HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
moxystudio
node-cross-spawn
JavaScript2020–2021
moxystudio / node-cross-spawn

node-cross-spawn

A cross platform solution to node's spawn and spawnSync

2Distinct people
2Mentions
1Explicit recommenders
1.2KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

A cross platform solution to node's spawn and spawnSync

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

For those who have been living under a rock in the past few years, relying on a maze of dependencies has led to issues before: * The event stream incident…

rzwitserloot used a recommendation phrase. One indexed comment matches. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 11:23:53 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by month2 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2020-03-04 14:44:29 UTC to 2021-11-17 01:16:06 UTC.

012020-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsMar 20202020-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsJan 20212021-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsNov 2021

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Mar 20202020-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-04-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Apr 20202020-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 20202020-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 20202020-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-07-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 20202020-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 20202020-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-09-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 20202020-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-10-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 20202020-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20202020-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-12-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 20202020-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-02-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 20212021-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-03-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 20212021-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-04-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 20212021-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 20212021-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 20212021-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-07-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 20212021-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 20212021-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-09-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 20212021-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-10-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 20212021-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20212021-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-12-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

1 sources
rzwitserloot·Mar 4, 2020Recommendation phrase
For those who have been living under a rock in the past few years, relying on a maze of dependencies has led to issues before: * The event stream incident (https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/11/26/npm_repo_bitcoin_st...), where are a very popular npm repo was maintained by someone who didn't want to do it anymore and handed the keys to the package (both on github and npm) to the first person who mailed with an offer to take over. That person proceeded to put in some bitcoin wallet stealing code. In a very creative way - if you haven't heard of it, I recommend reading a little more, it's an interesting story. * The leftPad debacle (https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/23/npm_left_pad_chaos/), where a one-liner repo was removed from npm by its author, breaking almost all node.js projects. The solution feels... insufficient (you can now no
Read the rest
longer just delete your project). * This pull request to remove a one-liner dep: (https://github.com/moxystudio/node-cross-spawn/pull/102) shows exactly what happens when you try to fix such problems by removing one-liner deps. There's a fundamental misalignment at work here: An open source maintainer thinks (and probably rightly so), that they don't owe you a thing, if they prefer keeping a one-liner dep, that's their prerogative, and it's not their job to ensure their library is secure. If it is easier for you (the user of a library) to ascertain safety if the one-liner dep is removed, that's nice but the maintainer of the library doesn't care about that. And at the same time, users of open source libraries, possibly buoyed by statements such as Linus's Law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus%27s_law): "given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow" generally do think they can rely on the maintainer for security. Which one is it? We can't have it both ways. You'd think in a language where monkey patching is somewhat common, such concerns would be _more_ important, and yet it is npm where the community as a whole is by far the most extremist in the sense of adopting dependencies, compared to other ecosystems such as java (mavencentral) or ruby (rubygems).
In Tracking down my strange program killer

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.