src: fix building --without-v8-platform (backport v7.x) #11157

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@mykmelez
Contributor

mykmelez commented Feb 4, 2017

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

src

Backport of the relevant commit from #11088 to v7.x-staging.

The call signature of v8_platform.StartInspector needs to be the same
whether or not NODE_USE_V8_PLATFORM, otherwise Node will fail to compile
if HAVE_INSPECTOR and !NODE_USE_V8_PLATFORM.

(cherry picked from commit e619725)

src: update v8_platform.StartInspector signature
The call signature of v8_platform.StartInspector needs to be the same
whether or not NODE_USE_V8_PLATFORM, otherwise Node will fail to compile
if HAVE_INSPECTOR and !NODE_USE_V8_PLATFORM.

(cherry picked from commit e619725)

@mykmelez mykmelez changed the title from Fix without v8 platform (backport v7.x) to src: fix building --without-v8-platform (backport v7.x) Feb 4, 2017

@mykmelez mykmelez referenced this pull request Feb 4, 2017

Closed

src: fix building --without-v8-platform #11088

2 of 2 tasks complete
@italoacasas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@italoacasas

italoacasas Feb 5, 2017

Member

ping @mykmelez some test are failing here.

Member

italoacasas commented Feb 5, 2017

ping @mykmelez some test are failing here.

@bnoordhuis

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bnoordhuis

bnoordhuis Feb 6, 2017

Member

@italoacasas If you click through, you'll see that the buildbots are green. The CI is somehow misreporting their status.

Member

bnoordhuis commented Feb 6, 2017

@italoacasas If you click through, you'll see that the buildbots are green. The CI is somehow misreporting their status.

@jasnell

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jasnell

jasnell Feb 6, 2017

Member

The OSX build bot did fail. It's been failing for a couple of days now. When clicking through, it shows the green result from the last successful run.

Member

jasnell commented Feb 6, 2017

The OSX build bot did fail. It's been failing for a couple of days now. When clicking through, it shows the green result from the last successful run.

@mykmelez

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mykmelez

mykmelez Feb 6, 2017

Contributor

@italoacasas If you click through, you'll see that the buildbots are green. The CI is somehow misreporting their status.

Right, I see Finished: SUCCESS at the end of the log for the ARM build (https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-arm/7538/).

The OSX build bot did fail. It's been failing for a couple of days now. When clicking through, it shows the green result from the last successful run.

Indeed, the Mac build reports a java.lang.NullPointerException at java.util.HashSet.(HashSet.java:118) both for this PR's build and for previous ones (f.e. the previous build https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-osx/7642/). So that's an issue with the CI service, not this PR.

Erm, I'm unsure of next steps here (first time Node.js bug fixer). I don't see issues on the CI service itself in this repository's issue tracker. Is there another place I should file those?

Contributor

mykmelez commented Feb 6, 2017

@italoacasas If you click through, you'll see that the buildbots are green. The CI is somehow misreporting their status.

Right, I see Finished: SUCCESS at the end of the log for the ARM build (https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-arm/7538/).

The OSX build bot did fail. It's been failing for a couple of days now. When clicking through, it shows the green result from the last successful run.

Indeed, the Mac build reports a java.lang.NullPointerException at java.util.HashSet.(HashSet.java:118) both for this PR's build and for previous ones (f.e. the previous build https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-osx/7642/). So that's an issue with the CI service, not this PR.

Erm, I'm unsure of next steps here (first time Node.js bug fixer). I don't see issues on the CI service itself in this repository's issue tracker. Is there another place I should file those?

@italoacasas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@italoacasas

italoacasas Feb 6, 2017

Member

@mykmelez the next step is landing the commit in v7.x-staging, I'm going to do it later today if no one else does it before. Thanks for the backport really appreciated.

Landed 46180fa

Member

italoacasas commented Feb 6, 2017

@mykmelez the next step is landing the commit in v7.x-staging, I'm going to do it later today if no one else does it before. Thanks for the backport really appreciated.

Landed 46180fa

italoacasas added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 6, 2017

src: update v8_platform.StartInspector signature
The call signature of v8_platform.StartInspector needs to be the same
whether or not NODE_USE_V8_PLATFORM, otherwise Node will fail to compile
if HAVE_INSPECTOR and !NODE_USE_V8_PLATFORM.

(cherry picked from commit e619725)

PR-URL: #11157
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>

@italoacasas italoacasas closed this Feb 6, 2017

@mykmelez mykmelez deleted the mykmelez:fix-without-v8-platform-v7.x branch Feb 6, 2017

italoacasas added a commit to italoacasas/node that referenced this pull request Feb 14, 2017

src: update v8_platform.StartInspector signature
The call signature of v8_platform.StartInspector needs to be the same
whether or not NODE_USE_V8_PLATFORM, otherwise Node will fail to compile
if HAVE_INSPECTOR and !NODE_USE_V8_PLATFORM.

(cherry picked from commit e619725)

PR-URL: nodejs#11157
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
@jasnell

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jasnell

jasnell Mar 7, 2017

Member

should this also land in v6?

Member

jasnell commented Mar 7, 2017

should this also land in v6?

@mykmelez

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mykmelez

mykmelez Mar 7, 2017

Contributor

should this also land in v6?

No, this fix is for a regression in #9691, which landed in v7, so v6 is unaffected.

Contributor

mykmelez commented Mar 7, 2017

should this also land in v6?

No, this fix is for a regression in #9691, which landed in v7, so v6 is unaffected.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment