18 Sep
2012
18 Sep
'12
10:27 p.m.
Le 2012-09-18 17:54, Sébastien Luttringer a écrit : > On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Sébastien Luttringer <seblu@seblu.net> wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Stéphane Gaudreault >> <stephane@archlinux.org> wrote: >>> Le 2012-09-13 16:19, Sébastien Luttringer a écrit : >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Version 5.2 of lua is out since December 2011 [1] and last update >>>> since June 2012. >>>> >>>> I suggest[2] to update our current lua package to 5.2.1 and introduce >>>> a new package lua51. >>>> As we need to rebuild and update dependencies of some packages, we can >>>> benefits to adopt a clean naming (like for python) for lua libraries >>>> like >>>> - lua-lfs for lua 5.2 version, where "lfs" is the name in the lua require. >>>> - lua51-lfs for 5.1 version. >>>> for current package lua-filesystem. >>>> >>>> Example: >>>> pkgbase=luafilsystem >>>> pkgname=(lua-lfs lua-lfs51) >>>> >>>> The goal is to drop lua51* package once all package will only needs lua >>>> 5.2. >>>> >>>> I currently have a lua (v5.2.1) and lua51 (v5.1.5) packages on my >>>> computer which works correctly. >>>> >>>> The following packages are out of my hands: >>>> seblu@brynhild ~ $ for i in extra testing; do sogrep $i lua.so; done >>>> celestia >>>> gnuplot >>>> graphviz >>>> gvim >>>> lighttpd >>>> nmap >>>> pdns-recursor >>>> rrdtool >>>> vlc >>>> weechat >>>> wireshark-cli >>>> >>>> seblu@brynhild ~ $ for i in community community-testing ; do sogrep $i >>>> lua.so; done >>>> awesome >>>> btanks >>>> cegui >>>> edje-svn >>>> electricsheep >>>> elinks >>>> fillets-ng >>>> geany-plugins >>>> grafx2 >>>> hedgewars >>>> highlight >>>> highlight-gui >>>> libquvi >>>> luabind >>>> lua-zlib >>>> megaglest >>>> notion >>>> stone-soup >>>> task >>>> widelands >>>> xmoto >>>> widelands >>>> >>>> As there is not so many packages to update in community, I can do it >>>> myself. I need some helps for those in extra/core. >>>> >>>> Comments? Objections? >>>> >>>> [1] http://www.lua.org/versions.html#5.2 >>>> [2] I'm not a lua expert, I use it only with awesome, so please tell >>>> me if you see something bad. >>>> >>> Before looking at the package names, I would like to see the list of >>> packages that are not compatible (no patch available). For packages in this >>> list, it could be interesting to look if upstream devs are still active and >>> if they have plans to move to 5.2. If not, we could simply drop them or >>> rebuild them without lua support when possible. >> I started to build a list for lua library which are compatible to lua5.2: Great ! >> - luaposix >> - luabitop >> - lua-zlib >> - luaexpat >> - luajit >> - luasql (luasql-mysql) >> >> Otherwise: >> - luabind (no yet) I think that support for lua 5.2 were included in the Luabind repository: See https://github.com/luabind/luabind/commits/0.9 >> - lualogging (no yet) >> - luakit (no yet) >> - luafilesystem [1] >> - luasocket [2] >> - luasec (no yet) >> - luarocks (in progress [3]) >> >> It's a bit longer for all packages and I will need help from maintainer. >> >> Do you think using the name of the library in filesystem instead of >> project name is a good idea? e.g: lua-lfs instead of lua-filesystem. I would vote to use the project name. If I found a project that provide something that could be useful in my code on the web and want to know if there is a corresponding package in Arch it is natural to search for the project name. >> [1] https://github.com/keplerproject/luafilesystem/commit/f634765b26c52d03aceed88c2130130ab43f6fa9 >> [2] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12040601/is-there-a-lua-socket-library-compatibile-with-lua-5-2-1 >> [3] https://github.com/keplerproject/luarocks/commit/37aded056fae788088855b36281b1d23b0131fdb > Here is an updated list of packages which need to be bumped. Built > from 3 search. > - expac -S %N lua|tr " " "\n"|grep -v ^$ > - pkgfile -isd /usr/lib/lua/|cut -f 2 -d / > - for i in core extra testing community community-testing ; do sogrep > $i lua.so; done > > http://pastebin.com/3siLkB34 > > It's about 50 packages. > Just to make sure, are all those packages not listed in your previous mail compatible with 5.2 ? Cheers, Stéphane