Closed VBobCat closed 1 year ago
To install ngx-flex-layout via npm without issues
It can't resolve dependency towards Angular 16 unless --force is used:
--force
npm ERR! code ERESOLVE npm ERR! ERESOLVE unable to resolve dependency tree npm ERR! npm ERR! While resolving: frontend@0.0.0 npm ERR! Found: @angular/cdk@16.0.1 npm ERR! node_modules/@angular/cdk npm ERR! @angular/cdk@"^16.0.0" from the root project npm ERR! npm ERR! Could not resolve dependency: npm ERR! peer @angular/cdk@"^15.0.0" from ngx-flexible-layout@15.0.1 npm ERR! node_modules/ngx-flexible-layout npm ERR! ngx-flexible-layout@"^15.0.1" from the root project npm ERR! npm ERR! Fix the upstream dependency conflict, or retry npm ERR! this command with --force or --legacy-peer-deps npm ERR! to accept an incorrect (and potentially broken) dependency resolution.
Try to run npm i when package.json states the following dependencies:
npm i
package.json
"@angular/animations": "^16.0.0", "@angular/cdk": "^16.0.0", "@angular/common": "^16.0.0", "@angular/compiler": "^16.0.0", "@angular/core": "^16.0.0", "@angular/forms": "^16.0.0", "@angular/material": "^16.0.0", "@angular/platform-browser": "^16.0.0", "@angular/platform-browser-dynamic": "^16.0.0", "@angular/router": "^16.0.0", "ngx-flexible-layout": "^15.0.1", "rxjs": "^7.8.1", "tslib": "^2.3.0", "zone.js": "~0.13.0"
Not applicable
As per dependency list above, running on Windows 10 22H2 (19045.2965), testing on Firefox 113.0.1.
I can't think of anything else.
Im working on this now.
Completed
Bug Report
What is the expected behavior?
To install ngx-flex-layout via npm without issues
What is the current behavior?
It can't resolve dependency towards Angular 16 unless
--force
is used:What are the steps to reproduce?
Try to run
npm i
whenpackage.json
states the following dependencies:What is the use-case or motivation for changing an existing behavior?
Not applicable
Which versions of Angular, Material, OS, TypeScript, browsers are affected?
As per dependency list above, running on Windows 10 22H2 (19045.2965), testing on Firefox 113.0.1.
Is there anything else we should know?
I can't think of anything else.