fix(env): track injected tools across nested shim calls

[lyzno1]

Nested package-manager calls can fail or select a system version because the boolean recursion guard assumes every tool is already on PATH.

Replace it with VP_PATH_INJECTED_TOOLS and shared child PATH preparation. Track available tools per installation, exclude other Vite+ shims, and recover missing bundled tools from the selected Node installation. Explicit vp env exec resolves a fresh selection, while nested shim calls preserve the parent's runtime and package-manager precedence through JS delegation.

Fixes #2630.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for viteplus-preview canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	5e02f12
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/viteplus-preview/deploys/6aa04421cc4bf50008abe9e4

[lyzno1]

@liangmiQwQ I've updated this draft to track injected tools with VP_PATH_INJECTED_TOOLS and shared PATH helpers. Could you take a look and let me know whether the approach matches what you had in mind?

[lyzno1]

Per-tool PATH tracking is in place, but a forwarding loop remains between renamed Vite+ installations. The current shim detection cannot reliably distinguish these from shared external-manager entrypoints such as mise. This PR remains in draft while I revisit that boundary.

[liangmiQwQ]

Per-tool PATH tracking is in place, but a forwarding loop remains between renamed Vite+ installations. The current shim detection cannot reliably distinguish these from shared external-manager entrypoints such as mise. This PR remains in draft while I revisit that boundary.

I'll take a look soon

[liangmiQwQ]

Per-tool PATH tracking is in place, but a forwarding loop remains between renamed Vite+ installations. The current shim detection cannot reliably distinguish these from shared external-manager entrypoints such as mise. This PR remains in draft while I revisit that boundary.

@lyzno1 This is another problem that already exists on Vite+. It is a little bit difficult to fix and not introduced by your PR. You can mark it as ready to review if you are ready.

[liangmiQwQ]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-09-09T14:34:41.496012Z	d546393	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff.

Reviewed commit: d5463937c1

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[liangmiQwQ]

It would be better to update this RFC document:

vite-plus/rfcs/vpx-command.md

Line 307 in d546393

- `locate_tool()` — locates a tool binary within a Node.js installation

[liangmiQwQ]

Others LGTM 💯

Huge thanks for working on this!

[fengmk2]

@lyzno1 Thanks for the big refactor!

[fengmk2]

@lyzno1 please fix the conflicts, thanks.