Re: lua ports: versions/flavors handling

2016-10-31 Thread Jeremie Courreges-Anglas
Jeremie Courreges-Anglas writes: > j...@wxcvbn.org (Jeremie Courreges-Anglas) writes: > >> Some time ago I took a look at hooking lua53 flavors in the ports that >> support it. It turned out that some ports were already broken with >> particular versions of lua (the most common

Re: lua ports: versions/flavors handling

2016-10-17 Thread Jeremie Courreges-Anglas
j...@wxcvbn.org (Jeremie Courreges-Anglas) writes: > Some time ago I took a look at hooking lua53 flavors in the ports that > support it. It turned out that some ports were already broken with > particular versions of lua (the most common errors are missing functions > at dlopen time, and

Re: lualdoc & awesome (was: Re: lua ports: versions/flavors handling)

2016-10-17 Thread David Coppa
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 7:51 PM, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > > The switch to explicit FLAVORS is almost complete, there are two > remaining ports, luaposix and lualdoc. > > lualdoc is packaged as a library that supports flavors, but afaik it is > a standalone tool. Debian

lualdoc & awesome (was: Re: lua ports: versions/flavors handling)

2016-10-17 Thread Jeremie Courreges-Anglas
The switch to explicit FLAVORS is almost complete, there are two remaining ports, luaposix and lualdoc. lualdoc is packaged as a library that supports flavors, but afaik it is a standalone tool. Debian for example packages it as "lua-ldoc", not "lua5.1-ldoc". Here's a diff to switch it to a

Re: lua ports: versions/flavors handling

2016-10-13 Thread Florian Stinglmayr
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 05:42:00PM +0200, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > > Some time ago I took a look at hooking lua53 flavors in the ports that > support it. It turned out that some ports were already broken with > particular versions of lua (the most common errors are missing functions > at