-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.5k
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
Jest requires symlinked files twice #3830
Comments
Also, a related note--Jest appears to allow packages to require "back" over symlinks as if it is running |
It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful.
It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful.
It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful.
It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful.
It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful.
It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful.
It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful.
It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful.
It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful.
* Use relative paths in packages/react * Use relative paths in packages/react-art * Use relative paths in packages/react-cs * Use relative paths in other packages * Fix as many issues as I can This uncovered an interesting problem where ./b from package/src/a would resolve to a different instantiation of package/src/b in Jest. Either this is a showstopper or we can solve it by completely fobbidding remaining /src/. * Fix all tests It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful. * Prettier * Remove @providesModule * Fix remaining Haste imports I missed earlier * Fix up paths to reflect new flat structure * Fix Flow * Fix CJS and UMD builds * Fix FB bundles * Fix RN bundles * Prettier * Fix lint * Fix warning printing and error codes * Fix buggy return * Fix lint and Flow * Use Yarn on CI * Unbreak Jest * Fix lint * Fix aliased originals getting included in DEV Shouldn't affect correctness (they were ignored) but fixes DEV size regression. * Record sizes * Fix weird version in package.json * Tweak bundle labels * Get rid of output option by introducing react-dom/server.node * Reconciler should depend on prop-types * Update sizes last time
* Use relative paths in packages/react * Use relative paths in packages/react-art * Use relative paths in packages/react-cs * Use relative paths in other packages * Fix as many issues as I can This uncovered an interesting problem where ./b from package/src/a would resolve to a different instantiation of package/src/b in Jest. Either this is a showstopper or we can solve it by completely fobbidding remaining /src/. * Fix all tests It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful. * Prettier * Remove @providesModule * Fix remaining Haste imports I missed earlier * Fix up paths to reflect new flat structure * Fix Flow * Fix CJS and UMD builds * Fix FB bundles * Fix RN bundles * Prettier * Fix lint * Fix warning printing and error codes * Fix buggy return * Fix lint and Flow * Use Yarn on CI * Unbreak Jest * Fix lint * Fix aliased originals getting included in DEV Shouldn't affect correctness (they were ignored) but fixes DEV size regression. * Record sizes * Fix weird version in package.json * Tweak bundle labels * Get rid of output option by introducing react-dom/server.node * Reconciler should depend on prop-types * Update sizes last time
* Use relative paths in packages/react * Use relative paths in packages/react-art * Use relative paths in packages/react-cs * Use relative paths in other packages * Fix as many issues as I can This uncovered an interesting problem where ./b from package/src/a would resolve to a different instantiation of package/src/b in Jest. Either this is a showstopper or we can solve it by completely fobbidding remaining /src/. * Fix all tests It seems we can't use relative requires in tests anymore. Otherwise Jest becomes confused between real file and symlink. jestjs/jest#3830 This seems bad... Except that we already *don't* want people to create tests that import individual source files. All existing cases of us doing so are actually TODOs waiting to be fixed. So perhaps this requirement isn't too bad because it makes bad code looks bad. Of course, if we go with this, we'll have to lint against relative requires in tests. It also makes moving things more painful. * Prettier * Remove @providesModule * Fix remaining Haste imports I missed earlier * Fix up paths to reflect new flat structure * Fix Flow * Fix CJS and UMD builds * Fix FB bundles * Fix RN bundles * Prettier * Fix lint * Fix warning printing and error codes * Fix buggy return * Fix lint and Flow * Use Yarn on CI * Unbreak Jest * Fix lint * Fix aliased originals getting included in DEV Shouldn't affect correctness (they were ignored) but fixes DEV size regression. * Record sizes * Fix weird version in package.json * Tweak bundle labels * Get rid of output option by introducing react-dom/server.node * Reconciler should depend on prop-types * Update sizes last time
This issue has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
Do you want to request a feature or report a bug?
Bug
What is the current behavior?
When requiring a file via a symlink that has already been required directly, Jest executes the file again. This is in contrast to node, which resolves the symlink's path absolutely and thus reuses the original require.
If the current behavior is a bug, please provide the steps to reproduce and either a repl.it demo through https://repl.it/languages/jest or a minimal repository on GitHub that we can
yarn install
andyarn test
.Reproduction: https://github.com/tmeasday/jest-symlink-repro
Install, then notice the difference between
node index.js
andnpm test
.What is the expected behavior?
I would expect Jest to behave the same as node here.
Please provide your exact Jest configuration and mention your Jest, node, yarn/npm version and operating system.
Tested with
jest@20.0.4
,node@8.1.0
,npm@5.0.3
on OSX 10.12.5The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: