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

inspector: restore 9229 as a default port #8550

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
8 participants
@eugeneo
Contributor

eugeneo commented Sep 15, 2016

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

Some tools are now relying on 9229 to be node.js "inspector" port (I see
Chrome extensions, some online blog posts, etc.) Also, having same
default port values for old and new protocols may lead to some
confusion, e.g. when tools are trying to autodiscover debuggable Node
instances.

CC: @ofrobots, @cjihrig, @bnoordhuis

@ofrobots

nit: can you keep the commit abstract to max 50 chars?

Otherwise LGTM, but let's get @cjihrig to signoff as well and approve.

@ofrobots ofrobots referenced this pull request Sep 15, 2016

Merged

inspector: listen on process.debugPort #8386

2 of 2 tasks complete
Eugene Ostroukhov
inspector: restore 9229 as a default port
Some tools are now relying on 9229 to be node.js "inspector" port (I see
Chrome extensions, some online blog posts, etc.) Also, having same
default port values for old and new protocols may lead to some
confusion, e.g. when tools are trying to autodiscover debuggable Node
instances.

@eugeneo eugeneo changed the title from inspector: restore 9229 as a default inspector port to inspector: restore 9229 as a default port Sep 15, 2016

@eugeneo

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

eugeneo commented Sep 15, 2016

I've updated the commit message.

@eugeneo

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

eugeneo commented Sep 15, 2016

Failure seems to be coming from "git gc" command execution.

@ofrobots

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

ofrobots commented Sep 16, 2016

@bnoordhuis

This comment has been minimized.

Member

bnoordhuis commented Sep 16, 2016

Is there a reason you didn't simply revert 9f1f7e2? If yes, can you at least mention in the commit log that you are rolling back that commit?

@cjihrig

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

cjihrig commented Sep 16, 2016

Sorry, I'm going to opt out of signing off on this as I don't agree with the change.

@ofrobots

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

ofrobots commented Sep 16, 2016

#8201 was fixed by 9f1f7e2. This change preserves the fix while bringing back the behavior that the old and new protocols run on different ports.

@ofrobots

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

ofrobots commented Sep 16, 2016

@cjihrig: can you elaborate on your concerns? I think debuggers have a valid use-case to require different protocols to run on different ports when trying to attach to existing node processes, or to auto-discover debuggable node processes.

@cjihrig

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

cjihrig commented Sep 16, 2016

@ofrobots I didn't realize that this would preserve the fix for #8201 (TBH, I hadn't reviewed these changes at that point, assuming it was essentially a revert). That makes me OK with it.

That said, I'm still worried if debuggers are relying on the port number to determine which protocol is used, as there is nothing stopping users from changing the port. I understand the auto-discovery point, as I'm one of the authors of the aforementioned Chrome extensions.

@joshgav

This comment has been minimized.

Member

joshgav commented Sep 16, 2016

@ofrobots

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

ofrobots commented Sep 19, 2016

@cjihrig

That makes me OK with it.

Can you review and sign-off?

@cjihrig

LGTM

@ofrobots

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

ofrobots commented Sep 19, 2016

Thanks! Landed as 626a07d.

@ofrobots ofrobots closed this Sep 19, 2016

ofrobots added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 19, 2016

inspector: restore 9229 as a default port
Some tools are now relying on 9229 to be node.js "inspector" port (I
see Chrome extensions, some online blog posts, etc.) Also, having same
default port values for old and new protocols may lead to some
confusion, e.g. when tools are trying to autodiscover debuggable Node
instances.

This is a partial revert of 9f1f7e2. This commit preserves the fix for
issue #8201 bringing back the behavior that the old and new protocols
run on different ports.run on different ports.

PR-URL: #8550
Reviewed-By: ofrobots - Ali Ijaz Sheikh <ofrobots@google.com>
Reviewed-By: cjihrig - Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>

@eugeneo eugeneo deleted the eugeneo:default-ports branch Sep 20, 2016

@cjihrig cjihrig referenced this pull request Oct 6, 2016

Merged

test: add cluster inspector debug port test #8958

3 of 3 tasks complete

cjihrig added a commit to cjihrig/node-1 that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2016

test: add cluster inspector debug port test
This commit adds a test for the debug port value in cluster
workers using the inspector debugger.

Refs: nodejs#8201
Refs: nodejs#8386
Refs: nodejs#8550
PR-URL: nodejs#8958
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
Reviewed-By: Ilkka Myller <ilkka.myller@nodefield.com>

jasnell added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2016

test: add cluster inspector debug port test
This commit adds a test for the debug port value in cluster
workers using the inspector debugger.

Refs: #8201
Refs: #8386
Refs: #8550
PR-URL: #8958
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
Reviewed-By: Ilkka Myller <ilkka.myller@nodefield.com>

@gibfahn gibfahn referenced this pull request Jun 15, 2017

Closed

Auditing for 6.11.1 #230

2 of 3 tasks complete
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment