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

npm throws exception (node.js 10.16.0) #938

Closed
uu123 opened this issue Jul 12, 2019 · 10 comments
Closed

npm throws exception (node.js 10.16.0) #938

uu123 opened this issue Jul 12, 2019 · 10 comments

Comments

@uu123
Copy link

uu123 commented Jul 12, 2019

Describe the bug

in ssh terminal npm -v throws exception
internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:638
throw err;
^

Error: Cannot find module '../lib/utils/unsupported.js'
at Function.Module._resolveFilename (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:636:15)
at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:562:25)
at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:690:17)
at require (internal/modules/cjs/helpers.js:25:18)
at /usr/bin/npm:19:21
at Object. (/usr/bin/npm:152:3)
at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:776:30)
at Object.Module._extensions..js (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:787:10)
at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:653:32)
at tryModuleLoad (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:593:12)

Expected:
6.9.0

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  1. Create debian filesystem & ssh session
  2. start ssh session
  3. sudo apt install -y curl
  4. sudo curl -sL https://deb.nodesource.com/setup_10.x | sudo bash -
  5. sudo apt-get install -y nodejs
  6. nodejs -v
    output:
    v10.16.0
  7. npm -v
    output:
    internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:638
    throw err;
    ^

Error: Cannot find module '../lib/utils/unsupported.js'
at Function.Module._resolveFilename (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:636:15)
at Function.Module._load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:562:25)
at Module.require (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:690:17)
at require (internal/modules/cjs/helpers.js:25:18)
at /usr/bin/npm:19:21
at Object. (/usr/bin/npm:152:3)
at Module._compile (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:776:30)
at Object.Module._extensions..js (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:787:10)
at Module.load (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:653:32)
at tryModuleLoad (internal/modules/cjs/loader.js:593:12)

Expected:
6.9.0

Screenshots

N/A

Device Information

Device: Galaxy S8
Android Version: P, 9
UserLAnd Version: 2.5.14-beta-335541
Whether the device is rooted: NO
Whether the device is running LineageOS: NO

@uu123
Copy link
Author

uu123 commented Jul 16, 2019

the same problem with nvm. Should I open separate bug for it?

@MatthewTighe
Copy link
Collaborator

MatthewTighe commented Jul 16, 2019

No, we can address both in this issue.

@maxbl4
Copy link

maxbl4 commented Nov 16, 2019

Are there any updates on this?
With help of nvm i checked versions of node from 8 to 13. All versions above 8 have this same error in userland debian.
Node 8 works, but it is too old for real usage

@danielhodder
Copy link

The same occurs when using nvm to manage versions of node. As a side-node, which almost looks related, using the arm64 builds of VS-code (https://github.com/headmelted/codebuilds/) also results in a similar load error. It seems like the relative load which was introduced in these later versions of Node isn't working right. Maybe there's a problem in now the working directory is calculated, or maybe there's an error with the loadpath?

@danielhodder
Copy link

I've done some digging and this appears to be the same root cause as libuv/libuv#2282. NodeJS 10.16 added support for the statx system call (nodejs/node#26707). As of that time NodeJS has not been able to work correctly in UserLAnd. It seems like the proot wrapper, or the seccomp filter in UserLAnd is not correctly returning ENOSYS when trying to invoke the statx system call.

@danielhodder
Copy link

Further digging seems to indicate that the cause is proot. The proot binary is swallowing the SIGSYS that seccomp is throwing from trying to invoke this system call. However, looking at the code in https://github.com/termux/proot I'm at a loss to explain that. It seems that if there is a SIGSYS then we should fall through to setting the return value to -ENOSYS which should result in the expected code. (https://github.com/termux/proot/blob/master/src/tracee/seccomp.c#L382-L385)

danielhodder added a commit to danielhodder/proot that referenced this issue Jan 3, 2020
When extensions handle system calls they set the system call ID to 0
(PR_void). This is the same as what happens if a system call isn't
understood by proot. On Android unknown system calls result in a SECCOMP
failure (sending SIGSYS), rather than returning ENOSYS.

This changes the behavour of SIGSYS handing to check if the call was
handled by an extension. If the call was handled by an extention the
call should return 0, since it has been handled outside that context. If
it wasn't handled then we should return ENOSYS. This is because either
that system call doesn't exist, or we aren't allowed to call it. Either
way, since the point of proot is to adapt seccomp to other applications,
we should return ENOSYS because as far as the system is concerned that
system call doesn't exist.

Major props to nhinds for writing a bunch of go programs to help narrow
this down to the the SECCOMP filter and the handing of the SISSYS
signal.

This fixes headmelted/codebuilds#97 and CypherpunkArmory/UserLAnd#938
danielhodder added a commit to danielhodder/proot that referenced this issue Jan 3, 2020
When extensions handle system calls they set the system call ID to 0
(PR_void). This is the same as what happens if a system call isn't
understood by proot. On Android unknown system calls result in a SECCOMP
failure (sending SIGSYS), rather than returning ENOSYS.

This changes the behavour of SIGSYS handing to check if the call was
handled by an extension. If the call was handled by an extention the
call should return 0, since it has been handled outside that context. If
it wasn't handled then we should return ENOSYS. This is because either
that system call doesn't exist, or we aren't allowed to call it. Either
way, since the point of proot is to adapt seccomp to other applications,
we should return ENOSYS because as far as the system is concerned that
system call doesn't exist.

Major props to nhinds for writing a bunch of go programs to help narrow
this down to the the SECCOMP filter and the handing of the SISSYS
signal.

This fixes headmelted/codebuilds#97 and CypherpunkArmory/UserLAnd#938
corbinlc pushed a commit to CypherpunkArmory/proot that referenced this issue Apr 27, 2020
When extensions handle system calls they set the system call ID to 0
(PR_void). This is the same as what happens if a system call isn't
understood by proot. On Android unknown system calls result in a SECCOMP
failure (sending SIGSYS), rather than returning ENOSYS.

This changes the behavour of SIGSYS handing to check if the call was
handled by an extension. If the call was handled by an extention the
call should return 0, since it has been handled outside that context. If
it wasn't handled then we should return ENOSYS. This is because either
that system call doesn't exist, or we aren't allowed to call it. Either
way, since the point of proot is to adapt seccomp to other applications,
we should return ENOSYS because as far as the system is concerned that
system call doesn't exist.

Major props to nhinds for writing a bunch of go programs to help narrow
this down to the the SECCOMP filter and the handing of the SISSYS
signal.

This fixes headmelted/codebuilds#97 and CypherpunkArmory/UserLAnd#938
@rohitranjan1991
Copy link

any solution to it yet ??

@danielhodder
Copy link

danielhodder commented May 4, 2020

The issue in proot has been merged so I'm hopeful we'll get a new build once the author has time. They noted they could only work on this in their spare time so hopefully they have time soon.

@corbinlc
Copy link
Member

corbinlc commented May 4, 2020

It is in version 2.7.1.

@rohitranjan1991
Copy link

I can confirm that i am able to install Node js using nvm. Thanks a lot :-)

@corbinlc corbinlc closed this as completed May 5, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants