| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Work around spec violations in V8 where it checks that `this == NULL`. GCC 6 started exploiting this particular kind of UB, resulting in runtime crashes. Fixes: nodejs#6724 PR-URL: nodejs#6738 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing ;
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
LGTM with style nit. cc @nodejs/lts |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I'm not sure we'd actually backport this kinda thing to v0.10... @nodejs/lts |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I commented on that here. I think a case for an exception can be made here. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
For example at https://github.com/sass/node-sass/releases/tag/v3.8.0 we are building binaries for all known node modules versions. It would be easier to support and cross-compile to older node versions if they need not be installed. Having the same interface in the config.gypi would be really cool, without resorting to workarounds like manual parsing of the node header files. Having it only in the newest version kind of defeats its purpose - it works only for the current and the future versions. For legacy versions, one would need to resort to manual version guessing. One uses always the latest v0.10, v0.12 etc. headers and config.gypi files anyway, so if this change makes it into, say, v0.10.47 and v0.12.16, I don't need to bother about older 0.10 and 0.12 versions, since the binaries will work there, too. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@saper you could hardwire values for 0.10 and 0.12 though, right? those are fixed numbers and not going to change (same with every other major but I take the point about it being easier into the future). |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I've no objections to backporting this to v0.10 with the caveat that anything that depends on process.config is inherently flaky. This PR LGTM. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@nodejs/lts ... any additional thoughts? I'm inclined to land unless there are objections. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Should I prepare pull requests for 0.12 and LTS? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@saper Yes, go ahead. One small style nit: can you capitalize the comments in the test? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Nit fixed, thank you. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
The test could use assert.equal() when comparing the numbers. LGTM either way though. To who lands this: s/Provide/provide/ in the title of the commit and maybe drop the quotes so it fits in 50 columns. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Oh, right, didn't notice that this was against v0.10 directly. Either we can open a new PR against v0.10-staging or we can roll the dice with GitHubs new PR-retargeting feature. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@jasnell just tried that and I think it might have worked (I got 5 commits after retarget so I have pushed a cherry-picked commit) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can you use const here please :-)
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ugh.. ha! nevermind... v0.10.... silly me
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you think we might actually want to add const in the current trunk?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should be using const in master, definitely, but by itself that's not enough of a reason to update the test case if it's not using const already. Best to leave it unless there are other changes to make.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
assert.strictEqual() here instead of assert.equal()
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Apologies, I said assert.equal() because I had a fuzzy notion that strictEqual() doesn't exist in v0.10. I was probably thinking of deepStrictEqual().
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No problem, happy to learn more about differences between node engines.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Enable targetting of a different node version than the currently running one when building binary modules. Based on nodejs/node@410296c37 PR-URL: nodejs#7808 Ref: nodejs/node-gyp#855
Enable targetting of a different node version than the currently running one when building binary modules. Based on nodejs/node@410296c37 PR-URL: nodejs#8027 Ref: nodejs#7808 Ref: nodejs/node-gyp#855
Enable targetting of a different node version than the currently running one when building binary modules. Based on nodejs/node@410296c37 PR-URL: nodejs#8171 Ref: nodejs#8027 Ref: nodejs#7808 Ref: nodejs/node-gyp#855
Enable targetting of a different node version than the currently running one when building binary modules. Based on 410296c37 PR-URL: #8171 Ref: #8027 Ref: #7808 Ref: nodejs/node-gyp#855 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Enable targetting of a different node version than the currently running one when building binary modules. Based on 410296c37 PR-URL: #8171 Ref: #8027 Ref: #7808 Ref: nodejs/node-gyp#855 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Enable targetting of a different node version than the currently running one when building binary modules. Based on 410296c37 PR-URL: #8171 Ref: #8027 Ref: #7808 Ref: nodejs/node-gyp#855 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Enable targetting of a different node version than the currently running one when building binary modules. Based on 410296c37 PR-URL: #8171 Ref: #8027 Ref: #7808 Ref: nodejs/node-gyp#855 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
|
@nodejs/lts... this appears to be the only still open PR based on v0.10-staging. Given that it's not likely that we'll be cutting a new v0.10, I recommend that we go ahead and close this. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Enable targetting of a different node version than the currently running one when building binary modules. Based on nodejs/node@410296c37 PR-URL: nodejs#8027 Ref: nodejs#7808 Ref: nodejs/node-gyp#855
Enable targetting of a different node version than the currently running one when building binary modules. Based on nodejs/node@410296c37 PR-URL: nodejs#8027 Ref: nodejs#7808 Ref: nodejs/node-gyp#855
|
Closing given that v0.10 is no longer actively supported |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Thanks, if there will be no 0.10 release this makes no point. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Enable targetting of a different node version than
the currently running one when building binary modules.
This is extracted from 410296c37
PR-URL: nodejs/node-gyp#855