. I also updated grunt-legacy-log-utils and grunt-legacy-log though I have no idea if they still work as I had to disable the tests because there are circular dependencies on the rest of grunt but hopefully once you update that I can turn them back on. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
Re: Dependency issues in mass rebuild due to nodejs-eyes and nodejs-raw-body
On 04/02/2020 21:05, Ben Rosser wrote: irc-colors failed because nodejs-eyes was retired, and nodejs-vows has an unsatisfiable dependency on it: DEBUG util.py:596: Error: DEBUG util.py:596: Problem: conflicting requests DEBUG util.py:596:- nothing provides (npm(eyes) >= 0.1.6 with npm(eyes) < 0.2) needed by nodejs-vows-0.8.2-13.fc31.noarch I filed an unretire for eyes last Friday but radio silence so far: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9214 DEBUG util.py:596: Error: DEBUG util.py:596: Problem: conflicting requests DEBUG util.py:596:- nothing provides (npm(eyes) >= 0.1 with npm(eyes) < 0.2) needed by nodejs-winston-0.7.3-12.fc31.noarch Can we collaborate on fixing these problems? I can unretire and update nodejs-eyes, but then we'll need to update winston and vows too. I'm not sure about nodejs-raw-body's dependencies-- I imagine updating nodejs-bytes and nodejs-http-errors will fix things, but that could probably affect other packages as well. I think vows is fine - there is a 0.8.3 but mostly it should be no problem once eyes is back. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
Re: First draft of script and spec files
On 03/09/2020 16:41, Troy Dawson wrote:
> Any changes and/or improvements that people think should be made?
Well macros for all that boilerplate in the spec is an
obvious one.
Also making the script fetch the actual version being packaged
rather than the latest version would be good. Something like:
VERSION="$(rpmspec --srpm --queryformat=%{VERSION} -q nodejs-${PACKAGE}.spec)"
and then:
npm pack ${PACKAGE}@${VERSION}
Tom
--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
___
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
Re: /usr/bin/node: No such file or directory on F32 ?!?
On 14/09/2020 10:30, Sérgio Basto wrote: koschei notifications says that a lot of packages stopped to build on F32 [1] in build.log the error is "/usr/bin/node: No such file or directory" Because nodejs=packaging no longer pulls in nodejs. Not sure what the eventual resolution was in F33 but as it's a build only issue it doesn't really matter for F32 unless you're trying to build an update for one of them. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
Re: /usr/bin/node: No such file or directory on F32 ?!?
On 14/09/2020 23:07, Sérgio Basto wrote: On Mon, 2020-09-14 at 12:13 +0100, Tom Hughes via nodejs wrote: On 14/09/2020 10:30, Sérgio Basto wrote: koschei notifications says that a lot of packages stopped to build on F32 [1] in build.log the error is "/usr/bin/node: No such file or directory" Because nodejs=packaging no longer pulls in nodejs. Not sure what the eventual resolution was in F33 but as it's a build only issue it doesn't really matter for F32 unless you're trying to build an update for one of them. ah ok, it is a easy fix , for example [1] but we need to fix about 300packages [2] Well that was my point. I didn't like that fix and I thought in the end it was resolved without needing to do that, but maybe not in F32. Check the old threads in the archives... Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
Re: Proposal: Reboot nodejs library/modules in Fedora
On 29/07/2020 22:38, Troy Dawson wrote: I wanted to get a list of essential nodejs packages, and I thought of getting a list of nodejs packages that are required by non-nodejs packages. How have you defined essential? That list is amazingly small. # Binaries / Runtime packages statsd -> nodejs-generic-pool R-shiny -> nodejs-showdown notepadqq -> nodejs-shelljs mocha -> uglify-js and nodejs-jade kosmtik -> 11 nodejs libraries jake -> 5 nodejs libraries elasticdump -> 3 nodejs libraries discord-irc -> 10 nodejs libraries carto -> 4 nodejs libraries As both kosmtik and carto originate with me - indeed kosmtik is kind of the original cause of my involvement in Node.js pacaging I can comment a bit on those. I wouldn't actually worry too much about keeping kosmtik to be honest. While carto is probably more useful the current version is rather out of date, because of tricky dependency issues in the newer versions so that dependency count will go up if it is updated I think. I also wonder if you missed some build/test toolchains that are required? Only that is where of the nasty trees of dependencies are I think. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
