Sorry for delayed reply, I've been travelling. On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 14:44, Eli Schwartz via aur-general <aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
The luarocks github repository has references to CFLAGS, so it seems to support that already. It does *not* have references to LDFLAGS or CPPFLAGS, not sure what to think of that... it's possible to export CFLAGS="$CPPFLAGS $CFLAGS $LDFLAGS" before building I guess?
It does have LIBFLAG which I believe should be contain LDFLAGS. See https://github.com/luarocks/luarocks/issues/429
3. We don't know why the argument on using pkg-config in LUA should be dismissed. [3]
This is relevant, I believe, given that daurnimator appears to be a member of both the lua and luarocks organizations on github, and presumably has some degree of influence.
Note that I am only a reviewer/maintainer for both orgs, I do not control any decision making processes. I can, of course, suggest things, but so can everyone else!
And I do sort of think that pushing things like this to upstream attention is kind of important from a packaging perspective. If I were a lua user rather than an idle bystander who happened to notice something odd being discussed, I would definitely be aggressively advocating for this upstream.
Lua has a very diverse set of users, including those that - refuse to use anything more modern than C89 - are game developers - use windows - are using lua on a microcontroller - refuse to be in the same room as autotools - say that libtool is the only way to package libraries - refuse to be in the same room as libtool - are super performance sensitive Trying to solve packaging and ecosystem issues is very difficult in such an environment. By being a trusted user I hope that it adds substance behind some upstream reform, where the response has sometimes been "we will only change this if a majority of distros agree".
Considering the questions are relevant regarding the use of bare gcc lines (!) in PKGBUILDs a candidate may want to add to [community], I'd say it's especially important to answer them.
It's especially important to answer them given that the candidate's application stated "the primary goal of improving Arch's Lua packages", but so far we have not been told what that means and can only guess based on what others have observed of his PKGBUILDs.
Foxboron, you said your candidate reached out to some people people via email to discuss "the current state of our LUA packages where he wanted to help improve the situation". Was this discussed during that private email conversation?
Daurnimator, can you elaborate on your plans?
I don't have a full answer for this yet! It's not as if I intend to go in and change everything on the first day I'm a TU. Problems need to be proposed, existing solutions need to be investigated, and I'll try to come to agreement with other distro maintainers, as well as other arch TUs.