Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
Yes - this is expected behavior for not passing down proper SSL
certificates to the constructor.
On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 12:27 PM, Elana Hashman
wrote:
> I have tested the steps with nodejs and nodejs-dev in bionic-proposed,
> however I get a different error. I am guessing that there is something
> wrong with the credential initializing:
>
> ubuntu@ubuntu-bionic:~$ node
> > const grpc = require('grpc')
> undefined
> > const creds = grpc.ServerCredentials.createSsl(null, [])
> undefined
> > const server = new grpc.Server()
> undefined
> > server.bind('0.0.0.0:8080', creds)
> E0908 19:25:28.193325796 27119 security_connector.cc:1149] Handshaker
> factory creation failed with TSI_INVALID_ARGUMENT.
> E0908 19:25:28.193531437 27119 server_secure_chttp2.cc:84]
> {"created":"@1536434728.193508636","description":"Unable to create secure
> server with credentials of type Ssl.","file":"../deps/grpc/
> src/core/ext/transport/chttp2/server/secure/server_secure_
> chttp2.cc","file_line":63,"security_status":1}
> 0
>
>
> I was able to successfully `npm install node-webcrypto-ossl` this time.
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug
> report.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863
>
> Title:
> Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/
> 1779863/+subscriptions
>
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863
Title:
Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
The official list of library dependency versions can be found here: https://nodejs.org/dist/index.json 8.11.4 is listed as linked against OpenSSL 1.0.2p. On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Dan Streetman wrote: > re: cosmic debdiff, debian appears to have added code to 8.11 version > that breaks the build with openssl 1.0.2, so i'll need to look into > that. > > @grumpycoder, or anyone else, can you confirm that nodejs version 8.11 > still "requires" openssl 1.0? > > -- > You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug > report. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 > > Title: > Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. > > To manage notifications about this bug go to: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/ > 1779863/+subscriptions > -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 Title: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
Apologies for the late reply.
My github repository is a quick effort in trying to expose the ABI problem,
but a more thorough (and straightforward) way to actually reproduce would
be to do the following:
First case, when using a module that ships with prebuilt binaries. With the
"nodejs" and "npm" Ubuntu packages installed, in a directory somewhere,
first do `npm install grpc`. Notice how it's mentioning installing a
prebuilt binary from remote. Next, run node, and enter the following code:
> const grpc = require('grpc')
> const creds = grpc.ServerCredentials.createSsl(null, [])
> const server = new grpc.Server()
> server.bind('0.0.0.0:8080', creds)
The last line will result in a crash of the nodejs runtime, that says
something like
node: symbol lookup error:
/tmp/ubuntu-crash/node_modules/grpc/src/node/extension_binary/node-v57-linux-x64-glibc/grpc_node.node:
undefined symbol: SSL_library_init
Second case, when using a module that only ships source code. With the
"nodejs" and "npm" Ubuntu packages installed, try the command `npm install
node-webcrypto-ossl`. Compilation will start, but will fail due to header
expectation mismatch.
If you retry the same steps using any of the official nodejs runtime
instead of the Ubuntu package, the first case will not crash the runtime
(it'll fail because we're not providing valid SSL certificates, but that's
normal behavior), and the second case will compile properly at installation
time.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 4:56 PM, Seth Arnold <1779...@bugs.launchpad.net>
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 05:51:56PM -, Robie Basak wrote:
> > For example: it's not really "node-debian-v57" either; it's
> > "node-openssl1.1-v57". Ubuntu, Debian and all other distributions that
>
> You'd probably also like this to enumerate all libraries that node
> re-exports, if you choose to go this route.
