It was thus said that the Great Hisham once stated:
> On 4 March 2013 02:20, Choonster TheMage <choonster.2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm in the process of developing a library that has some slightly
> > complex dependencies. I want it to depend on Penlight (but ideally not
> > LuaFileSystem) and one of several compression libraries to be chosen
> > by the developer using the library (but ideally not all of them).
> >
> > Is there any way to represent these dependencies in a Rockspec, or is
> > it too complex for the system to handle? I'd like to have the library
> > available through LuaRocks when it's done, but it looks like I may
> > have to have users manually manage the dependencies.
>
> The current version of LuaRocks does not support that, unfortunately.
> One possible workaround is to have several rockspecs, for each variant
> (see the various flavors of lrexlib in
> http://luarocks.org/repositories/rocks/ for example).
As an idea, right now, the dependencies are all strings:
dependencies =
{
"lua ~> 5.1",
"lpeg",
"Lrexlib-POSIX >= 2.7.2"
}
How hard would it be if, when scanning that list, you come across a table,
any of the listed modules in the table satisfy the dependency?
dependencies =
{
"lua ~> 5.1",
"lpeg",
{
"Lrexlib-GNU >= 2.7.2",
"Lrexlib-oniguruma >= 2.7.2",
"Lrexlib-PCRE >= 2.7.2",
"Lrexlib-POSIX >= 2.7.2",
"Lrexlib-TRE >= 2.7.2"
}
}
-spc (Or could that get too confusing?)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb
_______________________________________________
Luarocks-developers mailing list
Luarocks-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luarocks-developers
