nodejs May 2013

nodejs@lists.fedoraproject.org

5 participants
8 discussions

Handling architecture limitations
by Stephen Gallagher 24 Jun '13

24 Jun '13

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The main Node.js package supports only x86[_64] and ARM architectures, due to these being the only supported architectures of v8. This is causing issues with the downstream packages such as nodejs-less which are built for EPEL6. Is there any way to add ExclusiveArch to the %{?nodejs_find_provides_and_requires} macro in the main node package so that we won't try to build the modules on unsupported architectures? It would be a lot less effort to fix that macro than it would be to fix every node module. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlGaF3sACgkQeiVVYja6o6MlugCdGBTLzrVaz6ZQNWM7juDt0trc krYAn0HXNxsnHewgCkyFLXC6EAUkYKSd =PPij -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 12

New npm dependency reviews
by T.C. Hollingsworth 30 May '13

30 May '13

The latest npm requires a few new modules that haven't been packaged yet. I have filed reviews for these packages. You can see them here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=968919&hide_resolved=1 Please review some if you can. I'll gladly review some of your packages in kind. Thanks! -T.C.

2 1

Emergency call for karma to unbreak dependencies in EPEL6 stable
by T.C. Hollingsworth 29 May '13

29 May '13

Somehow the npm(ansi) virtual provides didn't get applied to the nodejs-ansi-0.1.2-7.el6 update, breaking dependencies in EPEL 6 stable. [1] Since this is a very bad situation, I'd appreciate it if several people would test the following update and provide karma ASAP: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-ansi-0.1.2-7.el6.1 That way we can minimize the time dependencies are broken in EPEL 6 stable. Thanks! -T.C. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=968531

1 0

nodejs-0.10.8
by T.C. Hollingsworth 29 May '13

29 May '13

I just pushed updates to nodejs-0.10-8, libuv-0.10.8, and v8-3.14.5.10 to updates-testing in all branches. These updates contain the libuv linker changes previously mentioned by Stephen Gallagher on this list. [1] They also contain the first V8 JavaScript interpreter update in quite some time. While I tested things as much as I could, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if I missed something (anyone who has watchcommits on my packages knows I space out on silly stuff all the time), so please test your modules with the updates extensively and report [2] any issues you encounter. There are a lot of moving parts in this update so it'd be nice to be 100% certain everything is copacetic before going stable, as this is likely what will ship with F19 Gold. And if by some miracle everything works well, please provide positive karma to the F19 [3], F18 [4], and EPEL6 [5] updates as appropriate. An npm update is forthcoming, but that will require a few more package reviews as isaacs continues to split out functionality useful to other projects into their own modules. I'll post to the list when they're ready. Thanks everyone for your awesome efforts! -T.C. [1] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.nodejs/14 [2] http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/nodejs [3] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/v8-3.14.5.10-1.fc19,libuv-0.10.8-1.… [4] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/v8-3.14.5.10-1.fc18,libuv-0.10.8-1.… [5] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/v8-3.14.5.10-1.el6,libuv-0.10.8-1.e…

1 0

Back in action
by Jamie Nguyen 26 May '13

26 May '13

Hi all, Just to let you know I'm now back in action. Most of the open reviews at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806 are mine, but most aren't particularly urgent. Just a note that nodejs-node-xmpp does not yet work on Node 0.10.x. Since node-xmpp is an essential component of the buddycloud software, buddycloud doesn't really work yet (ie, segfaults and weird behaviour). The original author of node-xmpp went on to other things a long time ago so it hasn't received any love for a while, but a buddycloud developer has recently taken over node-xmpp so hopefully things will change over the next few months. Regardless, it will be nice to have all the dependencies ready for when buddycloud does start to work, and many of them are very popular themselves anyway (like winston or stylus). I'll also make a start on reviewing some of the other outstanding Node reviews. Kind regards, -- Jamie Nguyen