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug
> report.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863
>
> Title:
> Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/
> 1779863/+subscriptions
>
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863
Title:
Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 05:51:56PM -, Robie Basak wrote: > For example: it's not really "node-debian-v57" either; it's > "node-openssl1.1-v57". Ubuntu, Debian and all other distributions that You'd probably also like this to enumerate all libraries that node re-exports, if you choose to go this route. Thanks -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 Title: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
My current schedule will make IRC being difficult, sorry. The problem is that users are *already* split into two factions. They expect apt-get to work, but they also expect npm install to work too. The former is fine on your end, because you control the whole ecosystem here, but it's perfectly reasonable for people to also expect that doing npm install just works too, and right now that's not the case. On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 10:51 AM, Robie Basak <1779...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 03:59:27AM -, Nicolas Noble wrote: > > So one another solution I'd then see would be for you to bite the > > bullet, and stop calling your runtime "nodejs", because, well, it's not > > really nodejs. > > Sure. This falls under correctly "declaring binary compatibility" in my > analysis. > > When it comes to this kind of thing, we rely on a single arbitrator to > define how to do this exactly so that all distributions, as well as > binaries built directly from upstream sources, correctly interact and > agree on what constitutes compatibility. Upstream works best to act as > the arbitrator since you're unilaterally in a position to define what > constitutes binary compatibility. Downstreams can't really do that. I > suggest, then, that you define exactly how to do this correctly, and > incorporate this mechanism into your build system (or at least > officially document it) so that all distributions do it the right way. > > For example: it's not really "node-debian-v57" either; it's > "node-openssl1.1-v57". Ubuntu, Debian and all other distributions that > might release with nodejs linked to OpenSSL 1.1 would all share binary > compatibility, AIUI, so it would be overkill to force them to lose > binary compatibility between each other just because this compatibility > is ill defined. The build system should correctly arrange for the report > to be correct based on how it was built. If this were to happen, all > distributions would simply use it, and you'd get your "declare your > binary compatibility correctly" wish granted by default. > > > But your obstination on releasing a nodejs runtime that's not really > > nodejs while 100% masquerading as the official nodejs will eventually > > force us to discourage our users to use your runtime, because there's > > nothing we could do to handle the subtle bugs you're introducing on us. > > I suspect what will happen here is that we'll end up rebuilding nodejs > against 1.0 in 18.04. But this won't solve the problem for next time. > > >From your wording I don't think you've understood the distribution > ecosystem and why what you are doing and your expectations are a problem > for distributions to be able to meet in the general case. Distribution > users *expect* package dependencies to be de-duplicated, and to receive > security support for those dependencies from a single source. This is > the reason that "apt-get install ..." Just Works. You rely on this too: > for everything on your system that works without you caring for them > specifically. > > Let's try not split our users into two factions, and instead figure out > how to solve this problem well for everyone. But I think to begin to do > that you first need to understand why distributions work the way they > do. I'm happy to spend more time with you on this. Please feel free to > ping me on IRC for a more interactive explanation of this, or to arrange > some other medium. > > -- > You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug > report. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 > > Title: > Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. > > To manage notifications about this bug go to: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/ > 1779863/+subscriptions > -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 Title: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
Also, I am but a simple npm package maintainer whose users are currently reporting weird issues when using Ubuntu packages. I did the thorough investigation of what the actual issue is, but I am not a nodejs developer. I have strictly no power whatsoever in resolving this issue one way or another. And I personally don't really care what the actual solution is, as long as my users stop reporting that doing npm install of my package fails for them on Ubuntu. Please do engage with the actual nodejs developers in order to resolve this. On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Nicolas Noble wrote: > My current schedule will make IRC being difficult, sorry. > > The problem is that users are *already* split into two factions. They > expect apt-get to work, but they also expect npm install to work too. The > former is fine on your end, because you control the whole ecosystem here, > but it's perfectly reasonable for people to also expect that doing npm > install just works too, and right now that's not the case. > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 10:51 AM, Robie Basak <1779...