-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 191
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
node: "package.json does not exist at " + package_json_path #259
Comments
How did you indicate the indexeddbshim dependency in your project root? Have you tried requiring using the relative path? |
@brettz9 I have tried requiring the full path, the relative path, as well as just the package name. I indicated the dependency by adding it to my |
Did you do it like this? "devDependencies": {
"indexeddbshim": "https://github.com/axemclion/IndexedDBShim#master"
} and then run |
Yes I did |
Sorry then, I don't know. All I know is that it is working in our internal tests, and I don't have time at the moment to investigate further. It would be appreciated if you could report back if you do find out. |
Btw, while there are already a great many fixes and improvements in |
You have references to your local WAMP installation in
If you install sqlite3 and fix the bad paths, this library can at least be required without crashing. I haven't made it far enough to say whether it actually works.
This seems to me like something that your CI environment could have caught. Is that something you could resolve when you have a moment? I'd also love if there was a stable version with node support in NPM. Cloning your repo adds over 100MB of unnecessary dependencies to a project's already-bloated |
Thank you very much for identifying the problem here, @subvertallchris ! I do have the As far as a release... When I had been in a position to concentrate on this, my intent was to complete compliance with the W3C tests (or to at least fix the major issues) and then to focus on assuring we did some real world testing to ensure performance or what not had not become a problem in the process, as I did not want to introduce a number of (standard-compliant) breaking changes without being ready to assuage users that the change was worth it, nor to be distracted with reports of remaining issues I knew to be problems though which I could fix with a little bit more time. FWIW, we have gotten pretty close now to passing the W3C and other tests as inherited from another project, but I found this project, besides needing an update, had made some shortcuts in adapting the tests which I wanted to avoid for more accurate compliance testing. I did start work on an in-place system for adapting these tests (which are written in HTML), so the HTML could be converted on-the-fly to Node-friendly JavaScript, allowing for both Node and potentially command-line browser testing and avoiding the need for maintenance headaches upon every W3C test upgrade. However, while now working marginally, the new testing environment still is apparently not set up properly as an inexplicably large of a number of these new W3C tests are failing and I haven't had time to investigate and fix the new testing environment, much less to finish work on the handful of remaining known (significant) failures (as found in the old W3C tests), e.g., blocking events and, if possible, transactional rollbacks. One tip re: cloning--you should be able to avoid cloning recursively, at least avoiding the very large W3C tests, but yes, of course, we need to get this to release. |
@subvertallchris : I have a new version pushed to Although I don't think we are ready for a new regular npm release yet for the reasons mentioned above, if you like, I can tag a separate branch to provide an insufficiently tested and incompletely bug-fixed version but one which is at least theoretically working for Node and non-changing. You should then be able to target the Github branch within your |
Thanks for the thorough writeup and followup! I'll give this a shot in On Friday, September 23, 2016, Brett Zamir notifications@github.com wrote:
|
Find a chance to check it out, @subvertallchris ? |
Unfortunately no, not yet. Sorry for the delay. I had to double back to a different feature to meet a deadline. I'll be giving it another shot in the next week or two. |
This should be fixed, but feel free to reopen if you still see issues. FYI, the remaining to-dos I wish to handle before an npm release are described at #262 (comment) . I currently have some energy and time to work on these issues, so hopefully it won't be more than a few weeks, but no guarantees. |
I'm getting running into this error, which appears to be related to this issue:
|
Try deleting |
@brettz9 that doesn't seem to make a difference. I'm using node 7.5.0 and npm 4.1.2, and there appears to be a |
If I |
Great, thanks... I've been busy testing support from within the repo... |
Like you @erikvold. I've done quick fix by adding in my
Therefore, I run from console |
Ok, happy to report that I expect this trouble really ought to be resolved. Besides the fix from @erikvold to avoid hard-coding the relative paths I had tried previously, there was also the need to exclude the Being as I am currently on the other side of the Great Firewall, however, I am having problems confirming this as I am not currently able to install indexeddbshim itself into another directory and npm can be quirky when trying to use over here. Could someone else try a fresh directory with a simple "dependencies": {
"indexeddbshim": "https://github.com/axemclion/IndexedDBShim"
}, ....and seeing if a simple Node script works, e.g., var setGlobalVars = require('indexeddbshim');
setGlobalVars();
var dbOpenRequest = indexedDB.open('test12345');
dbOpenRequest.onupgradeneeded = function (e) {
console.log('Database Opened successfully');
}; |
OTOH, it could just be an issue with npm loading of indexeddbshim which would also nice to have reported if that is the case. |
@brettz9 Works for me!
|
Great! Thanks very much for the testing and feedback, Erik. (And per your example, I realized we ought to default to Oh, and just to be clear, you got it working via npm or was it through Git cloning? I'll close this issue then, but feel free to add comments if people find any issues. |
I used
|
When attempting to load the node version of the current master branch, I am met with this error:
All I am doing is simply:
Any way to help fix this? This library looks like it can help solve my frontend testing woes and would love to get it working! Thank you for the work you have done here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: