惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
博客园_首页
Vercel News
Vercel News
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
罗磊的独立博客
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
IT之家
IT之家
美团技术团队
U
Unit 42
Google DeepMind News
Google DeepMind News
P
Proofpoint News Feed
J
Java Code Geeks
V
V2EX
量子位
腾讯CDC
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
The GitHub Blog
The GitHub Blog
G
Google Developers Blog
D
DataBreaches.Net
雷峰网
雷峰网
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
博客园 - 聂微东
L
LangChain Blog
C
Check Point Blog

Thoughts while building

OpenFreeMap survived 100,000 requests per second Investigating AI Manipulation in Viral Chinese Paraglider Video 2nd stage of the AI age: AI Labs Need Your Data TIL: Get file list from eslint, biome and ruff TIL: Vercel AI SDK - the bloat king TIL: CSS-in-JS modules for SolidJS TIL: Auth provider updates Understanding Round Robin DNS First month of OpenFreeMap Is there now a generation of users who never worked with files? Comparing Auth from Supabase, Firebase, Auth.js, Ory, Clerk and others
The curious case of the packageManager field in package.json
Zsolt Ero · 2024-12-29 · via Thoughts while building

TLDR: If you run into issues with the packageManager field in JS projects, you have to set COREPACK_ENABLE_AUTO_PIN to 0 in your bash profile and remove the existing packageManager field from your package.jsons.

In my experience, package.json was a stable, proven system that worked. Then came corepack's introduction of adding packageManager in each package.json, even when no one asked for it, for example when simply running “pnpm i”.

The idea is that to enforce reproducibility, you have to pin not just your packages, but also your package manager - and not just to a major version, but right down to the patch version.

In a kind of micro-management style, node/corepack now takes control from the package managers. Instead of trusting them not to break reproducibility, they introduce "phantom" package managers based on which directory you're in.

So for example, if I run:

$HOME/.nvm/versions/node/v20.17.0/bin/pnpm --version

it reports "9.10.0" when I'm in one folder and "9.15.2" when I'm in another directory. This totally breaks how "bin" files are supposed to work on UNIX/Linux/macOS. One "bin" file should equal one version.

So what’s in the file? It seems to be a wrapper calling corepack.cjs:

#!/usr/bin/env node
process.env.COREPACK_ENABLE_DOWNLOAD_PROMPT??='1'
require('./lib/corepack.cjs').runMain(['pnpm', ...process.argv.slice(2)]);

Unfortunately corepack.cjs is a unreadable/bundled file, so it’s not easy to figure out what’s happening inside.

They added a possible way to turn this behaviour off (set COREPACK_ENABLE_AUTO_PIN to 0), but hid it in an ENV var, so it cannot be set in a repo - it has to be set on each contributor's machine. The first Google result for this COREPACK_ENABLE_AUTO_PIN env var is a GitHub issue, explaining why the default setting breaks open-source workflows, as each contributor is required to disable it in their local environment - it cannot be configured on repo level.

Moreover it's broken. Every time I run “pnpm i”, it annoys me to upgrade pnpm:

Except, when I run the displayed command:

corepack install -g pnpm@9.15.2

it does nothing. It definitely doesn't update the packageManager field in my package.json, so my project is always left on the old version. This means that tomorrow, it can tell me again that "Update is available!"

The confusing thing is that the update notice links to pnpm’s GitHub and even to their X page. There's not a single mention that its corepack which is artificially keeping back the package manager's version.

I opened a thread on pnpm where they recommended me to turn off this behavior of corepack. Which is basically the only choice they have, as corepack is breaking this system above their head and then users report thinking that pnpm is broken.

Open source maintainers explaining why it's not working (29 upvotes) https://github.com/nodejs/corepack/issues/485

My issue for pnpm trying to figure out what's happening: https://github.com/orgs/pnpm/discussions/8911

My issue for corepack: https://github.com/nodejs/corepack/issues/587

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?