Package Details: atom-editor-beta 1.21.0.beta1-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/atom-editor-beta.git (read-only)
Package Base: atom-editor-beta
Description: Hackable text editor for the 21st Century, built using web technologies on the Electron framework - Beta channel.
Upstream URL: https://github.com/atom/atom
Keywords: atom beta editor
Licenses: MIT
Conflicts: atom-editor-beta-arch, atom-editor-beta-bin
Submitter: hydraz
Maintainer: fusion809
Last Packager: fusion809
Votes: 12
Popularity: 0.308384
First Submitted: 2015-12-28 17:00
Last Updated: 2017-09-19 19:26

Latest Comments

fusion809 commented on 2017-09-14 21:09

Oops I accidentally committed my tests of nodejs as the dep of this package (instead of nodejs-lts-boron) so I've reverted that. I tested building this package against nodejs-lts-boron and it failed. Not sure how to fix it though. Any ideas anyone?

Thiphariel commented on 2017-09-14 12:21

@fusion809 I got the exact same problem with nodejs >8. A loop while installing apm
How can I managed this ? I tried by downgrading nodejs without success.
Thanks

Throne3d commented on 2017-09-09 16:15

Hm. It seems like the version mismatch thing is due to using a system nodejs (and I'm not sure why) – if I use nvm to use a locally-installed version ("nvm install node", "nvm use default"), it gets past that point. I do, however, then hit a later error where the script seems to use the system python (version 3.6.2), and so fails to install a dependency. This is despite it having the PYTHON environment variable set.

Oh well.

*Edit*: You may need to run script/clean first, to enable it to get past the first error, if you swap which nodejs you're using? I'm not sure.

fusion809 commented on 2017-09-09 14:53

@Throne3d Decided to test your theory and just gave the build with nodejs a go and I got errors:

Node: v8.4.0
Npm: v5.3.0
Installing script dependencies
Installing apm
module.js:597
return process.dlopen(module, path._makeLong(filename));
^

Error: Module version mismatch. Expected 48, got 57.
at Error (native)
at Object.Module._extensions..node (module.js:597:18)
at Module.load (module.js:487:32)
at tryModuleLoad (module.js:446:12)
at Function.Module._load (module.js:438:3)
at Module.require (module.js:497:17)
at require (internal/module.js:20:19)
at Object.<anonymous> (/data/AUR/atom-editor-beta/src/atom-1.20.0-beta7/apm/node_modules/atom-package-manager/node_modules/git-utils/lib/git.js:8:16)
at Object.<anonymous> (/data/AUR/atom-editor-beta/src/atom-1.20.0-beta7/apm/node_modules/atom-package-manager/node_modules/git-utils/lib/git.js:371:4)
at Module._compile (module.js:570:32)
child_process.js:614
throw err;
^

Error: Command failed: /data/AUR/atom-editor-beta/src/atom-1.20.0-beta7/apm/node_modules/atom-package-manager/bin/apm --version
at checkExecSyncError (child_process.js:591:13)
at Object.execFileSync (child_process.js:611:13)
at Object.<anonymous> (/data/AUR/atom-editor-beta/src/atom-1.20.0-beta7/script/bootstrap:30:14)
at Module._compile (module.js:573:30)
at Object.Module._extensions..js (module.js:584:10)
at Module.load (module.js:507:32)
at tryModuleLoad (module.js:470:12)
at Function.Module._load (module.js:462:3)
at Module.require (module.js:517:17)
at require (internal/module.js:11:18)

Repeated over and over. If you've got a fix for that I'll be happy to switch this package over to using nodejs instead but otherwise nodejs-lts-boron stays.

Throne3d commented on 2017-09-09 14:40

I'm confused – why is nodejs-lts-boron required? The main atom package works fine with just nodejs, and the guide to *building* at least says Node.js 6.x or later: https://github.com/atom/atom/blob/1.20-releases/docs/build-instructions/linux.md

It looks like this has been the case (Node.js 6.x "or later") since v1.19.0-beta0: https://github.com/atom/atom/commit/1f56e068cd8aed3228c9bb137966bf5b7cecbb51

(I would prefer not to downgrade my nodejs version, since some projects I use require the more recent versions, but I would also like to use this beta version if possible, and it seems weird that it would be necessary to use the old LTS version of node?)

atriix commented on 2017-05-20 19:02

I got stuck in a build error loop that was running forever.

Error: ENOENT: no such file or directory, open 'exception-reporting'
at Error (native)
at Object.fs.openSync (fs.js:641:18)
at Object.fs.readFileSync (fs.js:509:33)
at /home/aaaa/.cache/pacaur/atom-editor-beta/src/atom-1.18.0-beta0/script/node_modules/electron-link/lib/generate-snapshot-script.js:28:27
at undefined.next (native)
at step (/home/aaaa/.cache/pacaur/atom-editor-beta/src/atom-1.18.0-beta0/script/node_modules/electron-link/lib/generate-snapshot-script.js:3:191)
at /home/aaaa/.cache/pacaur/atom-editor-beta/src/atom-1.18.0-beta0/script/node_modules/electron-link/lib/generate-snapshot-script.js:3:361

Removing the packages that is already removed from the package.json fixes it.

sed -i -e "/exception-reporting/d" -e "/metrics/d" src/initialize-application-window.coffee

fusion809 commented on 2017-05-17 07:22

I did unflag it, nodejs-lts-boron is in the AUR (https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/nodejs-lts-boron/), what are you (idella.craddock) flagging it as out-of-date for? If the AUR package nodejs-lts-boron didn't exist anymore I could understand the flag, although I would advise mentioning this fact in the comments instead of flagging this package as reporting a packaging issue is not the purpose of flagging a package out-of-date, but since nodejs-lts-boron hasn't been deleted what is the problem? I have no control over the fact that nodejs-lts-boron isn't in the Arch Linux official repos, but the nodejs-lts-boron dependency IS required for this package to build and run correctly. The nodejs package in the Arch Linux repos won't work at building this package. If you dislike the fact nodejs-lts-boron isn't in the official Arch Linux repos I'd suggest requesting it to be added at the Arch Linux bug tracker.

This isn't me angry at you, I'm just trying to understand what the problem is here.

idella.craddock commented on 2017-05-17 06:59

bah, I accidentally marked this as out of date. How can I remove a flag? :( Sorry

krd commented on 2017-02-22 19:30

Also hitting the same error as fightcookie and SanpoChew
> Error: Module version mismatch. Expected 46, got 48.

fightcookie commented on 2017-02-14 00:50

getting the exact same error as SanpoChew

All comments