Open yunwei37 opened 2 months ago
Do you mean to build frida from source?
Yes. Using https://github.com/frida/frida-gum
Yes. Using https://github.com/frida/frida-gum
Building frida is very complex and slow, it requires many dependencies (such as meson) and can't be integrated into CMake, It also takes about 10 minutes on my machine(E5 2697v2 *2) to build. I suggest not doing such thing, since frida releases pre built binaries
You can try open a github codespace and type make
to compile the frida-gum? It taake about 30s-1min to compile on Github Codespace. The codespace's hardware is very limited.
I think it's not a complex process to compile it. Maybe you have some network issues?
You can try open a github codespace and type
make
to compile the frida-gum? It taake about 30s-1min to compile on Github Codespace. The codespace's hardware is very limited.I think it's not a complex process to compile it. Maybe you have some network issues?
I still suggest using prebuilt binaries since frida released them, I suggest using source only when there is not binary release. Since building from source may slow down the compile process.
Also, is there any dependency needs to be installed manually when building frida? From the CI of frida, seems meson should be installed
I agree with you. Maybe using frida as a binray would be better.
For the performance problem, I think maybe we can have our own release by building frida ourselves in another repo?
I agree with you. Maybe using frida as a binray would be better.
For the performance problem, I think maybe we can have our own release by building frida ourselves in another repo?
We may create a fork and let CI release them if we made some changes to frida
Agree that.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
We have get some bug report and performance issues related to Frida, it would be better to manage it as a submodule instead of download binary from the release.
191 #137
Describe the solution you'd like
Use Frida as submodule in third_party dir.