Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Cannot deploy symlinks #22

Closed
hiroshi opened this issue May 23, 2014 · 3 comments
Closed

Cannot deploy symlinks #22

hiroshi opened this issue May 23, 2014 · 3 comments

Comments

@hiroshi
Copy link

hiroshi commented May 23, 2014

When I had symlinks in my deploy target directory I got the error.

$ firebase deploy
Preparing to deploy Public Directory...

stream.js:94
      throw er; // Unhandled stream error in pipe.
            ^
Error: Didn't get expected byte count
expect: 33
actual: 4975
    at decorate (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/firebase-tools/node_modules/fstream-ignore/node_modules/fstream/lib/abstract.js:67:36)
    at FileReader.Abstract.error (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/firebase-tools/node_modules/fstream-ignore/node_modules/fstream/lib/abstract.js:61:12)
    at ReadStream.<anonymous> (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/firebase-tools/node_modules/fstream-ignore/node_modules/fstream/lib/file-reader.js:66:10)
    at ReadStream.EventEmitter.emit (events.js:117:20)
    at _stream_readable.js:920:16
    at process._tickCallback (node.js:415:13)

I replaced those symlinks with copied regular files, then the error resolved.
It is great that firebase deploy can handle symlinks kindly.

The version of firebase-tools are installed via npm.

$ firebase
Firebase Command Line Tools
Version 1.0.4
@cbraynor
Copy link
Contributor

cbraynor commented Jun 5, 2014

I tracked this down to an issue with isaacs/fstream but until that's fixed I've put some nicer error reporting in. v1.0.5 through npm has the fix. Thanks

@cbraynor cbraynor closed this as completed Jun 5, 2014
mbleigh added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 15, 2015
Stop using deprecated fs.existsSync method
@pspeter3
Copy link

This seems to be the case still. Is there any reason it has to be?

@cbraynor
Copy link
Contributor

This is the PR that fixes the issue: npm/fstream#16 (though a lot has changed since that PR first saw the light of day). The fix was identified 2 1/2 years ago, but the PR finally got assigned to someone a few months ago so it might actually be moving along

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants