fstream relies on graceful-fs, which itself relies on natives, the latter which is broken with the following error:
/webpack:/node_modules/natives/index.js:45
whitelist.forEach(function (id) {
^
TypeError: require is not a function
at /webpack:/node_modules/natives/index.js:50:1
at Array.forEach (<anonymous>)
at Object.req [as require] (/webpack:/node_modules/natives/index.js:45:1)
at Object.8956 (/webpack:/node_modules/graceful-fs/fs.js:1:1)
at __webpack_require__ (/webpack:/webpack/bootstrap:19:1)
at Object.2242 (/webpack:/node_modules/graceful-fs/graceful-fs.js:3:1)
at __webpack_require__ (/webpack:/webpack/bootstrap:19:1)
at Object.7402 (/webpack:/node_modules/fstream/lib/reader.js:4:1)
at __webpack_require__ (/webpack:/webpack/bootstrap:19:1)
at Object.7821 (/webpack:/node_modules/fstream/fstream.js:2:1)
I've posted an issue on the graceful-fs board asking them to fix it: https://github.com/isaacs/node-graceful-fs/issues/156 but I'm wondering if this module has a good reason to be using graceful-fs or it could rely instead on the built-in (and therefore very well tested) fs, which has better sense than to use a clearly unreliable package like 'natives'
fstream
relies ongraceful-fs
, which itself relies onnatives
, the latter which is broken with the following error:I've posted an issue on the graceful-fs board asking them to fix it: https://github.com/isaacs/node-graceful-fs/issues/156 but I'm wondering if this module has a good reason to be using graceful-fs or it could rely instead on the built-in (and therefore very well tested)
fs
, which has better sense than to use a clearly unreliable package like 'natives'