On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Ildar Mulyukov <il...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > On 12.07.2012 00:48:53, Hisham wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Ildar Mulyukov >> > Q: Why the site_config.lua is put into /usr/share? This supposed to >> be >> > ARCH-independent dir. It can be safely moved to: >> > lib_modules_path.."/luarocks". Like mine: >> >> mkdir -p %buildroot%lua_modulesdir/%name >> >> #Arch-dependant parts >> >> mv %buildroot%lua_modulesdir_noarch/%name/\ >> >> site_config.lua \ >> >> %buildroot%lua_modulesdir/%name >> >> True. I'm just about to make a new release so this won't make it, but >> could you register an issue on this so it doesn't get buried in the >> mailing list? > > Sure! https://github.com/keplerproject/luarocks/issues/86 > BTW looking into LR code, I see package.path manipulations including > /usr/share/lua/5.1/?.lua but not /usr/lib/lua/5.1/?.lua . Be warned.
Oh, thanks for the warning. I was definitely going to miss that detail (I added only share to the bin/ scripts because that's all that LR itself used). A fix won't be in time for the new release (I'm uploading 2.0.10 right now, since it already took too long to get the fetch/git.lua fix out), but I'll look at this issue closely for the next one. -- Hisham http://hisham.hm/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list Luarocks-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luarocks-developers
