On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:51:49AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > > When I updated wireshark, I was surprised that they still don't support > lus-5.3. Upon investigation, they decided that 5.3 broke too many scripts > that users have. > > I found this note in tools/macos-setup.sh > > # Use 5.2.4, not 5.3, for now; lua_bitop.c hasn't been ported to 5.3 > # yet, and we need to check for compatibility issues (we'd want Lua > # scripts to work with 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3, as long as they only use Lua > # features present in all three versions) > > I also checked Arch and they also have lua52 in their system. > > I don't think lus52 will change much, if at all, so the maintenance burden > will be low. > > -- Bruce > Agreed it won't change: from https://www.lua.org/versions.html "There will be no further releases of Lua 5.2".
Googling about this (I saw comments on lua changes on tex list(s) the other day), it seems that one version deprecates things (e.g. 5.2 marks things as deprecated) and then the next (5.3 in that post about what was expected) removed them and does not list them in the incompatible changes. Details of the listed incompatibilities are at http://q-syshelp.qschome.com/Content/Control_Scripting/Lua_5.3_Reference_Manual/8_-_Incompatibilities_with_the_Previous_Version.htm The posts I saw on the tex list(s) seemed to particularly be about different results, or different output formats, for calculations which are the first two items in the incompatible changes. I'm glad that the only lua I build is the shipped version in texlive. ĸen -- It is said that there are two great unsolved problems in computer science: naming, cache invalidation, and off-by-one errors. -- Ben Bullock -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
