On 09/26/2013 04:19 PM, T.C. Hollingsworth wrote:
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Tomas Hrcka
<thrcka(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Hello fedora noders,
>
> at first I want to thank you for great amount of work you did to get node to
> fedora. Good job!
>
> I am poking around nodejs and v8 for few months, and there are few things...
> Is there a reason why do we have this old version of v8 in fedora? I know
> that stable branch of node is using it. But 0.10.* releases should run well
> also on newer v8.
Everyone's mostly covered this already, but I just wanted to add that actually
0.10.x won't run on newer v8 at all; there are huge API changes:
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/nodejs/VlUJ68n6QBg
Not only did nodejs require changes but virtually every C extension module will
also be broken. Upstream is working on a new C extension interface that will
prevent this kind of thing from happening in the future (because everyone knows
it will).
Ok, I am aware of API/ABI changes in v8. But I was able to run hello
world on stable node and never v8 (not current stable). I wasn't
thinking about C extensions and now I see that could be a problem.
0.12 is going to be a huge growing pain for the community at large; us rushing
into it will not help anyone.
Yes, but truth is that most of enthusiasts using node
js use latest
versions everywhere. Lot of people I talked to, this summer on web
related events where disapointed that fedora/epel doesn't have those
packages in latest upstream versions. But I will fix this with COPR repo
and provide latest upstream node for fedora.
> I started rewrite of v8.spec to use gyp and new stable
> release of v8, once finished I will publish it for review (since I am new to
> packaging this may take some time).
I'd be very happy to see v8 converted to gyp, but in Rawhide only. It's
something that I've been meaning to do but never got around to, since what we
have does work for now and rebuilding all v8-dependents just for this seemed
like unnecessary work. But there are a couple other things on my wish list that
require a native module rebuild (like flipping http-parser to use the upstream
SONAME setting instead of my patch), so I'd be willing to go for it now.
If it helps, I converted it ages ago when I was still maintaining it in a third-
party repo. That old SRPM is here:
http://patches.fedorapeople.org/oldnode/unstable/f17/SRPMS/v8-3.9.23-1.fc...
Thanks for this I will provide srpm when ready. The package will
probably need some experienced pair of eyes just to check if I didn't
break stuff...
Of course, years later I noticed a couple flaws in that packaging right off the
bat. (Specifically, the %{arm} macro needs to be used in ExclusiveArch and the
stuff in %{_bindir} belongs in devel.)
-T.C.
_______________________________________________
nodejs mailing list
nodejs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/nodejs
--
Tomas Hrcka
Software Engineer - Developer Experience