add support for running as a directly node required module

[willscott]

Address #7

With this change to make alternate checks if freedom isn't around, you can run in node directly:

var PortControl = require('freedom-port-control');
var controller = new PortControl();
controller.probeProtocolSupport().then(function(result) {
  console.log(result);
});

---

This change is

[agallant]

If this works, it'd be good to get it in and cut a new release - been trying to get simple-socks and zork working in node and dug deep enough to hit this issue.

[kennysong]

Thanks for doing this, Will! In addition to the socket wrappers, I think the URL object and the XMLHttpRequest lines might also need to be modified to work in node.

[willscott]

it'll take me a bit to get back to this. I remember when i looked at this
in march i was able to run it with reasonable output, but don't have the
diversity of nat types to test against, so don't know if functionality is
complete at this point. What i remember is that with this change is can be
required and doesn't throw errors, so this might be an acceptable merge
with a subsequent ticket to clean up those behaviors.

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Kenny Song [email protected] wrote:

Thanks for doing this, Will! In addition to the socket wrappers, I think
the URL object
https://github.com/freedomjs/freedom-port-control/blob/willscott-node/src/upnp.js#L60
and the XMLHttpRequest
https://github.com/freedomjs/freedom-port-control/blob/willscott-node/src/upnp.js#L295
lines might also need to be modified to work in node.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#9 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AAaIp3oVXc6uA4z2ejZUvFaR1YFDyQ_xks5qIKYkgaJpZM4H3mve
.