fix: pick up the correct file argument when forking a process

[robertsLando]

This enables you to fork a process with run time arguments, for instance --max_old_space_size=1024.

This is an old fix by @bergheim. Never submitted a PR for it

Fixes #459 Fixes #1461

[bergheim]

Awesome! I really thought I had submitted this and that it was just ignored.

I am still using it, and I believe I have rebased a bit etc because I am on master. Must not have updated github. Will have a look over the new year and update this.

[robertsLando]

@bergheim Yeah please fix merge conflicts so we can merge this :)

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull-request is stale because it has been open 90 days with no activity. Remove the stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. To ignore this pull-request entirely you can add the no-stale label

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull-request is now closed due to inactivity, you can of course reopen or reference this pull-request if you see fit.

[robertsLando]

cc @jesec

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull-request is stale because it has been open 90 days with no activity. Remove the stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. To ignore this pull-request entirely you can add the no-stale label

[jesec]

Tests are failing.

[bergheim]

Hello,

I tried to add this as a PR but that was already here (I now remember), so I guess we can just keep it here. Tests pass, and it works fine for me with various mem settings and forking, but I suspect something is still off with this old code.

I wrote some tests. However getting runtime options into https://github.com/bergheim/pkg/blob/fa0b1a478bbf618a0ca23a6028249bfffa572e8f/test/utils.js#L120 was a bit tricky given the time I had. I want to pass execArgv to utils.pkg.sync. But I am unable to get anything into the left args in the test. Any pointers?

Thanks.

[robertsLando]

Sorry I dunno how to help here, maybe @jesec?

[bergheim]

Any feedback on this @jesec @robertsLando or others?

[robertsLando]

Looks good to me overall. Would like to also have @jesec opinion.

Could you add a test too?

[robertsLando]

@jesec Ping

[faroceann]

looks like @jesec hasn't been active in this repo @robertsLando, is there any other way forward for this PR to be merged?

[robertsLando]

@faroceann Unfortunately I haven't the privileges to do so much, I could merge this but I wouldn't be able to create releases. I will try to ping @jesec via PM but I know he has been very full in last months

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull-request is stale because it has been open 90 days with no activity. Remove the stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. To ignore this pull-request entirely you can add the no-stale label

[robertsLando]

@baparham Also may have sense to merge this too before next release

[baparham]

I guess the todo's left here are:

• [ ] Rebase against latest main, resolve any conflicts
• [ ] add a test (how? seems difficult considering @bergheim previous comments)

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull-request is stale because it has been open 90 days with no activity. Remove the stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. To ignore this pull-request entirely you can add the no-stale label

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull-request is now closed due to inactivity, you can of course reopen or reference this pull-request if you see fit.

[jromero-pg]

This just affected us as well. Could we re-open this PR and the associated issue https://github.com/vercel/pkg/issues/459?

[jromero-pg]

@leerob do you know who can provide some feedback on this PR and/or get it merged?

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull-request is stale because it has been open 90 days with no activity. Remove the stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. To ignore this pull-request entirely you can add the no-stale label

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull-request is now closed due to inactivity, you can of course reopen or reference this pull-request if you see fit.