GNU bug report logs - #51838
[PATCH 00/11] guix: node-build-system: Support compiling add-ons with node-gyp.

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>
To: Philip McGrath <philip <at> philipmcgrath.com>, Timothy Sample <samplet <at> ngyro.com>, Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org>
Cc: 51838 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#51838] [PATCH 00/11] guix: node-build-system: Support compiling add-ons with node-gyp.
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2021 06:17:58 +0100

Hi,

Am Donnerstag, den 02.12.2021, 16:18 -0500 schrieb Philip McGrath:
> On 11/28/21 14:35, Timothy Sample wrote:
> > Jelle Licht <jlicht <at> fsfe.org> writes:
> > >  From what I have seen package-lock.json offers us no benefits
> > > (because we track exact dependency information via the guix
> > > store) and can (as you have seen) prevent builds from working. My
> > > 2c: always remove it in a phase in the build system.
> > 
> > I’m inclined to agree with Jelle and Liliana.  I can’t imagine a
> > situation in which we would want the lock files.  We could be
> > wrong, but we can always adjust the build system later if something
> > surprising happens (e.g., ‘#:keep-lock-file?’ or whatever).
> 
> This makes sense to me. Should we also delete "yarn.lock" (respected
> as of npm v7)[1] and "npm-shrinkwrap.json"[2]? It seems like the
> same reasons probably apply. 
If it breaks builds, then yes.

> We might want to handle "node_modules/.package-lock.json"[3], too,
> but that seems less likely to exist.
What are node_modules in this context?  To me that sounds like
"vendored packages" and if so, they ought to (ideally) be deleted in a
snippet way before unpack.  Meaning you wouldn't have to handle that
case in configure.

Cheers

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.