-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
feat: add an option for turning off Node.js hijacking #1344
Conversation
What is the right way to make this configurable? |
We already have an env variable for that: |
Does it mean that the issue #897 can be solved by simply running |
If you run a pkg executable with |
Why was it closed? Is #897 fixed? |
Like @jesec said you should get the same result using |
For sure not the same result because see my change at line 1919 |
You should use an env var so to make it configurable |
ok |
This is not doing what I need. This solution works if I set the env variable, when running the compiled binary. What I want is to build the binary with this setting on. |
Probably I need to add a new argument here Lines 161 to 175 in f081c63
|
Could someone look into this please? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good from a code side. Dunno if @jesec agree
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks categorically wrong.
It does not make sense to embed MOCK_NODE
into the executable.
What are you trying to do here? Do you want pkg to extract a regular Node.js runtime from the patched binary? If that's the case:
- why not just download from nodejs.org?
- why not put the condition at L66 to revert all patches?
- why don't you skip all other
pkg
procedures? - we use CLI arguments not env variables for configurations of
pkg
itself.
Just FYI, here's how we solved this for ourselves with a patch: #897 (comment) For clarity, the exact issue for us is the patching of |
This pull-request is stale because it has been open 90 days with no activity. Remove the stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. To ignore this pull-request entirely you can add the no-stale label |
This pull-request is now closed due to inactivity, you can of course reopen or reference this pull-request if you see fit. |
close #897