Re: lua ports: versions/flavors handling

[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 errors are missing functions
>> at dlopen time, and module() errors), yet they were hooked up.
>>
>> So it's not just about adding lua53 flavors, but about having
>> a consistent ports tree.  In the end, I think that lua.port.mk should
>> stop populating FLAVORS automatically, so that people hacking on lua
>> have to explicitely enable the lua versions they tested.  Just like for
>> python.port.mk.
>>
>> The diff to explicitely add FLAVORS / hook them up is not ripe yet,
>> but first I'd like to know if people object to the proposal above.
>
> afaik we can stop automatically adding FLAVORS in lua.port.mk; it would
> be nice if someone could put this in a bulk to confirm.

Committed, thanks Antoine for the bulk build test.

-- 
jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF  DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE

Re: lua ports: versions/flavors handling

[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 module() errors), yet they were hooked up.
>
> So it's not just about adding lua53 flavors, but about having
> a consistent ports tree.  In the end, I think that lua.port.mk should
> stop populating FLAVORS automatically, so that people hacking on lua
> have to explicitely enable the lua versions they tested.  Just like for
> python.port.mk.
>
> The diff to explicitely add FLAVORS / hook them up is not ripe yet,
> but first I'd like to know if people object to the proposal above.

afaik we can stop automatically adding FLAVORS in lua.port.mk; it would
be nice if someone could put this in a bulk to confirm.


Index: lua.port.mk
===
RCS file: /d/cvs/ports/lang/lua/lua.port.mk,v
retrieving revision 1.34
diff -u -p -p -u -r1.34 lua.port.mk
--- lua.port.mk 7 Jun 2016 11:51:52 -   1.34
+++ lua.port.mk 17 Oct 2016 13:34:49 -
@@ -10,18 +10,6 @@ CATEGORIES +=lang/lua
 # Define the default version and use that if MODLUA_VERSION is not set.
 MODLUA_DEFAULT_VERSION =   5.1
 
-# If a port already has flavors, append our lua flavors to it, unless it
-# requests specific versions of lua. Otherwise set the FLAVORS list to
-# just the lua flavors.
-_MODLUA_FLAVORS =  lua52 lua53
-.if !defined(MODLUA_VERSION)
-.  if !defined(FLAVORS)
-FLAVORS ?= ${_MODLUA_FLAVORS}
-.  elif !${FLAVORS:M${_MODLUA_FLAVORS}}
-FLAVORS += ${_MODLUA_FLAVORS}
-.  endif
-.endif
-
 FLAVOR ?=  # empty
 
 # without a flavor, assume ${MODLUA_DEFAULT_VERSION}

-- 
jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF  DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE

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

[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 for example packages it as "lua-ldoc", not
> "lua5.1-ldoc".
>
> Here's a diff to switch it to a standalone tool.  Since x11/awesome is
> its only consumer, I used MODLUA_VERSION = 5.2 so that people that build
> from source don't need to install two lua versions (well, that's
> cheap...).
>
> I added a @pkgpath so that people who have lua52ldoc installed can
> transparently upgrade, but should I also add bin/lua51 and bin/lua52
> symlinks?  I'd prefer not...
>
> Bonus: x11/awesome/patches loses weight.
>
> Thoughts?

Reads ok to me, but why have you removed doxygen too?

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

[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 standalone tool.  Since x11/awesome is
its only consumer, I used MODLUA_VERSION = 5.2 so that people that build
from source don't need to install two lua versions (well, that's
cheap...).

I added a @pkgpath so that people who have lua52ldoc installed can
transparently upgrade, but should I also add bin/lua51 and bin/lua52
symlinks?  I'd prefer not...

Bonus: x11/awesome/patches loses weight.

Thoughts?


Index: devel/Makefile
===
RCS file: /d/cvs/ports/devel/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.1551
diff -u -p -r1.1551 Makefile
--- devel/Makefile  16 Oct 2016 23:52:31 -  1.1551
+++ devel/Makefile  17 Oct 2016 17:25:36 -
@@ -434,7 +434,6 @@
  SUBDIR += luafs,lua52
  SUBDIR += luafs,lua53
  SUBDIR += lualdoc
- SUBDIR += lualdoc,lua52
  SUBDIR += luapack
  SUBDIR += luapack,lua52
  SUBDIR += luaposix
Index: devel/lualdoc/Makefile
===
RCS file: /d/cvs/ports/devel/lualdoc/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.16
diff -u -p -r1.16 Makefile
--- devel/lualdoc/Makefile  26 Aug 2016 07:51:49 -  1.16
+++ devel/lualdoc/Makefile  17 Oct 2016 17:29:17 -
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ GH_PROJECT =LDoc
 GH_TAGNAME =   1.4.5
 PKGNAME =  lualdoc-${GH_TAGNAME}
 CATEGORIES =   devel
+REVISION = 0
 
 HOMEPAGE = http://stevedonovan.github.io/ldoc/
 
@@ -18,9 +19,10 @@ PERMIT_PACKAGE_CDROM =Yes
 MODULES =  lang/lua
 
 MODLUA_RUN_DEPENDS =   devel/lua-penlight
+MODLUA_SA =Yes
+MODLUA_VERSION = 5.2
 
 NO_BUILD = Yes
-
 NO_TEST =  Yes
 
 do-install:
@@ -35,7 +37,6 @@ do-install:
${MODLUA_DATADIR}/ldoc/html/
${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/doc/*.md ${MODLUA_DOCDIR}
${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/readme.md ${MODLUA_DOCDIR}
-   ${SUBST_PROGRAM} \
-   ${WRKSRC}/ldoc.lua ${PREFIX}/bin/ldoc${MODLUA_DEP_VERSION}
+   ${SUBST_PROGRAM} ${WRKSRC}/ldoc.lua ${PREFIX}/bin/ldoc
 
