Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

test: changed assert.equal() to assert.strictEqual() #10015

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

zina-olson
Copy link
Contributor

Checklist
  • make -j8 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test nosign (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

test

Description of change

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the test Issues and PRs related to the tests. label Dec 1, 2016
@imyller imyller added the code-and-learn Issues related to the Code-and-Learn events and PRs submitted during the events. label Dec 1, 2016
@mscdex mscdex added the child_process Issues and PRs related to the child_process subsystem. label Dec 1, 2016
@mscdex
Copy link
Contributor

mscdex commented Dec 1, 2016

Please see the commit message guidelines here.

Copy link
Contributor

@cjihrig cjihrig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code change LGTM

@addaleax
Copy link
Member

addaleax commented Dec 8, 2016

Landed in e6a0c39 (with commit message fixed up), thanks for the contribution!

@addaleax addaleax closed this Dec 8, 2016
addaleax pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2016
PR-URL: #10015
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
addaleax pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2016
PR-URL: #10015
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
addaleax pushed a commit to addaleax/node that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2016
PR-URL: nodejs#10015
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
@italoacasas italoacasas mentioned this pull request Dec 15, 2016
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 20, 2016
PR-URL: #10015
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2016
PR-URL: #10015
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2016
PR-URL: #10015
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
This was referenced Dec 21, 2016
AdamMajer added a commit to AdamMajer/node that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2020
OpenSSL 1.1.1d does not ship with getrandom syscall being
predefined on all architectures. So when NodeJS is run with glibc
prior to 2.25, where getentropy is unavailable, and the getrandom
syscall is unknown, it will fail. PPC64LE or s390 are affected
by lack of this definition.

Original commit message.

    commit 4dcb150ea30f9bbfa7946e6b39c30a86aca5ed02
    Author: Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>
    Date:   Sat Sep 28 14:59:32 2019 +0200

      Add defines for __NR_getrandom for all Linux architectures

      Fixes: nodejs#10015

      Reviewed-by: Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de>
      GH: nodejs#10044

Fixes: nodejs#31671
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
child_process Issues and PRs related to the child_process subsystem. code-and-learn Issues related to the Code-and-Learn events and PRs submitted during the events. test Issues and PRs related to the tests.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants