Clarify process.report glibcVersionRuntime semantics for statically linked glibc builds
Personne n'a encore pris cette issue.
- Langage dominant
- JavaScript
- Étoiles
- 122k
- Forks
- 37.4k
- Merge moyen
- 4 j 3 h
- PR mergées (30 j)
- 272
Description
What is the issue?
process.report.getReport().header.glibcVersionRuntime can be absent in a Node.js binary that appears to be statically linked against glibc.
That may be intentional, but the current documentation does not appear to define the presence semantics of glibcVersionRuntime, especially for statically linked glibc builds. This makes it easy for ecosystem code to interpret an absent glibcVersionRuntime as "not glibc" or "musl", even when glibcVersionCompiler is present.
Reproduction
Using Node.js v22.21.1:
$ file "$(command -v node)"
/usr/bin/node: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), statically linked, for GNU/Linux 4.19.0, stripped
$ ldd --version | head -n 1
ldd (GNU libc) 2.39
$ node -p "JSON.stringify({
node: process.version,
execPath: process.execPath,
glibcVersionCompiler: process.report.getReport().header.glibcVersionCompiler,
glibcVersionRuntime: process.report.getReport().header.glibcVersionRuntime,
node_target_type: process.config.variables.node_target_type,
node_shared: process.config.variables.node_shared
}, null, 2)"
{
"node": "v22.21.1",
"execPath": "/usr/bin/node",
"glibcVersionCompiler": "2.39",
"node_target_type": "static_library",
"node_shared": false
}
glibcVersionRuntime is omitted from the report object.
Why this is unclear
The diagnostic report documentation shows both fields in the example report:
"glibcVersionRuntime": "2.17",
"glibcVersionCompiler": "2.17"
The report documentation also says the report version is bumped when a key is added or removed, or when a value type changes.
However, I could not find documentation stating whether glibcVersionRuntime is guaranteed to be present on Linux glibc builds, whether it may be omitted, or whether it is expected to be omitted for statically linked glibc builds.
The implementation appears to emit glibcVersionRuntime only when dlsym(RTLD_DEFAULT, "gnu_get_libc_version") succeeds, while glibcVersionCompiler is emitted under __GLIBC__.
Expected documentation / clarification
It would be useful for the documentation to clarify one of the following:
glibcVersionRuntimeis optional and may be absent when the runtime glibc version cannot be dynamically queried, including statically linked glibc builds; orglibcVersionRuntimeshould be present for statically linked glibc builds, and its absence is a bug; or- consumers should not use absence of
glibcVersionRuntimeas evidence that the runtime is musl or non-glibc.
I am not asserting that the current runtime behavior is necessarily wrong. The issue is that the field's absence is observable, but the documented contract does not appear to define what that absence means.
Guide de contribution
Ouvrir le guide de contribution
Par où commencer
- Lisez l'issue en entier, puis le guide de contribution du projet.
- Signalez en commentaire que vous la prenez — cela évite que deux personnes fassent le même travail.
- Forkez le dépôt et travaillez sur une branche.
- Ouvrez une pull request qui référence le numéro de l'issue.
Piste de recherche
Commencez par la documentation du rapport de diagnostic et les champs process.report.getReport().header décrits dans l'issue. Clarifiez si glibcVersionRuntime peut être absent lorsque glibc est lié statiquement et que cette absence ne constitue pas une preuve de musl ; le travail sera terminé lorsque la documentation définira la sémantique de sa présence à côté de l'exemple existant.
Rédigé par le modèle d'indexation à partir du texte de l'issue.
Évaluation
- Stack technique
- javascript, linux, node.js
- Domaine
- documentation, operating-systems
- Type d'issue
- Documentation
- Difficulté
- 2/5
- Temps estimé
- 1-3 heures
- Activité
- Active
- Clarté
- Plutôt claire
- Accessibilité débutants
- 68/100