-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11.3k
Conversation
in your `$PATH` as there's a limited amount Homebrew can do to isolate | ||
those. If you wish to use those modules you should permanently | ||
prepend your `$PATH` like such: | ||
export PATH=#{HOMEBREW_PREFIX}/share/iojs/bin:#{libexec}/iojs/bin:$PATH |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On this line: If you follow that line, you can just do npm install -g blah
or similar. We could simplify this, but I wanted to give maintainers and people options for discussion for now, and I wanted to give developers a way to activate the iojs npm without having it absolutely conflict with the Node
npm. This reasonably-hideous workaround achieves that.
Further discussion: Yes, for now, I've removed the option to not install |
Can you summarize the major points of difference with the existing PR? |
Sure.
The exec scripts are the kinda nifty part to play with here - the
|
On another small note: I know @othiym23 wanted to avoid renaming |
["man1", "man3", "man5", "man7"].each do |man| | ||
mkdir_p HOMEBREW_PREFIX/"share/man/#{man}" | ||
rm_f Dir[HOMEBREW_PREFIX/"share/man/#{man}/{npm.,npm-,npmrc.}*"] | ||
Dir[libexec/"npm/share/man/#{man}/npm*"].each { |f| ln_sf f, HOMEBREW_PREFIX/"share/man/#{man}" } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice spot! Will fix as soon as my internet decides it wants to go a little faster than 7KB/s 😿
Alternative implementation of #35853 for discussion/giggles/etc.
sha256 "c7fe7f71d9920f4cfd930f9022c7dddca7e11a0377fed1ee23e3241c2952db42" | ||
|
||
option "with-debug", "Build with debugger hooks" | ||
option "with-completion", "install bash completion for npm" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's make this without-completion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I didn't know if that was too clashing against Node, given this deliberately removes the conflict and keg mechanism? (As an experiment. Not saying this is the best way to get it done, just an alternative to the other discussion). I suppose I could do a little if file already exists don't replace it detection dance? Although that could prove troublesome at updates.
Per Mike's comment in the other thread, closing this PR 👍 |
Alternative implementation of #35853 for discussion/giggles/etc.