As a maintainer of node-gyp, depending on a specific version of node-gyp is something I advise against. You should normally use the one that's bundled with node+npm.

Thanks for the feedback @bnoordhuis, I'll probably not merge this then.

Any suggestions on #355? Or is it a situation we just can't handle in code, since it's caused by Ubunut/Debian distributing a non-official Node.js package?

#355 seems like a problem of debian or ubuntu's own making. If those distros tracked v8.x LTS like they should have, they'd be at a node-gyp version that's new enough (v5.0.5 vs v3.6.2.)

Closing in favor of #367

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build ceaaa9333cac9c4a46c36c0c8d4ef286e7086f1b-PR-357

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

We've detected an issue with your CI configuration that might affect the accuracy of this pull request's coverage report.
To ensure accuracy in future PRs, please see these guidelines.
A quick fix for this PR: rebase it; your next report should be accurate.

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• 215 unchanged lines in 13 files lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+3.8%) to 78.644%

Totals
Change from base Build 7b9598e9dad0a00e1b7ddd1aabd9cf7dddb3cab4:	3.8%
Covered Lines:	3715
Relevant Lines:	4711

💛 - Coveralls