 .include 
Index: devel/lualdoc/pkg/PLIST
===
RCS file: /d/cvs/ports/devel/lualdoc/pkg/PLIST,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -r1.4 PLIST
--- devel/lualdoc/pkg/PLIST 26 Aug 2016 07:51:49 -  1.4
+++ devel/lualdoc/pkg/PLIST 17 Oct 2016 17:23:15 -
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 @comment $OpenBSD: PLIST,v 1.4 2016/08/26 07:51:49 dcoppa Exp $
-bin/ldoc${MODLUA_DEP_VERSION}
+@pkgpath devel/lualdoc,lua52
+bin/ldoc
 share/doc/${FULLPKGNAME}/
 share/doc/${FULLPKGNAME}/doc.md
 share/doc/${FULLPKGNAME}/readme.md
Index: x11/awesome/Makefile
===
RCS file: /d/cvs/ports/x11/awesome/Makefile,v
retrieving revision 1.102
diff -u -p -r1.102 Makefile
--- x11/awesome/Makefile22 Aug 2016 13:45:09 -  1.102
+++ x11/awesome/Makefile17 Oct 2016 14:18:37 -
@@ -38,13 +38,12 @@ LIB_DEPENDS=devel/libexecinfo \
x11/dbus \
x11/libxdg-basedir
 
-MODLUA_BUILD_DEPENDS=  devel/lua-lgi \
-   devel/lualdoc
+MODLUA_BUILD_DEPENDS=  devel/lua-lgi
 
-BUILD_DEPENDS= textproc/asciidoc>=8.4.5 \
+BUILD_DEPENDS= devel/lualdoc \
+   textproc/asciidoc>=8.4.5 \
textproc/xmlto \
-   graphics/ImageMagick \
-   devel/doxygen
+   graphics/ImageMagick
 
 MODLUA_RUN_DEPENDS=devel/lua-lgi
 
Index: x11/awesome/patches/patch-awesomeConfig_cmake
===
RCS file: /d/cvs/ports/x11/awesome/patches/patch-awesomeConfig_cmake,v
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -p -r1.18 patch-awesomeConfig_cmake
--- x11/awesome/patches/patch-awesomeConfig_cmake   22 Aug 2016 13:45:09 
-  1.18
+++ x11/awesome/patches/patch-awesomeConfig_cmake   17 Oct 2016 17:27:57 
-
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 $OpenBSD: patch-awesomeConfig_cmake,v 1.18 2016/08/22 13:45:09 dcoppa Exp $
 --- awesomeConfig.cmake.orig   Sun Mar  6 15:05:54 2016
-+++ awesomeConfig.cmakeMon Aug 22 15:33:26 2016
 awesomeConfig.cmakeMon Oct 17 19:27:40 2016
 @@ -16,12 +16,11 @@ option(COMPRESS_MANPAGES "compress manpages" ON)
  option(GENERATE_DOC "generate API documentation" ON)
  
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ $OpenBSD: patch-awesomeConfig_cmake,v 1.
  # }}}
  
  # {{{ Endianness
-@@ -43,29 +42,21 @@ macro(a_find_program var prg req)
+@@ -43,11 +42,7 @@ macro(a_find_program var prg req)
  endif()
  endmacro()
  
@@ -31,17 +31,7 @@ $OpenBSD: patch-awesomeConfig_cmake,v 1.
  # programs needed for man pages
  

Re: lua ports: versions/flavors handling

[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 dlopen time, and module() errors), yet they were hooked up.
>

There are basically two use cases for Lua. One you have an app that
extends itself for scripting and usually specify one Lua version to
run at. Like HexChat that recommends lua52 or newer for their scripts.

And then you have the libraries. Those *should* support all Lua versions
but often neglect have them fail at the newer ones. If the library is
decent enough though, then there's usually a newer version somewhere
that fixes that issue, or the issues are trivially fixed. The Lua
maintainers provide very easy pointers on how to support all major
Lua versions.

> So it's not just about adding lua53 flavors, but about having
> a consistent ports tree.  In the end, I think that lua.port.mk should
> stop populating FLAVORS automatically, so that people hacking on lua
> have to explicitly enable the lua versions they tested.  Just like for
> python.port.mk.
>

It would certainly be the easiest solutions yes. And I am sure that
there are projects which are beyond hope. But I'd rather invest the
work and get the good ones to support all flavours, and cleanse the
rest.

> The diff to explicitly add FLAVORS / hook them up is not ripe yet,
> but first I'd like to know if people object to the proposal above.

Those are my €0.02

Regards,
Florian

lua ports: versions/flavors handling

[Jeremie Courreges-Anglas]

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 module() errors), yet they were hooked up.

So it's not just about adding lua53 flavors, but about having
a consistent ports tree.  In the end, I think that lua.port.mk should
stop populating FLAVORS automatically, so that people hacking on lua
have to explicitely enable the lua versions they tested.  Just like for
python.port.mk.

The diff to explicitely add FLAVORS / hook them up is not ripe yet,
but first I'd like to know if people object to the proposal above.

-- 
jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF  DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE