open-rmf/rmf-web

[Bug]: npm version >=99

Closed this issue · 1 comments

Briancbn commented

Before proceeding, is there an existing issue or discussion for this?

OS and version

Ubuntu 22.04

Open-RMF installation type

Source build

Other Open-RMF installation methods

No response

Open-RMF version or commit hash

ac0ca6c

ROS distribution

Humble

ROS installation type

Binaries

Other ROS installation methods

docker

Package or library, if applicable

No response

Description of the bug

In package.json, I don't think the npm version here is intended. It won't cause issue normally.
I discovered issue when I was trying with a CI build, using caching to skip the dependency installation.
I think it might be typo in #628. Maybe 9 instead of 99. Although with the setup instructions in the README, the npm installed is still version 8.

rmf-web/package.json

Line 7 in ac0ca6c

"npm": ">=99"

Steps to reproduce the bug

After installing pnpm and nodejs. Run

npm ci --cache .npm --prefer-offline
npm ERR! code EBADENGINE
npm ERR! engine Unsupported engine
npm ERR! engine Not compatible with your version of node/npm: undefined
npm ERR! notsup Not compatible with your version of node/npm: undefined
npm ERR! notsup Required: {"node":">=16","pnpm":">=7.5.0","npm":">=99"}
npm ERR! notsup Actual:   {"npm":"8.19.4","node":"v16.20.2"}
npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
...

Although later I discovered, I could just use the pnpm caching function.
If it is just a typo, I will just submit a PR to fix it.

Expected behavior

No response

Actual behavior

No response

Additional information or screenshots

No response

aaronchongth commented

Hey there! Sorry, that this is happening. We could certainly document it better since #628, but this change is actually on purpose and not a typo as we have migrated to use pnpm instead of npm. This is an active step to ensure that folks are using pnpm instead of npm, to get the same behaviors guarantees.

I would suggest making the changes required in your CI to use pnpm instead. I'll be closing this then, feel free to follow up with any questions you may have.

  • 👍1