Dependency error as friendly-errors-webpack-plugin still requires webpack 4
See original GitHub issuewebpack-encore 1.0.5 requires webpack “^5.12” AND friendly-errors-webpack-plugin “^2.0.0-beta.1”
BUT: friendly-errors-webpack-plugin requires webpack “^4.0.0”
That gives me:
npm WARN ERESOLVE overriding peer dependency
npm WARN Found: webpack@5.21.2
npm WARN node_modules/webpack
npm WARN webpack@"^5.12" from @symfony/webpack-encore@1.0.5
npm WARN node_modules/@symfony/webpack-encore
npm WARN dev @symfony/webpack-encore@"^1.0.0" from the root project
npm WARN 9 more (browser-sync-webpack-plugin, postcss-loader, ...)
npm WARN
npm WARN Could not resolve dependency:
npm WARN peer webpack@"^4.0.0" from friendly-errors-webpack-plugin@2.0.0-beta.2
npm WARN node_modules/friendly-errors-webpack-plugin
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 3 years ago
- Comments:6 (5 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
friendly-errors-warn-webpack-plugin - npm package - Snyk
All security vulnerabilities belong to production dependencies of direct and indirect packages. License: ISC. Security Policy: No.
Read more >To v5 from v4 - webpack
This guide aims to help you migrating to webpack 5 when using webpack directly. If you are using a higher level tool to...
Read more >Upgrading jq-pro 4.7.7 to 4.8 broke my webpack - MDBootstrap
[3/4] Linking dependencies... warning " > sass-loader@7.1.0" has unmet peer ... friendly-errors-webpack-plugin@1.7.0 ├─ from2@2.3.0 ├─ fs-extra@2.1.2 ...
Read more >Npm run start not working, No configuration provided for main ...
lock file, but only received error saying I had to log in to npm. After trying “yarn” instead it seemed to work, still...
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
@weaverryan boom! #976
@hailwood oh, indeed it would! It looks popular and well-maintained. It is a fork of the original… though it looks like 1.6.1 was the last shared version. We use
2.0.0-beta.2
, so there could be some BC breaks. However, staying on what we have no is a non-option.Short answer: yes, we should change to this. Would someone be willing to give it a try?