@bugs.launchpad.net> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 03:59:27AM -, Nicolas Noble wrote: >> > So one another solution I'd then see would be for you to bite the >> > bullet, and stop calling your runtime "nodejs", because, well, it's not >> > really nodejs. >> >> Sure. This falls under correctly "declaring binary compatibility" in my >> analysis. >> >> When it comes to this kind of thing, we rely on a single arbitrator to >> define how to do this exactly so that all distributions, as well as >> binaries built directly from upstream sources, correctly interact and >> agree on what constitutes compatibility. Upstream works best to act as >> the arbitrator since you're unilaterally in a position to define what >> constitutes binary compatibility. Downstreams can't really do that. I >> suggest, then, that you define exactly how to do this correctly, and >> incorporate this mechanism into your build system (or at least >> officially document it) so that all distributions do it the right way. >> >> For example: it's not really "node-debian-v57" either; it's >> "node-openssl1.1-v57". Ubuntu, Debian and all other distributions that >> might release with nodejs linked to OpenSSL 1.1 would all share binary >> compatibility, AIUI, so it would be overkill to force them to lose >> binary compatibility between each other just because this compatibility >> is ill defined. The build system should correctly arrange for the report >> to be correct based on how it was built. If this were to happen, all >> distributions would simply use it, and you'd get your "declare your >> binary compatibility correctly" wish granted by default. >> >> > But your obstination on releasing a nodejs runtime that's not really >> > nodejs while 100% masquerading as the official nodejs will eventually >> > force us to discourage our users to use your runtime, because there's >> > nothing we could do to handle the subtle bugs you're introducing on us. >> >> I suspect what will happen here is that we'll end up rebuilding nodejs >> against 1.0 in 18.04. But this won't solve the problem for next time. >> >> >From your wording I don't think you've understood the distribution >> ecosystem and why what you are doing and your expectations are a problem >> for distributions to be able to meet in the general case. Distribution >> users *expect* package dependencies to be de-duplicated, and to receive >> security support for those dependencies from a single source. This is >> the reason that "apt-get install ..." Just Works. You rely on this too: >> for everything on your system that works without you caring for them >> specifically. >> >> Let's try not split our users into two factions, and instead figure out >> how to solve this problem well for everyone. But I think to begin to do >> that you first need to understand why distributions work the way they >> do. I'm happy to spend more time with you on this. Please feel free to >> ping me on IRC for a more interactive explanation of this, or to arrange >> some other medium. >> >> -- >> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug >> report. >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 >> >> Title: >> Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. >> >> To manage notifications about this bug go to: >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/177986 >> 3/+subscriptions >> > > -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 Title: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 03:59:27AM -, Nicolas Noble wrote: > So one another solution I'd then see would be for you to bite the > bullet, and stop calling your runtime "nodejs", because, well, it's not > really nodejs. Sure. This falls under correctly "declaring binary compatibility" in my analysis. When it comes to this kind of thing, we rely on a single arbitrator to define how to do this exactly so that all distributions, as well as binaries built directly from upstream sources, correctly interact and agree on what constitutes compatibility. Upstream works best to act as the arbitrator since you're unilaterally in a position to define what constitutes binary compatibility. Downstreams can't really do that. I suggest, then, that you define exactly how to do this correctly, and incorporate this mechanism into your build system (or at least officially document it) so that all distributions do it the right way. For example: it's not really "node-debian-v57" either; it's "node-openssl1.1-v57". Ubuntu, Debian and all other distributions that might release with nodejs linked to OpenSSL 1.1 would all share binary compatibility, AIUI, so it would be overkill to force them to lose binary compatibility between each other just because this compatibility is ill defined. The build system should correctly arrange for the report to be correct based on how it was built. If this were to happen, all distributions would simply use it, and you'd get your "declare your binary compatibility correctly" wish granted by default. > But your obstination on releasing a nodejs runtime that's not really > nodejs while 100% masquerading as the official nodejs will eventually > force us to discourage our users to use your runtime, because there's > nothing we could do to handle the subtle bugs you're introducing on us. I suspect what will happen here is that we'll end up rebuilding nodejs against 1.0 in 18.04. But this won't solve the problem for next time. >From your wording I don't think you've understood the distribution ecosystem and why what you are doing and your expectations are a problem for distributions to be able to meet in the general case. Distribution users *expect* package dependencies to be de-duplicated, and to receive security support for those dependencies from a single source. This is the reason that "apt-get install ..." Just Works. You rely on this too: for everything on your system that works without you caring for them specifically. Let's try not split our users into two factions, and instead figure out how to solve this problem well for everyone. But I think to begin to do that you first need to understand why distributions work the way they do. I'm happy to spend more time with you on this. Please feel free to ping me on IRC for a more interactive explanation of this, or to arrange some other medium. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 Title: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
On Sat, Aug 04, 2018 at 04:44:05PM -, Elana Hashman wrote: > The ABI incompatibility with upstream is not just "regrettable", but an > actual bug. It's not supported behaviour; it's an undocumented ABI > deviation, and as soon as upstream became aware of it, they filed an > issue. The problem is wider than this. Distributions aren't set up to maintain binary compatibility in the way that you expect. I appreciate the difficulties that this causes the ecosystem. However, binary compatibility with elements not shipped with the distribution is not a guarantee that binary distributions (like Debian, Ubuntu and others) have traditionally ever made. *Declaring* binary compatibility/incompatibility correctly is a separate matter and is possibly a bug here. For example: if I grab a binary built elsewhere and try to run it on my system, I may receive an error telling me that the linker cannot find "libc.so.5". It would correctly be reporting that binary dependencies that are expected to be provided by my system are not present. The equivalent should be happening with Node.js and third party modules affected by this issue, and if it isn't, that's a bug. This bug report says "will fail to load" though, so perhaps binary compatibility checks are working as expected. In this specific