Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Additional fix for #4444 to prevent errors on windows #11423

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Sep 28, 2022
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions CHANGELOG.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
- `[jest-mock]` Improve `spyOn` typings to handle optional properties ([#13247](https://github.com/facebook/jest/pull/13247))
- `[jest-snapshot]` Throw useful error when an array is passed as property matchers ([#13263](https://github.com/facebook/jest/pull/13263))
- `[jest-snapshot]` Prioritize parser used in the project ([#13323](https://github.com/facebook/jest/pull/13323))
- `[jest-transform]` Attempt to work around issues with atomic writes on Windows ([#11423](https://github.com/facebook/jest/pull/11423))

### Chore & Maintenance

Expand Down
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions packages/jest-transform/src/ScriptTransformer.ts
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -946,6 +946,12 @@ const readCacheFile = (cachePath: string): string | null => {
try {
fileData = fs.readFileSync(cachePath, 'utf8');
} catch (e: any) {
// on windows write-file-atomic is not atomic which can
// result in this error
if (e.code === 'ENOENT' && process.platform === 'win32') {
return null;
}

e.message = `jest: failed to read cache file: ${cachePath}\nFailure message: ${e.message}`;
removeFile(cachePath);
Copy link
Member

@SimenB SimenB Sep 16, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should we call this as well?

I guess not since ENOENT would probably be thrown again

throw e;
Expand Down