Upgrade to version 2 of detect-libc

[lovell]

↪️ Pull Request

Hi, the latest detect-libc has been modernised to use the non-blocking Node.js Report API where available (Node.js >= 12), falling back to a more efficient single child process only when needed.

It's a major version bump for detect-libc as it drops support for versions of Node.js < 8 but parcel already requires >= 12 so this change is OK to include in a patch release.

https://www.npmjs.com/package/detect-libc

💻 Examples

Should anyone be interested in the background to this, please see lovell/detect-libc#14

🚨 Test instructions

Hopefully existing unit tests in this repo cover its use.

detect-libc has an extensive integration test suite, e.g. https://github.com/lovell/detect-libc/actions/runs/1717414863

✔️ PR Todo

• Added/updated unit tests for this change
• Filled out test instructions (In case there aren't any unit tests)
• Included links to related issues/PRs

[height]

Link Height tasks by mentioning a task ID in the pull request title or commit messages, or description and comments with the keyword link (e.g. "Link T-123").

💡Tip: You can also use "Close T-X" to automatically close a task when the pull request is merged.

[wbinnssmith]

nit: consider

let [_family, _version] = await Promise.all([family(), version()]);
// ...

[lovell]

Thanks for the review. For those on Node.js 12+, which I think will be all parcel users, the call to family() is very fast but the call to version() will still involve spawning a child process, a small I/O overhead. Keeping these separate allows the call to the former to possibly shortcut the need to call the latter. That's bit of a micro-optimisation though, so I'm happy to switch to your suggestion for more readable code if you'd prefer.

[wbinnssmith]

👍 makes sense

[wbinnssmith]

Hopefully existing unit tests in this repo cover its use.

We don't run on old Centos to test the segfault issue with the ImageOptimizer, so I don't think that codepath is taken. Probably worth a manual test to confirm it functions as before.

@devongovett once we get CI stable, it may be worth considering running the integration tests on a system with old glibc too.

[lovell]

I've rebased to remove the conflict and I think the one open conversation can now be resolved. Does the "Waiting" status mean you're waiting for me to do something? Please do let me know if there's anything else that's required, thank you.

[lovell]

Closing as no longer required since #8838