Quoting Paolo Greppi (2022-01-24 10:01:30) > Hi all > > Il 09/01/22 21:59, Paolo Greppi ha scritto: > > I stumbled upon this thread related to packaging corepack for gentoo: > > https://github.com/nodejs/corepack/issues/76 > > > > We now have node 16 in experimental, but our package does not bundle > > corepack (as upstream does): > > https://packages.debian.org/experimental/amd64/nodejs/filelist > > > > I propose that we create a RFP/ITP for corepack separate from nodejs, > > with Conflicts: yarnpkg > > > > The corepack binary would install /usr/bin/yarnpkg pointing to the > > corepack shims; this would allow Debian users who "use different package > > manager versions across multiple projects" to happily install random > > binaries downloaded from the internet if they wish. > > > > If we agree that we (as a distribution) need specific versions of > > yarnpkg (for building other stuff, we need to keep one or more yarnpkg > > packages in Debian, all with Conflicts: corepack + each other. > > > > If we really want yarnpkg 1, according to my tests, the corepack route > > is useless: > > > > docker pull node:16 > > docker run -it --rm node:16 bash > > yarn -v # 1.22.15 > > # this downloads https://registry.npmjs.org/yarn/-/yarn-1.22.17.tgz > > # based on the versions / 1.22.17 / dist / tarball value in: > > # https://registry.yarnpkg.com/yarn/ > > corepack prepare yarn@1.22.17 --activate > > yarn -v # 1.22.15 > > corepack yarn -v # 1.22.17 > > ls -l /root/.node/corepack > > > > total 2 > > -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 63 Jan 9 18:33 lastKnownGood.json > > drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 14 Jan 9 18:13 yarn > > > > To "build" it quick and dirty we can download once and for all the same > > pre-built binary that corepack would download, extract it and symlink it > > to /usr/bin/yarnpkg (without shims); this package should go to contrib > > since it downloads stuff from the internet during the build, but would > > fix the issue of yarnpkg blocking the migration to webpack5 and removal > > of node-request. > > Or else keep alive the current version in main by just bundling into it > > webpack4 and node-request. > > > > If we really want a new yarnpkg3 package, corepack is also useless as it > > merely installs yarnpkg 1. > > The upstream recommended way of installing yarnpkg 3 (get yarn 1 with > > corepack then yarn init -2 (sic!)) just downloads the current pre-built > > binary (ATM > > https://repo.yarnpkg.com/3.1.1/packages/yarnpkg-cli/bin/yarn.js, 2199165 > > bytes) to .yarn/releases/yarn-3.1.1.cjs. > > AFAICT this does not integrate with the shared package manager versions > > stored in ~/.node/corepack. > > > > One way to "build" yarnpkg3 quick and dirty is to download once and for > > all the same pre-built binary that yarn init -2 would download, and > > symlink it to /usr/bin/yarnpkg (without shims). > > Or if we want it in main we should replicate the way upstream builds > > this yarn.js binary. > > > > Sorry for the long message, this is a mess! > > > > Paolo > > > > the bugs related to yarn 1 are piling up, what do we want to do as a > team on this ? > > I vote for keeping yarn 1 in the archive by bundling into it > node-babel-eslint, webpack4 and node-request-capture-har/node-request. > This would address #1002902, #1001630, #1000582 and #958686. > > BTW in the meantime nobody created a RFP/ITP for corepack: it looks like > there's not so much interest for that.
Is there much interest in yarnpkg? Is there enough interest in yarnpkg to bring back webpack4 then I would argue it should be done properly (as independent package) or at least get release team and security team opinion on the plans to stuff it up with **more** unmaintainable code. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
-- Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@alioth-lists.debian.net https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel
