Skip to content

gyp: muffle xcode-select warnings - #21784

Closed
ryzokuken wants to merge 1 commit into
nodejs:masterfrom
ryzokuken:gyp-xcode-select
Closed

gyp: muffle xcode-select warnings#21784
ryzokuken wants to merge 1 commit into
nodejs:masterfrom
ryzokuken:gyp-xcode-select

Conversation

@ryzokuken

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • tests and/or benchmarks are included
  • documentation is changed or added
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

/cc @nodejs/gyp @gibfahn

sorry for holding this off until today 😅

Do we use a different version of gyp as compared to node-gyp? I found all the right function calls but they were calling different things, so had been wondering.

@nodejs-github-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@nodejs-github-botnodejs-github-bot added build Issues and PRs related to build files or the CI. tools Issues and PRs related to the tools directory. labels Jul 12, 2018
Muffle gyp from creating xcode-select related warnings, essentially
flooding the console.
Co-authored-by: Gibson Fahnestock <gibfahn@gmail.com>
Refs: nodejs/node-gyp#1370
Refs: nodejs#21520
@Trott

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Is the benefit of discarding the spurious error greater than the cost of swallowing other useful debugging information in the event of a real error? (I don't know the answer.)

@gibfahn

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Is the benefit of discarding the spurious error greater than the cost of swallowing other useful debugging information in the event of a real error? (I don't know the answer.)

See discussion in #21520 , but I'd say absolutely. This is the minimal changeset, and it shouldn't swallow any relevant errors.

See nodejs/node-gyp#569 for the pain it causes, I think we should keep the in-tree GYP build as similar as possible to the node-gyp version in any case.

@gibfahngibfahn left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM FWIW, but would appreciate other reviews.

@richardlau

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I think we should keep the in-tree GYP build as similar as possible to the node-gyp version in any case.

Radical idea: What if we dropped the in-tree gyp in favour of the one embedded in node-gyp (which we are already dependent on to build the addon tests)?

@gibfahn

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Radical idea: What if we dropped the in-tree gyp in favour of the one embedded in node-gyp (which we are already dependent on to build the addon tests)?

@nodejs/build @nodejs/node-gyp

@jasnell

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What's the status on this one?

@jasnelljasnell added the stalled Issues and PRs that are stalled. label Sep 10, 2018
@ryzokuken

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@richardlau has an excellent suggestion, but this PR can be landed nonetheless.

@ryzokuken

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Noticed that nobody landed this, but it has enough approvals, etc. Landing this in a few hours unless someone objects.

refack
refack previously approved these changes Nov 8, 2018
@refack

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ryzokuken if you'd like to submit a PR "upstream", where we could debate the finer point of this case.

@refackrefack removed the stalled Issues and PRs that are stalled. label Nov 8, 2018
@refack

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

wait... we already landed #2199916cffb0
😕

@richardlau

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Noticed that nobody landed this, but it has enough approvals, etc. Landing this in a few hours unless someone objects.

This has conflicts and needs an up to date CI run.

@refack

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I'm going to close this as superseded. @ryzokuken feel free to reopen.

@refackrefack closed this Nov 8, 2018
@ryzokuken

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@refack will do.

@ryzokuken

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Waiiit a minute. Why would I open two PRs with the exact same goal?

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

buildIssues and PRs related to build files or the CI.toolsIssues and PRs related to the tools directory.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants

@ryzokuken@nodejs-github-bot@Trott@gibfahn@richardlau@jasnell@refack