Orphaning og my nodejs packages
I have orphaned all my nodejs packages - feel free to grab though be aware that in many cases they have hopeless dependency issues. Full list of affected packages: carto jake kosmtik lodash node-gyp nodejs-agentkeepalive nodejs-ap nodejs-array-differ nodejs-array-union nodejs-arrify nodejs-assertion-error nodejs-async-queue nodejs-aws-sign2 nodejs-bl nodejs-bluebird nodejs-buffer-writer nodejs-chai nodejs-chai-connect-middleware nodejs-chai-passport-strategy nodejs-chroma-js nodejs-chrono nodejs-clean-css nodejs-clone nodejs-closure-compiler nodejs-co nodejs-concat-stream nodejs-constantinople nodejs-deep-eql nodejs-deep-equal nodejs-define-properties nodejs-dep-graph nodejs-difflet nodejs-es-abstract nodejs-es-to-primitive nodejs-express nodejs-extend nodejs-eyes nodejs-filelist nodejs-fill-keys nodejs-foreach nodejs-fs-extra nodejs-function-bind nodejs-gdal nodejs-generate-function nodejs-generate-object-property nodejs-get nodejs-globule nodejs-graceful-fs nodejs-grunt-cli nodejs-grunt-known-options nodejs-grunt-legacy-log nodejs-grunt-legacy-log-utils nodejs-har-validator nodejs-has nodejs-hash_file nodejs-has-symbols nodejs-has-unicode nodejs-hsluv nodejs-humanize-ms nodejs-i2c nodejs-iconv nodejs-iconv-lite nodejs-image-size nodejs-inherits nodejs-is nodejs-is-callable nodejs-is-date-object nodejs-is-my-json-valid nodejs-is-object nodejs-is-property nodejs-is-regex nodejs-isstream nodejs-is-symbol nodejs-is-typedarray nodejs-json-localizer nodejs-jsonpointer nodejs-js-string-escape nodejs-JSV nodejs-klaw nodejs-leaflet nodejs-leaflet-formbuilder nodejs-leaflet-hash nodejs-less nodejs-less-plugin-clean-css nodejs-libpq nodejs-libxmljs nodejs-lodash nodejs-make-arrow-function nodejs-make-generator-function nodejs-mapnik nodejs-mapnik-pool nodejs-mapnik-reference nodejs-mapnik-vector-tile nodejs-mbtiles nodejs-merge-descriptors nodejs-millstone nodejs-mock-fs nodejs-module-not-found-error nodejs-monocle nodejs-multimatch nodejs-nan nodejs-nan1 nodejs-node-expat nodejs-node-markdown nodejs-node-stringprep nodejs-numeral nodejs-oauth nodejs-object-dot-assign nodejs-object-inspect nodejs-object-is nodejs-object-keys nodejs-okay nodejs-packet-reader nodejs-passport nodejs-passport-oauth nodejs-passport-oauth1 nodejs-passport-oauth2 nodejs-passport-strategy nodejs-path-exists nodejs-pedding nodejs-pff nodejs-pg nodejs-pg-connection-string nodejs-pg-cursor nodejs-pg-escape nodejs-pg-int8 nodejs-pg-native nodejs-pg-numeric nodejs-pg-packet-stream nodejs-pgpass nodejs-pg-pool nodejs-pg-protocol nodejs-pg-types nodejs-postgres-array nodejs-postgres-bytea nodejs-postgres-date nodejs-postgres-interval nodejs-progress-stream nodejs-prompt nodejs-proxyquire nodejs-queue-async nodejs-readdir-scoped-modules nodejs-request nodejs-require-directory nodejs-resumer nodejs-rewire nodejs-safe-buffer nodejs-secure-random nodejs-set-immediate nodejs-set-immediate-shim nodejs-should nodejs-should-equal nodejs-should-format nodejs-should-http nodejs-should-type nodejs-simple-assert nodejs-single-line-log nodejs-sinon nodejs-sliced nodejs-speedometer nodejs-sphericalmercator nodejs-sqlite3 nodejs-srs nodejs-step nodejs-string-dot-prototype-dot-trim nodejs-stringstream nodejs-supports-color nodejs-tap nodejs-tape nodejs-tilelive-mapnik nodejs-tiletype nodejs-tmp nodejs-tough-cookie nodejs-type-detect nodejs-uid2 nodejs-uri-js nodejs-uri-path nodejs-utilities nodejs-utils-merge nodejs-vows nodejs-with nodejs-xml2js nodejs-xmlbuilder nodejs-zap nodejs-zipfile Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
Re: Proposal: Reboot nodejs library/modules in Fedora
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. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
