vp uninstall -g should succeed (exit 0) when package is not installed, matching npm behavior

[ywenhao]

Description

When a globally installed package is not present, vp uninstall -g <pkg> exits with a non-zero status and prints an error. This breaks common shell patterns such as:

vp uninstall -g corepack && vp install -g <pkg>

The && chain stops after the uninstall step, so the subsequent install never runs.

npm uninstall -g does not exhibit this behavior — uninstalling a package that is not installed succeeds with exit code 0, allowing idempotent uninstall-then-install workflows.

Steps to reproduce

1. Ensure corepack is not listed in global packages:

   vp list -g

2. Run uninstall:

   vp uninstall -g corepack

   Actual: exits with code 1 and prints:

   Failed to uninstall corepack: Package corepack is not installed
   

3. Compare with npm:

   npm uninstall -g corepack
   echo $?

   Actual: exits with code 0 (no error).

4. Chained command fails with vp but works with npm:

   # Fails — second command never runs
   vp uninstall -g corepack && vp install -g typescript
   
   # Works — install runs even if corepack was not installed
   npm uninstall -g corepack && npm install -g typescript

Expected behavior

vp uninstall -g <pkg> should succeed (exit 0) when the package is not installed, consistent with npm. Uninstalling something that is already absent should be a no-op, not an error.

This is especially relevant for packages like corepack that may be managed implicitly by Vite+ (shim / auto-install on Node 25+) and therefore may not appear in vp list -g, yet users still want to run vp uninstall -g corepack defensively before installing another global package.

Environment

• vp version: v0.2.7
• OS: Linux (Fedora)
• Node.js: v24.19.0 (via Vite+)

[jong-kyung]

This looks related to #1808. corepack is managed as a default shim.

sorry for the noise 🙇‍♂️ I deleted my earlier comment; this seems unrelated to #2222. Apologies for the ping @liangmiQwQ.

[liangmiQwQ]

This looks related to #1808. corepack is managed as a default shim.

sorry for the noise 🙇‍♂️ I deleted my earlier comment; this seems unrelated to #2222. Apologies for the ping @liangmiQwQ.

Never mind, I'm back now and will handle things normally. I'm also interested in helping analyze this issue if you need it.

[jong-kyung]

npm exits with code 0 when uninstalling a global package that isn't installed, while pnpm and Yarn Classic exit with code 1.
Since this behavior isn't consistent across package managers, I'm not sure vp should necessarily return 0 here.

cc @fengmk2

[ywenhao]

For reference, here is how other major package managers handle uninstalling a package that is not installed:

• npm: Treats this as an idempotent operation — skips it, outputs success, and exits with code 0. This makes it safe to use in && chaining patterns (e.g., uninstall && install).
• pnpm 11: Exits with code 1 and reports ERR_PNPM_GLOBAL_PKG_NOT_FOUND when the package is not found (verified on pnpm 11.20.0; source). Thanks @jong-kyung for the correction — my earlier note that pnpm also exits 0 here was wrong.
• Yarn Classic: Also exits with a non-zero code in this case.

Apologies for the confusion. The core ask remains: aligning vp uninstall -g with npm's idempotent behavior would still help the uninstall && install use case, especially for packages like corepack that may not appear in vp list -g.

[fengmk2]

@jong-kyung let's follow pnpm's behavior

[jong-kyung]

@fengmk2 we still follow pnpm 11, which exits with code 1 when a global package is not found 🤔

vite-plus/crates/vite_global_cli/src/commands/global/install.rs

Lines 959 to 964 in 67b3315

	} else {
	// Phase 2: Fallback - scan BinConfig files for orphaned binaries
	let orphan_bins = BinConfig::find_by_package(&package_name).await?;
	if orphan_bins.is_empty() {
	return Err(Error::Other(format!("Package {} is not installed", package_name).into()));
	}

[ywenhao]

Closing as the team plans to follow pnpm 11, which also exits 1 when uninstalling a global package that isn't installed. Current vp behavior matches that. Thanks for the discussion.