EPERM: operation not permitted (rmdir) when using prune

• I have read the contribution documentation for this project.
• I agree to follow the code of conduct that this project follows, as appropriate.
• I have searched the issue tracker for an issue that matches the one I want to file, without success.

[Edited due to spelling error]

I am getting an EPERM error related to rmdir.

ERR! Error: EPERM: operation not permitted, rmdir c:\Users\Jon\Desktop\Test\distwin32a\mytest1-win32-x64\resources\app\node_modules

My command line is:

npm run build-win32

My script is:

"build-win32": "electron-packager . --electron-version 1.4.15 --tmpdir=false --platform win32 --icon ./assets/icon.ico --out ./distwin32a --overwrite"

My package.json is:

    {
  "name": "mytest1",
  "version": "1.0.0",
  "description": "MyTest2",
  "main": "main.js",
  "scripts": {
    "start": "electron main.js",
	"build-all": "electron-packager . --electron-version 1.4.15 --tmpdir=false --platform all --icon ./assets/icon --out ./dist",
	"build-win32": "electron-packager . --electron-version 1.4.15 --tmpdir=false --platform win32 --icon ./assets/icon.ico --out ./distwin32a --overwrite",
	"build-linux": "electron-packager . --electron-version 1.4.15 --tmpdir=false --platform linux --icon ./assets/background.png --out ./distlinux --overwrite",
	"build-osx": "electron-packager . --electron-version 1.4.15 --tmpdir=false --platform darwin --icon ./assets/icon.icns --out ./distdarwin --overwrite"
  },
  "private": true,
  "build": {
    "appId": "mycompany.myproduct"
  },
  "keywords": [
    "Stuff",
    "Stuff"
  ],
  "author": "JAA17",
  "license": "SEE LICENSE IN LICENSE.TXT",
  "devDependencies": {
    "electron-packager": "^8.5.1"
  }
}

The only thing I have in the background is Visual Studio where I do my code editing.

[malept]

In order to debug your problem further, we need a minimal testcase to reproduce your problem. Using the electron-quick-start repository as a base, could you please create a minimal Electron app that illustrates the issue you described, and post a link to it here?

[malept]

Since the original issue reporter has not responded to the request for additional information about whether yarn works in over two months, I’m going to assume that they either found the answer in another manner or decided not to pursue this issue. If I’m incorrect, they can respond with answers to the questions posed, and I’ll reopen.