pi nuke

@AlexandruDobrinescu isn't Sandy Bridge intel? why does your chroot architecture report amd64? @DennisLfromGA can confirm `xiwi` sometimes works when `xorg` does not: #4558

There's apparently a way to support this on test images already: https://chromedriver.chromium.org/getting-started/chromeos https://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/chromedriver/getting-started/chromeos

This code search may shed some light as to how it is built and added... https://source.chromium.org/chromiumos/chromiumos/codesearch/+/main:src/third_party/chromiumos-overlay/chromeos-base/chromeos-chrome/chromeos-chrome-105.0.5176.0_rc-r2.ebuild?q=chromedriver&ss=chromiumos%2Fchromiumos%2Fcodesearch So far it doesn't look like anything special is done to the ChromeDriver build...

Actually my prior edit to my above comment was seemingly wrong: It looks like ChromeDriver is built using the [chrome_make function from line 963](https://source.chromium.org/chromiumos/chromiumos/codesearch/+/main:src/third_party/chromiumos-overlay/chromeos-base/chromeos-chrome/chromeos-chrome-105.0.5176.0_rc-r2.ebuild;drc=d739fc1fb93c08a6f8cb1f34fa9c20c306395258;l=963) [The function call is on line...

Here is the eclass file: https://source.chromium.org/chromiumos/chromiumos/codesearch/+/main:src/third_party/chromiumos-overlay/eclass/chromium-source.eclass?q=ENINJA&ss=chromiumos%2Fchromiumos%2Fcodesearch All it does for chrome_make is define ENINJA, which is just the location of the ninja binary. So, I guess the only thing left...

This comment will be dedicated to breaking down the `chrome_make` call. - will add as I go - will add references to the code search for each section - [...

You could add it to your path in .bashrc file Here is an explanation for `$HOME` dir: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/36871/where-should-a-local-executable-be-placed

+1

+1 A simpler way to demonstrate the bug: ``` globbySync([ "file.ext" ], { gitignore:true }) //works globbySync([ "./file.ext" ], { gitignore:false }) //works globbySync([ "./file.ext" ], { gitignore:true }) //throws...

How definitive is this? Do you intend to completely rewrite the CLI/introduce "breaking changes" with this? I imagine that any changes you would make would have to be backwards compatible....