New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
package.json: Make llnode installable via npm #60
Conversation
This updates package.json and adds scripts to allow llnode to be built via "npm install llnode" It doesn't create a Node.js module you can use via require('llnode'). (This may change in the future depending on project direction.) The npm name llnode has been reserved here: https://www.npmjs.com/package/llnode This PR does leave the npm version number at 0.0.0, this should once the install process has been reviewed and at that point the llnode package should be npm publish'd.
cool! |
- If lldb doesn't exist try lldb-3.9,3.8,3.7 etc instead. - Allow install scripts guess to be overridden with --lldb_exe option e.g. npm install --lldb_exe=`which lldb-3.9`
I've updated configure.js to do a better job of finding the lldb executable on Linux.
|
@indutny @Fishrock123 - I'll be out from the end of this week to 3rd January. I'm happy to make changes this week if you have any comments. If you don't have time this week I don't mind if you make changes on my branch while I'm out, otherwise we can fix it up in the new year. |
Set the version to 0.0.1 to allow the install process from npmjs.org to be tested. It can be corrected to the current version when this branch is merged into master.
I've put this branch up on npmjs.org as version 0.0.1 so that it can get some testing and feedback when used as an actual npm. |
FYI, tried this out on Ubuntu, lldb 3.9, with a core dump from Node.js v7:
Works well, this is going to be nice |
I copied the .eslintrc from a node build and ran that against the scripts. They should be formatted correctly now. |
@indutny I'll put the package.json level back to 1.4.0, do a merge and then publish a v1.4.0 package to npm. Is that reasonable? (We might need to document the publish process the contribution docs now too.) |
@hhellyer sounds reasonable to me. |
I've published to https://www.npmjs.com/package/llnode - it took an hour or so to update the npmjs.org page last time so that still shows 0.0.1 but doing |
Fantastic! Thank you! |
@bnoordhuis - Well I'm quite prepared to be told I was being an idiot but no matter what I did I couldn't figure out why when I did npm install <path_to_folder> (during development) the npm never copied files ending in .gyp. So I renamed it llnode.gyp.json. (I've just re-tested it and calling it llnode.gyp or build.gyp both still cause it not to be copied.) It might be an obscure npm feature or just something really silly I was doing but in the end renaming it seemed enough to solve my problem. There might be some weirdness around having .gyp files other than binding.gyp in your npm, I just added one to something else to verify the copying problem and it's existence alone broke the build. I think I just put the symlink in so I didn't break anyone else who was referring to the file. (I was trying to make the minimum set of changes.) |
I don't have the reference to hand but I believe npm has (had?) the surprising behaviour of renaming all |
@richardlau - That would actually fit what I saw. (And explain why now if I change binding.gyp in the npm I'm working on to iamafish.gyp it still builds!) |
This updates package.json and adds scripts to allow llnode to be
built via "npm install llnode"
It doesn't create a Node.js module you can use via require('llnode').
(This may change in the future depending on project direction.)
The npm name llnode has been reserved here:
https://www.npmjs.com/package/llnode
and Fedor also has access to that as discussed under issue #53.
This PR does leave the npm version number at 0.0.0, this should
be updated once the install process has been reviewed and at
that point the llnode package should be npm publish'd.