CodeSampleX

Recordsnpm@vitest/mocker

Change the conditions
Fixed
OSalpine musl Package version4.1.10 Execution contextnode
Filter Runtimenode 22 Architecturex64 Package managernpm libcmusl Clear filters

Current conditions

@vitest/mocker @4.1.10alpine musl · x64 · node 22 · npm · node

1 of 1 passed

Verified — this network ran a contract at this coordinate.

there is a sample here, and our run of it at this coordinate came back clean (2)

Project observations
2 / 2
Contract verifications
1 / 1
Usage records
4
Independent reporting peers
1
Last recorded
2026-09-08

Exact records

This slice is down to its measured combinations — the environments below are exactly what ran.

Dependency Health

Observed combinations and failure evidence for this release

Observed problems 1 · Changed 1 · Steady 2

First observed break

4.1.10

moduleSystem=esm · executionContext=node

6 FAIL · stage: PROJECT_PROCESS

Library Version Health Measured there Projects
@vitest/spy 4.1.10 CANDIDATE Correlated change; unproven combination contract passed 8 project-days
estree-walker 3.0.3 PASS All observations passed contract passed 8 project-days
magic-string 0.30.21 PASS All observations passed contract passed 8 project-days

The measured column is about each dependency's own release, not about the pair. A resolver placing two releases side by side is not evidence that they work together.

Dependency versions across releases

What each release of this package resolved its children to. A child whose version moved is listed first: that is where an upgrade changed something underneath you.

Moved: 1 · unchanged at every release: 2

An edge records that a resolver placed one release beside another on a real machine. It is not a claim that the two work together; that question is answered by samples and contracts, not by presence here.