Problem/Motivation
Version 2.0.0-alpha1 is incompatible with Drupal 9.5.4.
The linkchecker 2.0.0-alpha1 module requires the installation of the Dynamic Entity Reference module, version ^3.0 or ^4.0. It turns out that these versions are incompatible with Drupal 9.5.4.
Therefore, it is my understanding that linkchecker 2.0.0-alpha1 is incompatible with Drupal 9.5.4.

Steps to reproduce
Install Drupal 9.5.4
Install Dynamic Entity Reference 8.x-2.0-alpha19
Install Linkchecker 8.x-1.1
And now, try to update to Linkchecker 2.0.0-alpha1, and....
Proposed resolution
Remaining tasks
User interface changes
API changes
Data model changes
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linkchecker.jpg | 169.16 KB | astutonet |
Issue fork linkchecker-3346793
Show commands
Start within a Git clone of the project using the version control instructions.
Or, if you do not have SSH keys set up on git.drupalcode.org:
Comments
Comment #2
emptyvoid commentedYeah just assume it is for Drupal 10 only.
Since the dependency Dynamic Entity Reference pulled a fast one a few months ago and made everything a hard Drupal 10 only.
Screwed up four modules I'm using that depended on that code.
(sigh)
8.x-1.1 GUIs work but the core detection classes fail completely generation 1000s of issues in watchdog.
Sadly don't have a viable alternative.. have to use 3rd party web crawelers I guess.
Comment #5
vladimirausPlease try this one.
That should work.
Comment #6
damienmckennaI think it should only add ^2.0? Adding ^1.16 might introduce incompatibilities.
Comment #7
astutonetYeap! This one in #5 works.
Comment #8
rohan-sinha commentedreviewed the issue on Link Checker module on D9.5, MR !41 is good , no issue found after installation.
Moving to RTBC. Thanks
Comment #9
jurgenhaasFor those who want to use this module in version 2 on Drupal 9, until the MR is being merged, you can add a repository and requirement to your composer.json like this:
Comment #10
c-logemannSince DER is using triggers in Version 2 and 4 the dependency of Linkchecker to DER is very problematic in my opinion: #3193254: using dynamic_entity_reference brings in triggers and uninstalling does not get rid of them
Because of the trigger problematic I don't want to test something with v2/v4 of DER and others need to report about this. The reported Problem. was with v2 of DER.
I don't want to block people/projects who like to use v2/4 of DER but I would feel better if we just depend on v3 if v1 wouldn't work anymore as reported in #6.
We don't have a real code fix just to "open" the composer dependency. When @DamienMcKenna is right we can use this:
"drupal/dynamic_entity_reference": "^2.0 || ^3.0 || ^4.0"This will still allow DER v2/v4. But I strongly recommend v3.
@all testers: Please report which versions of DER and Core you are using. And again: I will not spend any time to test DER v2/v4 setups.
This Issue is just another reason for me to get rid of this DER dependency and I will discuss this with the other maintainers.
Comment #11
c-logemann@DamienMcKenna: Can you share a link or maybe explain what's the problem with DER 8.x-1.16?
Because DER v3 is only working with D10+ we need a solution for this, too.
Comment #12
jurgenhaasCore 9.5.10
DER 8.x-1.16
No issues so far.
Quite understandably. Features that may depend upon DER should be extracted into their own integration module. That makes dependency management so much easier.
Comment #13
eiriksmI can't find the issue right now, but I have previously argued that our dependency on it is there only for that very tiny little functionality, so we could instead just duplicate the parts we need from it. It really is not a lot to duplicate, and the module would be much easier to maintain :)
Comment #14
c-logemann@eiriksm Maybe we only discussed this in a chat :-)
I added a new Issue for that: #3375553: Remove Dynamic Entity Reference (DER) dependency
Comment #15
jurgenhaasFor the original purpose if this issue, I'm setting this to RTBC so that it can be merged and people can then use the 2.x alpha release more easily.
Comment #16
jurgenhaasI have rebased the MR for the latest changes in 2.0.x
Any chance that this minor change gets committed? Even if not required long-term, it would just solve an issue without the chance of breaking anything.
Comment #17
eiriksmComment #19
c-logemannComment #20
vladimirausThank you! Committed! 🥃