I've created a package.json file for my private app. In it, I have my dependencies listed, as expected. Some of those dependencies have dependencies of their own. When running npm install on my app, it's not installing the dependencies of my dependencies. Is there something wrong with my package.json file which is preventing this? ("winston" is one of my dependencies which isn't properly installing)
{
"name": "my app",
"version": "0.0.1",
"dependencies" : {
"connect" : "1.8.5",
"express" : "2.5.8",
"socket.io" : "0.8.7",
"winston" : "0.5.9"
},
"engine": {
"node": ">=0.6"
}
}
Reponse to comments: NPM installs the top level deps, fine, no errors, it looks like it works. It just never downloads the deps of the deps. Will try the -d option.
Spaces are not allowed in the name option for package.json files.
The name ends up being part of a URL, an argument on the command line, and a folder name. Therefore, the name can't contain any non-URL-safe characters.
https://docs.npmjs.com/files/package.json#name
I had the same issue and with some googling, it seems that this is a problem in node.js: https://github.com/isaacs/npm/issues/1341
I noticed the winston line is ended with ,
This is not a valid JSON.
Related
I am trying to deploy a function to Google Cloud Functions. I based it on their ImageMagick tutorial.
Every time, the function fails to deploy because it reaches an error. Looking at the log, the error is:
Provided module can't be loaded.
Did you list all required modules in the package.json dependencies?
Detailed stack trace:
Error: Cannot find module 'sharp'
I can't figure out why this is happening, because sharp is in my package.json dependencies. If I open the web editor for the function in the Google Cloud console, the package.json is there as one of the files and shows sharp as a dependency. I tried running npm install and npm install --save and re-deploying, and that hasn't fixed anything.
I'm including the package in the function with const sharp = require('sharp'); (this is the line where the log shows the error occurring), and this is my package.json:
{
"name": "Resize images",
"version": "0.0.1",
"private": true,
"author": "James Tyner",
"engines": {
"node": ">=10.0.0"
},
"dependencies": {
"#google-cloud/storage": "^5.0.0",
"sharp": "^0.25.4"
}
}
Can you help me figure out what I'm doing wrong?
This has happened to me many times since I was tricked to install packages in the project directory. It works fine locally but creates an error when you try to deploy.
It worked for me when I changed directory into the functions folder, instead of the firebase project folder and did a package install in there
cd functions
npm install [your missing package] --save
I was running into this issue. Various dependencies were causing my function deployment to fail. After a bit of digging I found that the peer-dependencies were not being included.
Adding this fixed my issue
"scripts": {
...
"gcp-build": "npm i npm-install-peers"
},
checking the docs.
the gcp-build command allows us to perform a custom build step during the function build process.
Somehow I was able to address the issue, but I don't fully understand what I did differently. I found that the dependencies listed in package.json weren't being installed when I ran npm install, so I created a separate folder and copied my code there, ran npm install in the new folder, and it worked well from there. Since then, the dependencies have been working properly when I change them and re-deploy the function.
Using Node v12.13.1 and serverless deployment with webpack to GCP and cloud-functions, I've struggled with this issue. In my case it was a different module though. The problem is that no module from node_modules will be possible to require or import. The reason becomes clear if one takes a look at the webpack zip-file in directory .serverless. It seems that with GCP nothing but the file (typically index.js) denoted as "main" in package.json is actually included.
The solution was to adapt webpack.config.js to explicitly include those files missing.
webpack.config.js
Say I have a private npm package, #myprivate/repo which has the following contents in its package.json:
"scripts": {
"example": "db-migrate"
},
"bin": {
"foo": "bin/foo"
}
Where bin/foo is:
#!/bin/bash
npm run example
I now pull this into a parent repo with npm install:
package.json:
{
"dependencies": {
"#myprivate/repo": "*"
},
"scripts": {
"example": "unrelated command",
"useful": "foo"
}
}
Then running npm run useful results in the foo bin script getting called, which then attemps to call unrelated command. How do I scope the invocation to the dependency? How can I force a bin script to package its own npm dependency and rely on that? Is nested scripts in nested dependency package.json the best way, or is there a better more canonical solution?
I ended up being able to get the behaviour I want by changing the last line of bin/foo to:
npm explore #myprivate/repo npm run example
This does feel a little bit happy (I'm referencing the repo using npm explore from within itself), but it does get the job done. Would love to hear of a better solution
I am trying to create a simple node js plugin. Here is what I have done till now.
package.json
{
"name": "testcli",
"version": "0.0.1",
"description": "Test CLI Tool",
"main": "index.js",
"author": "BJ",
"license": "ISC",
"bin": {
"testx": "index.js"
}
}
Beside the package.json I have a file index.js that has a single line console.log('Hi!')
now when I install the package with npm install -g (from the same directory) and then run the command testx it gives me the following error
.../AppData/Roaming/npm/testx: line 1: /node_modules/testcli/index.js: No such file or directory
How can I solve this?
