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 < > 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 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 > >> continue to handle both Lua versions, and it takes longer to test, fix, > etc. > >> There's no real advantage to supporting both at this point, afaik. > There > >> was back when Lua 5.2 was new and buggy, but 5.2 has been out since > 2011. > >> > >> -hadriel >
Is 5.2.3 a must have? Right now we have a 5.2.1 library for Windows (I'm trying to build with it as we speak) but not a 5.2.3 one. Pascal.
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
