docs(get-started): Add which as deps (IDFGH-12546)

[arrio464]

In some cases, Arch Linux does not install 'which' in the system.
It may cause problems like this:

{"message":"Command failed: which -a python; which -a python3\n/bin/sh: line 1: which: command not found\n/bin/sh: line 1: which: command not found\n","stack":"Error: Command failed: which -a python; which -a python3\n/bin/sh: line 1: which: command not found\n/bin/sh: line 1: which: command not found\n\n\tat ChildProcess.exithandler (node:child_process:420:12)\n\tat ChildProcess.emit (node:events:514:28)\n\tat maybeClose (node:internal/child_process:1091:16)\n\tat ChildProcess._handle.onexit (node:internal/child_process:302:5)","level":"error","timestamp":"2024-04-06T12:50:36.294Z"}
{"user":true,"message":"Error looking for python in system","stack":"Error: Command failed: which -a python; which -a python3\n/bin/sh: line 1: which: command not found\n/bin/sh: line 1: which: command not found\n\n\tat ChildProcess.exithandler (node:child_process:420:12)\n\tat ChildProcess.emit (node:events:514:28)\n\tat maybeClose (node:internal/child_process:1091:16)\n\tat ChildProcess._handle.onexit (node:internal/child_process:302:5)","level":"error","timestamp":"2024-04-06T12:50:36.296Z"}

{"message":"Cannot access filePath: cmake","stack":"Error: spawn which ENOENT\n\tat ChildProcess._handle.onexit (node:internal/child_process:283:19)\n\tat onErrorNT (node:internal/child_process:476:16)\n\tat process.processTicksAndRejections (node:internal/process/task_queues:82:21)","level":"error","timestamp":"2024-04-06T12:59:55.984Z"}
{"message":"Cannot access filePath: ninja","stack":"Error: spawn which ENOENT\n\tat ChildProcess._handle.onexit (node:internal/child_process:283:19)\n\tat onErrorNT (node:internal/child_process:476:16)\n\tat process.processTicksAndRejections (node:internal/process/task_queues:82:21)","level":"error","timestamp":"2024-04-06T12:59:56.058Z"}
{"user":true,"message":"Something went wrong while trying to build the project","stack":"Error: CMake or Ninja executables not found\n\tat uo.build (/dist/extension.js:2:1522778)\n\tat async Xs (/dist/extension.js:2:1623409)\n\tat async /dist/extension.js:2:1764720","level":"error","timestamp":"2024-04-06T12:59:56.061Z"}

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[github-actions]

Warnings

⚠️

Some issues found for the commit messages in this PR: the commit message "docs(get-started): Add which as deps": probably contains Jira ticket reference (2024-04, 2024-04, 2024-04, 2024-04, 2024-04). Please remove Jira tickets from commit messages. body's lines must not be longer than 100 characters summary looks too short Please fix these commit messages - here are some basic tips: follow Conventional Commits style correct format of commit message should be: <type/action>(<scope/component>): <summary>, for example fix(esp32): Fixed startup timeout issue allowed types are: change,ci,docs,feat,fix,refactor,remove,revert,test sufficiently descriptive message summary should be between 20 to 72 characters and start with upper case letter avoid Jira references in commit messages (unavailable/irrelevant for our customers) TIP: Install pre-commit hooks and run this check when committing (uses the Conventional Precommit Linter).

👋 Hello arrio464, we appreciate your contribution to this project!

---

📘 Please review the project's Contributions Guide for key guidelines on code, documentation, testing, and more.

---

🖊️ Please also make sure you have read and signed the Contributor License Agreement for this project.

---

Click to see more instructions ...

This automated output is generated by the PR linter DangerJS, which checks if your Pull Request meets the project's requirements and helps you fix potential issues.

DangerJS is triggered with each push event to a Pull Request and modify the contents of this comment.

Please consider the following:
- Danger mainly focuses on the PR structure and formatting and can't understand the meaning behind your code or changes.
- Danger is not a substitute for human code reviews; it's still important to request a code review from your colleagues.
- Resolve all warnings (⚠️ ) before requesting a review from human reviewers - they will appreciate it.
- To manually retry these Danger checks, please navigate to the Actions tab and re-run last Danger workflow.

Review and merge process you can expect ...

We do welcome contributions in the form of bug reports, feature requests and pull requests via this public GitHub repository.

This GitHub project is public mirror of our internal git repository

1. An internal issue has been created for the PR, we assign it to the relevant engineer.
2. They review the PR and either approve it or ask you for changes or clarifications.
3. Once the GitHub PR is approved, we synchronize it into our internal git repository.
4. In the internal git repository we do the final review, collect approvals from core owners and make sure all the automated tests are passing.
- At this point we may do some adjustments to the proposed change, or extend it by adding tests or documentation.
5. If the change is approved and passes the tests it is merged into the default branch.
5. On next sync from the internal git repository merged change will appear in this public GitHub repository.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against d9e51b8

[suda-morris]

This is required by https://github.com/espressif/vscode-esp-idf-extension/blob/c2f1ccf44536dc6b58a98db8a8067b61cf5103d4/src/pythonManager.ts#L355

cc @brianignacio5

[brianignacio5]

LGTM

[dobairoland]

I'm not strongly against this but it opens an inconvenient precedence if we accept it. We might start to add dependencies of dependent tools and frameworks with this logic.

This is not required by ESP-IDF so it doesn't belong to the documentation of ESP-IDF. Other tools and frameworks which use ESP-IDF should document additional package requirements in their own documentation.

[brianignacio5]

I'm not strongly against this but it opens an inconvenient precedence if we accept it. We might start to add dependencies of dependent tools and frameworks with this logic.

This is not required by ESP-IDF so it doesn't belong to the documentation of ESP-IDF. Other tools and frameworks which use ESP-IDF should document additional package requirements in their own documentation.

Yes it makes sense. I'm just don't know where should we add such a thing documentation because it overlaps with ESP-IDF prerequisites. A better solution would be to avoid the use of which/where altogether.