On 11/03/2019 09:03, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: > On 11/03/2019 08:34, Douglas R. Reno wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019, 2:23 AM Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev >> <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> On 10/03/2019 22:22, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: >> > I've added the page: >> > >> > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/general/lua52.html >> > >> > to add in the older lua-5.2 package in support of wireshark as well as >> > potentially other programs. >> > >> > I request that others build this package and provide feedback to see >> if I >> > missed anything. It's a very short build -- less than 0.1 SBU, but >> getting >> > two versions of the same package installed properly is a bit tricky. >> > >> >> What's the interest of having lua (whatever version) in wireshark? As >> far as I >> know, lua bindings are not needed for proper operation of wireshark. >> They can >> add scripting support to Wireshark, for making complicated things, but it >> could be made optional in the book... >> >> Also, going back to an old version of a package, because a patch does not >> apply anymore to use a newer version might not be the best way to get the >> "latest and greatest"... >> >> Or maybe this is the other way around: we should check what needs lua in >> the >> book, and maybe remove the latest version... Or remove it completely, if >> it is >> optional. >> >> Pierre >> -- >> >> >> It has to do with the modules that packages such as Samba installed. Without >> Lua support, the module that Samba installs to allow CIFS traffic to be >> understood can't be used. >> > > Good to know, but maybe samba could use lua 5.2? Or maybe wireshark's patch > could be updated for new wireshark version? Or just wireshark could be built > without lua? In any case, it would be much better than having two versions of > the same package in the book...
Wrong answer, sorry: samba can use (optionally) wireshark's lua bindings... I thought samba was directly dependent on lua. > > We just have had an argument about maintenance ease recently, whether having > two different packages on the same page is more or less maintenance burden. > One thing I'm sure about is that having two versions of the same package in > the book is _much more_ a maintenance burden... > > Thinking more about it, I'd say that the least maintenance heavy path is to > remove lua support for wireshark... I don't think that anymore now, if wireshark can be used to analyse CIFS traffic (do I understand correctly now?): it's the aim of wireshark to analyse all sorts of traffic. But I still think it will be a maintenance burden... So there are 2 options left: - adapt the lua-5.3 patch for new wireshark version. - have only lua-5.2 in the book I've looked for packages dependent on lua. According to the (SysV) book: - highlight requires it (can it be lua-5.2?) - hexchat and vlc recommend it (same question) - it is optional for nano, ptlib, gegl, graphviz, wireshark, apache, dovecot, gtk-engines, keybinder. - libpeas is said to depend optionally on luajit. It looks like luajit is somehow independent on lua (same language, but completely different implementation). - totem-pl-parser is said to depend optionally on lua-socket--git. Don't know what it is. Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
