On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 07:03:36PM -0400, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
On Apr 2, 2014, at 6:07 PM, Jeff Morriss jeff.morriss...@gmail.com wrote:
In that case I'd vote no: Redhat EL 6 comes with 5.1.4 and it probably
has a long lifetime ahead of it.
How hard/painful would it be to install
On 03/31/14 18:18, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
On Mar 31, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Jeff Morriss jeff.morriss...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you mean Wireshark would no longer compile/run if the Lua version was 5.2?
Yes, that would be the ultimate goal. That way someone writing a Lua script
and wants to share
On Apr 2, 2014, at 6:07 PM, Jeff Morriss jeff.morriss...@gmail.com wrote:
In that case I'd vote no: Redhat EL 6 comes with 5.1.4 and it probably has
a long lifetime ahead of it.
How hard/painful would it be to install Lua 5.2.x? (I don't know the answer
- just asking)
It's a tiny little
On 03/28/14 10:29, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
Howdy,
Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2?
Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1.
There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should
continue to work)... but for the
On 3/28/14 8:42 AM, Pascal Quantin wrote:
2014-03-28 16:34 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com
mailto:hadriel.kap...@oracle.com:
The bugs are listed here:
http://www.lua.org/bugs.html
5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out
On Mar 31, 2014, at 2:55 PM, Gerald Combs ger...@wireshark.org wrote:
Yes exactly. Right now our binaries seem to come from
http://luabinaries.sourceforge.net/download.html (Gerald will confirm).
That's correct. The Lua development teams is one of the few that provide
Windows libraries
On Mar 31, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Jeff Morriss jeff.morriss...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you mean Wireshark would no longer compile/run if the Lua version was
5.2?
Yes, that would be the ultimate goal. That way someone writing a Lua script
and wants to share it with others doesn't have to worry
2014-03-28 20:32 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com:
On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:42 AM, Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com
wrote:
2014-03-28 16:34 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com:
The bugs are listed here:
http://www.lua.org/bugs.html
5.2.3 was only
Howdy,
Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2?
Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1.
There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older scripts should
continue to work)... but for the C-code it's a lot more painful to have to
If 5.2 has been out for three years at this point it sounds fine to me.
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Hadriel Kaplan
hadriel.kap...@oracle.com wrote:
Howdy,
Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua 5.2?
Right now the automated builds are getting built with
2014-03-28 16:02 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey bal...@balintreczey.hu:
+1
The Debian packages use Lua since 1.10.2-2 without any problem.
Cheers,
Balint
2014-03-28 15:45 GMT+01:00 Nakayama Kenjiro nakayamakenj...@gmail.com:
+1
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan
2014-03-28 16:34 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com:
The bugs are listed here:
http://www.lua.org/bugs.html
5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since
2012.
What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3
one? Do you
The bugs are listed here:
http://www.lua.org/bugs.html
5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012.
What do you mean by we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows but not a 5.2.3 one?
Do you mean from some pre-built binary repository somewhere?
-hadriel
On Mar 28,
BTW, to answer your question directly, no I don't think it's a big deal if you
only run 5.2.1. The bugs fixed in 5.2.2 were pretty esoteric, and even more so
those fixed in 5.2.3.
FWIW, I use Lua 5.2.1 on my Mac all the time (because MacPorts hasn't updated
their Lua installer to 5.2.3 yet,
+1
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan
hadriel.kap...@oracle.comwrote:
Howdy,
Is there any reason not to make wireshark 1.11.x and beyond only use Lua
5.2? Right now the automated builds are getting built with 5.1.
There's very little difference to end users (i.e., older
+1
The Debian packages use Lua since 1.10.2-2 without any problem.
Cheers,
Balint
2014-03-28 15:45 GMT+01:00 Nakayama Kenjiro nakayamakenj...@gmail.com:
+1
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com
wrote:
Howdy,
Is there any reason not to make wireshark
On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:42 AM, Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-03-28 16:34 GMT+01:00 Hadriel Kaplan hadriel.kap...@oracle.com:
The bugs are listed here:
http://www.lua.org/bugs.html
5.2.3 was only released this past December, but 5.2.2 has been out since 2012.
What
17 matches
Mail list logo
