src: re-integrate headers into node.h #20939
Conversation
Alternative to nodejs#20938 (clean revert) and nodejs#20925 (adding the headers to the release tarball). The changes to `src/node.h` are a clean revert in the same ways as nodejs#20938 does it, the difference being that the new `.cc` files are kept here. This has the advantage of not being another large diff that other PRs will have to rebase against, especially since the split into `callback_scope.cc` and `exceptions.cc` is something that we want to keep in the long run. This essentialy implements bnoordhuis’s suggestion from nodejs#20925.
nodejs-github-bot
added
c++
|
@MylesBorins said he'll do the release once this lands. Let's get a clean CI, and since our CI does not cover the breaking case at all, we need separate verification that this fixes the build issue with |
BridgeAR
added
the
author ready
|
CI failures are the same that we've been consistently seeing this week. @addaleax ... given that our CI does not cover the actual breakage that occurred, have you been able to verify that this does, in fact, resolve the issue? |
|
@jasnell Yes, to the degree to which that is possible locally. I can definitely build |
|
Let's get this landed then. Thank you for the help! :-) |
|
so as a heads up... both master + v10.2.0 work when sleep is built locally and pointing at the node directory for headers We likely need to do a test build with this to ensure that it actually fixes stuff in prod |
|
@MylesBorins Yeah, I know … this is also why we’re not picking this up in our own test suite. You can verify that this works by installing 10.2.0 via nvm, trying to build an addon (→ breaks), checking out the v10.2.0 tag here, applying this patch, creating a tarball with It’s not a pretty way to test it locally, but it should be pretty reliable, and since this is essentially a revert as far as public headers are concerned, I think we don’t need to wait for a test build. |
|
Heh, I just walked through that exact process locally and came up with the same results. I'll get this landed in master now. |
Alternative to #20938 (clean revert) and #20925 (adding the headers to the release tarball). The changes to `src/node.h` are a clean revert in the same ways as #20938 does it, the difference being that the new `.cc` files are kept here. This has the advantage of not being another large diff that other PRs will have to rebase against, especially since the split into `callback_scope.cc` and `exceptions.cc` is something that we want to keep in the long run. This essentialy implements bnoordhuis’s suggestion from #20925. PR-URL: #20939 Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]>
|
Landed in 3f4caec |
|
You could alternately probably use |
|
@richardlau TIL about The |
Alternative to #20938 (clean revert) and #20925 (adding the headers to the release tarball). The changes to `src/node.h` are a clean revert in the same ways as #20938 does it, the difference being that the new `.cc` files are kept here. This has the advantage of not being another large diff that other PRs will have to rebase against, especially since the split into `callback_scope.cc` and `exceptions.cc` is something that we want to keep in the long run. This essentialy implements bnoordhuis’s suggestion from #20925. PR-URL: #20939 Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]>
|
@addaleax It seems that node-gyp's header for 10.2.0 dose not include core.h but node.h included it then. Should we re-upload the headers? |
|
@XadillaX That was the problem being fixed here, right? In any case, I don’t think we’re going to overwrite already-published release files… |
src: re-integrate headers into node.h nodejs/node#20939
Alternative to #20938
(clean revert) and #20925
(adding the headers to the release tarball).
The changes to
src/node.hare a clean revert in thesame ways as #20938 does it,
the difference being that the new
.ccfiles are kept here.This has the advantage of not being another large diff that
other PRs will have to rebase against, especially since
the split into
callback_scope.ccandexceptions.ccissomething that we want to keep in the long run.
This essentialy implements bnoordhuis’s suggestion from
#20925.
Checklist
make -j4 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test(Windows) passes