[BUG] npx <gist> leads to command not found

[kentcdodds]

Is there an existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues

This issue exists in the latest npm version

• I am using the latest npm

Current Behavior

I'm trying to run:

npx https://gist.github.com/kentcdodds/bb452ffe53a5caa3600197e1d8005733

However I get:

sh: workshop-setup: command not found

For context, I use this for step of my workshop repositories. It checks that learner's machines have the correct versions of things installed, installs dependencies, and runs validation to make sure things were installed correctly. This worked before I updated to npx v8.

Expected Behavior

I expect the bin of the gist's package.json to be run as previous versions of npx as recent as v7.

Steps To Reproduce

1. In any environment
2. With any config
3. Run npx https://gist.github.com/kentcdodds/bb452ffe53a5caa3600197e1d8005733
4. See the above error

Environment

• npm: latest
• Node.js: latest
• OS Name: any
• System Model Name: any
• npm config: any

(All my students are running into this. Even my CI: https://github.com/kentcdodds/react-fundamentals/runs/6989184285?check_suite_focus=true)

[nlf]

it looks like what's going on here is that the package.json in your gist has the name workshop-setup but since this package is also published to the npm registry, we're reading the package.json file for a name and then installing the package from the registry instead of the gist.

this is very clearly a bug. thanks for the report!

[kentcdodds]

That's great! Thank you for looking into this. I tried removing the name and setting it to @kentcdodds/workshop-setup and neither of those solutions worked. Is there a workaround I can use until this is fixed?

[gengjiawen]

That's great! Thank you for looking into this. I tried removing the name and setting it to @kentcdodds/workshop-setup and neither of those solutions worked. Is there a workaround I can use until this is fixed?

Another way is downgrade npm.

npm i -g npm@6

[wraithgar]

Duplicate issue here w/ some more comments: #5134