On 13 May 2016 at 12:35, Nagaev Boris <bnag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Philipp Janda <siffie...@gmx.net> wrote: >> Am 12.05.2016 um 22:09 schröbte Hisham: >>> >>> Waiting for your feedback, >>> Hisham >>> >>> Streamlining the rockspec format >>> ================================ >>> >>> if build.type is not given, assume builtin. >>> >>> If build.modules is not given: >> >> Having `build.modules` is actually rather nice, because you can infer >> which modules are part of a rock without downloading the source code. I >> think someone somewhere suggested a semi-automated check to ensure that >> there are no module naming conflicts. That option would be off the table ... >> Also, I think that listing the modules to be installed is one of the >> least complicated things when writing a rockspec. > > I would like a luarocks command which would fill "modules" part of > rockspec automatically.
`luarocks write-rockspec` already tries to do this. Try it: luarocks write-rockspec git://github.com/starius/lua-lru It does lots of heuristics to fill the other fields, but doesn't always get everything right. It's good for a first template, however. -- Hisham ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched! https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list Luarocks-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luarocks-developers