case it looks like it is possible to rebuild nodejs against openssl1.0 to resolve the problem for now. However, this is only possible because openssl1.0 happens to also be packaged in Bionic. This is a lucky coincidence. Had it been removed by the time of Bionic's release, we'd be far more stuck than we are now. I want to make sure that everybody involved understands this, because this demonstrates how the current expectations of the Node.js ecosystem mismatches the way distributions actually work. In the general case, distributions, in a particular release, may well not package the particular versions of dependencies that you declare to be part of your ABI. They may use other versions because it minimises distribution maintenance work to only package one version, and dependencies are used by other projects, too. It has been suggested that this would be the responsibility of distribution nodejs maintainers to resolve. However, in the general case it cannot be resolved. Other packaged projects may require a newer version of the dependency. That Node.js considers the dependency part of its "official ABI" is currently neither a reason to hold those projects back, nor a reason to package multiple versions of dependencies just for nodejs' sake. Distribution maintainers will patch nodejs as required to get it building against the newer version of the dependency so that the distribution can ship on schedule. That this might break binaries built outside the distribution has never been considered within the scope of general distribution development workflow, except to the extent that distribution binaries correctly declare their own ABIs and that diverging on ABI in a distribution-specific way that is not upstream (in this case upstream means OpenSSL, not Node.js) is generally undesirable. I hope this explains the actual problem: it's not as simple as just expecting/requiring downstream distributions to link against the version of the dependency that you want. So how do we resolve this properly? I don't know. Further discussion is needed. I hope my explanation of the problem above will help to frame this discussion. To be clear, I'm not attempting to block this current SRU. I just want it to be absolutely clear to everyone that it would be a stop-gap for 18.04 only. It will not stop the problem happening again in the future. And if the problem does recur in the future, the solution may not be as simple because the nodejs-upstream-required version of the dependency may not be available in the distribution release next time. I do think it's dangerous to just SRU this time and then forget about the problem. This would reinforce unrealistic/incorrect expectations, leading to bigger issues when the problem recurs at a point when the simple workaround won't be available. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 Title: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
While it's theorically possible to bypass node-gyp, I'm not aware of any actively used method that would do so. The node-gyp is a bundled dependency of npm, and is the code that parses the native module information (the bindings.gyp file that is), in order to generate the Makefile that will build the module. This Makefile will contain all the appropriate hard-coded information pertaining to the version of the runtime this module needs to be build against, including the path to the openssl headers that node-gyp just downloaded for the runtime in its local cache folder. On Fri, Aug 3, 2018, 20:01 Steve Langasek wrote: > Nicolas, thanks for the clarification. Just to be sure, is node-gyp the > *only* way to build binary add-ons for node, or is it possible that some > users have built add-ons using some other build system? > > -- > You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug > report. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 > > Title: > Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. > > To manage notifications about this bug go to: > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions > -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 Title: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
The template changes look good to me. On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 9:21 AM, Ubuntu Foundations Team Bug Bot < 1779...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote: > ** Tags added: patch > > -- > You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug > report. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 > > Title: > Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. > > To manage notifications about this bug go to: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/ > 1779863/+subscriptions > -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 Title: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
I can confirm that your nodejs from your ppa makes prebuilt binaries work fine again, yes. On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Dan Streetman wrote: > @ehashman, @grumpycoder, let me know if you're able to test with the deb > from my ppa, so we can at least confirm it does fix this issue. > > -- > You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug > report. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 > > Title: > Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. > > To manage notifications about this bug go to: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/ > 1779863/+subscriptions > -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 Title: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 1779863] Re: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs.
There's also a "documentation" in nodejs' release database: https://nodejs.org/dist/index.json On Mon, Jul 23, 2018, 15:56 Elana Hashman <1779...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote: > Oops, GitHub expanded that link to the full commit when I copied it. > Here's demonstrating it's the same one as the 8.10.0 tag: > https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/v8.10.0/deps/openssl/openssl/README#L2 > > Release notes are here > https://github.com/nodejs/node/releases/tag/v8.10.0 > > -- > You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug > report. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 > > Title: > Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. > > To manage notifications about this bug go to: > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions > -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1779863 Title: Ubuntu nodejs package isn't ABI compatible with mainline nodejs. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nodejs/+bug/1779863/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
