Gar

I took a look and I think the fact that you had to add `name` to all those fixtures is a signal that this isn't quite right. Unless I'm mistaken...

Also as a side task I have made https://github.com/npm/run-script/issues/190 and assigned it to myself. We are obviously not done in the process of moving onto that consolidated module for all...

"that code" refers to all the code checking if what was returned was an empty object or not. That's immaterial when using `@npmcli/package-json`, either it returns a parsed package.json file...

This will need a test

Looks good other than that rogue `if` statement

I don't think this is a problem we should just if-statement around. If `node` doesn't have a package attribute either it's an underlying bug, or it's a node type we're...

Because this is not a bug I am going to close this issue. The rfc issue is probably the best place to add more input. Personally I'm a huge fan...

I think caching is the right balance of doing things correctly, but as fast as possible inside those parameters. We will not be string pattern matching the `ldd` bin. This...

Even if `excludeNetwork` made the call much faster this is still probably a good thing to cache since it's not expected to change inside a given runtime, and is called...

An alternative that would technically work and be correct but is probably not the right path for npm itself would be to use node_gyp and expose a direct call to...