You need to add a shebang to tell the shell how to invoke this script.
Try adding #! /usr/bin/env node at the beginning of your script.
A lot of packages have one or more executable files that they'd like to install into the PATH. npm makes this pretty easy (in fact, it uses this feature to install the "npm" executable.)
To use this, supply a bin field in your package.json which is a map of command name to local file name. On install, npm will symlink that file into prefix/bin for global installs, or ./node_modules/.bin/ for local installs.
For example, myapp could have this:
{ "bin" : { "myapp" : "./cli.js" } }
So, when you install myapp, it'll create a symlink from the cli.js script to /usr/local/bin/myapp.
If you have a single executable, and its name should be the name of the package, then you can just supply it as a string. For example:
{ "name": "my-program"
, "version": "1.2.5"
, "bin": "./path/to/program" }
would be the same as this:
{ "name": "my-program"
, "version": "1.2.5"
, "bin" : { "my-program" : "./path/to/program" } }
Please make sure that your file(s) referenced in bin starts with #!/usr/bin/env node, otherwise the scripts are started without the node executable!
I am publishing a npm package developed with Browserify, and wonder what is the proper manner to construct a package.json.
The package is a node server-client app (it is actually atom package), and the client side is based on Browseriy.
./www/js/index.js -> ./www/js/index.bundled.js
The required modules are marked and highlight.js.
The both modules are used only on the client side code/file which is bundled by blowserfiy.
A lazy and simple solution would be simply, just to have
package.json A
{
......,
"dependencies":
{
...,
...,
"highlight.js": "*",
"marked": "*"
}
}
and to include the www/js/index.bundled.js file in the npm package files as it is after the browserify in my local dev environment.
However, now I think the npm package.json can be one of the below:
package.json B
{
......,
"dependencies":
{
...,
...,
},
"devDependencies":
{
"highlight.js": "*",
"marked": "*",
"browserify": "*"
}
}
In this case, browserified ./www/js/index.bundled.js file is left in the npm package, and treat marked and highlight.js as a devDependencies, and also browserify.
Then
package.json C
{
......,
"dependencies":
{
...,
...,
"highlight.js": "*",
"marked": "*",
"browserify": "*"
},
"scripts": {
"run": "browserify ./www/js/index.js -o ./www/js/index.bundled.js"
}
}
Just let you know, I have never tried this, and don't know this scripts-run actually runs on npm install myPackage, perhaps not, and maybe you know the proper configuration, maybe there's no such a thing.
In this scenario, ./www/js/index.bundled.js is excluded from the npm package file, and built from the latest npm packaged marked and highlight.js.
The reason I think this manner is somewhat proper is especially in the scenario the npm modules are used and shared in both server and client side.
For instance, take a look at dnode. This RPC module is developed by the same author of browserify (#substack), and should share the same version of dnode module in both server and client side. If a pre browserified ./www/js/index.bundled.js is bundled in the published npm package, it will be outdated compared to server side dnode. Sure we may be able to specify the version to install by package.json, but it's better to use the latest on both server and client side.
Any suggestion? Thanks.
I suggest to use second choice and specify browserify as a devDependency.
You have to build it before you publish your package to npm registry, so users won't need to install browserify themselves.
It's also useful to add a Makefile and make as a prepublish script.
When I remove the devDependencies array, trimArguments installs fine. If I give it a dev-dependency, it seems to completely ignore trimArguments. No warning, just silent failure. My package.json is the following:
{"name":"asyncFuture",
"version":"0.1.0",
"main": "asyncFuture.js",
"dependencies":[
"git+https://git#github.com/fresheneesz/trimArguments.git#578afe0fa6ce96797c36e018bf5bae31b508a02f"
],
"devDependencies": [
"git+https://git#github.com/fresheneesz/deadunit.git#8395e438492267b94ef51ee4f94a6d6c8f1c15da"
],
"repository": {
"type": "git",
"url": "git://github.com/fresheneesz/asyncFuture"
}
}
Is this an NPM bug or am I misunderstanding how to use this? NPM version 1.3.8 on windows 7 32-bit
UPDATE
It's looking like npm is ignoring any package except for the last one, even if I put all dependencies under the "dependencies" array (and get rid of devDependencies). This has to be a bug. I'm gonna file a ticket.
When using URLs as dependencies:
You may specify a [...] URL in place of a version range.
Noting that dependencies are:
specified with a simple hash of package name to version range.
You still need to specify the package name even when using a (Git) URL.
"dependencies": {
"trimArguments": "git+https://git#github.com/fresheneesz/trimArguments.git#578afe0fa6ce96797c36e018bf5bae31b508a02f"
},
"devDependencies": {
"deadunit": "git+https://git#github.com/fresheneesz/deadunit.git#8395e438492267b94ef51ee4f94a6d6c8f1c15da"
}
dependencies and devDependencies are not arrays; they are maps.
https://npmjs.org/doc/json.html#dependencies