1 0

libuv tweaks
by Stephen Gallagher 13 May '13

13 May '13

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I saw today that libuv pushed a patch upstream to enable proper setting of the -soname argument when calling 'ld'. I built this change in Rawhide, but I'll confess to not being certain enough about how the linker works to backport the same change to F19 and earlier. I'm concerned it might be an effective soname bump without the accompanying filename change. The other change I made was to drop the Bundles(ev) notification, as I see that they actually pulled that out of the code quite some time ago. Which is excellent. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlGQ2WUACgkQeiVVYja6o6PKPACfdZRjzwrLP/Ig3I/pV7bdLNWV 3coAn22ol8dgnDlfhiC8+zW3tK0CX5eK =Y8VW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Node.js Mailing List (& more!)
by T.C. Hollingsworth 04 May '13

04 May '13

Hi Fedora noders! If you're receiving this, you've done *something* related to Node at some point. (And there's a lot of you, which is why you're all Bcc'ed!) There's now a Node.js mailing list to make communicating easier: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/nodejs Please join us there if you're interested; this will be the last time I mass mail anybody. If you don't care about node anymore, feel free to skip the rest of this, otherwise read on.. In addition to the mailing list, I've also given node some wiki love. There's now an overview page you can point all your friends to: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Node.js There's also a fancy SIG page. Add your name to it! https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Node.js While I got them off to a start, they definitely could use some more love. Please edit away, it is a wiki after all! Note that there's a link to a Packaging FAQ, but it currently redirects to the guidelines. I'm going to be putting in a guidelines update real soon now, taking into account all the changes thanks to your wonderful suggestions. Part of that will be moving some stuff out of the guidelines and into the FAQ, since FPC wants to get the guidelines back to the basics. [1] So that page won't stay a redirect long! If you have any suggestions in this area that we haven't already discussed previously, please e-mail the list. Otherwise, I'll send out the drafts there prior to sending them along to FPC to gather feedback. Additionally, there's now a tracking bug for Node.js reviews [2]. Please add "nodejs-reviews" to the Blocks field of all future Node.js-related package reviews. npm2rpm will use it to skip packages that are already awaiting review. Speaking of npm2rpm, I hope to have that out for everyone next week, along with an additional script that checks npm for updates and updates packages. Sorry it's taken so long! In case you missed it, Stephen Gallagher recently got Node.js working on EPEL 6. (Thanks, Stephen!) The only thing extra you need to do for EPEL is add %{?nodejs_find_provides_and_requires} to the top of your spec file. This forces the older RPM in RHEL6 to invoke the Node.js provides and requires generators, since it cannot be done automatically like it is in Fedora. (This will also find it's way into the EPEL guidelines in the aforementioned guidelines update.) Finally, at this point in the Node.js 0.10.x release cycle, updates are being released roughly every week, as more people migrate to the new version and find all the bugs in it. Unfortunately, that means as soon as bodhi lets me push 0.10.4, 0.10.5 is out! Please test new versions, and visit bodhi and give them karma, so we're not pushing stuff with already fixed bugs stable two days after the next version is released. In about a month or so, releases should taper off and it won't be such a problem anymore. Thanks for all of your awesome work! -T.C. [1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2013-March/008971.html [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=956806

4 9

Package rename breakage - wat do?
by T.C. Hollingsworth 02 May '13

02 May '13

Someone recently experienced a little breakage related to a package rename, and I'm not sure about the best strategy to resolve it. Upstream finally got around to unbundling a cookie handling library from two unrelated npm packages (tobi and request). We had previously split it off in Fedora before, but needed to rename the package and move it into its final home, so the directory under /usr/lib/node_modules changed. While I shipped an updated nodejs-request along with the new nodejs-cookie-jar package in the same Bodhi update, it's possible to update to nodejs-cookie-jar (which Obsolotes/Provides the old unbundled package) without updating nodejs-request. This will of course will break request since it looks for it under the old, temporary name. So, should we: 1. provide a compatibility symlink so older versions of nodejs-request aren't broken at all 2. add Conflicts to nodejs-cookie-jar specifiying the older versions of nodejs-request that it will break 3. do nothing; if you install only part of a single bodhi update and it breaks you get to keep both pieces Both 1 or 2 are ugly in their own way, and 3 might be technically correct but doesn't seem very nice, so I'm not sure how to proceed. Thanks in advance for suggestions! -T.C.

4 4

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

nodejs May 2013