On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 11:23:37PM +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 4:34 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >> I'd rather avoid adding more of this until we figure out what to do
> >> about multiple Lua versions. The Lua5.1/5.2 split is still stuck
> >> nowhere, and luajit is yet ano
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 4:34 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>> I'd rather avoid adding more of this until we figure out what to do
>> about multiple Lua versions. The Lua5.1/5.2 split is still stuck
>> nowhere, and luajit is yet another variant to handle.
>
> If we don't do this, the only way to add lua
My personal opinion is that anything that reduces complexity or duplication
in the tree is a good thing.
At least if there's some kind of version spat, you only need to fix it in
one place (the eclass) instead of in individual ebuilds.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 7:34 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 04:15:42PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:05:57 -0500
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > there are currently 19 packages in the tree that have the luajit use
> > flag, and I am planning on adding 10 more.
> >
> > I think this use flag should b
On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:05:57 -0500
William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> there are currently 19 packages in the tree that have the luajit use
> flag, and I am planning on adding 10 more.
>
> I think this use flag should be global with the following description:
>
> "use the lua just-in-time compiler
All,
there are currently 19 packages in the tree that have the luajit use
flag, and I am planning on adding 10 more.
I think this use flag should be global with the following description:
"use the lua just-in-time compiler for lua support"
If there are no objections, I'll start the transition o
