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, and I use MacPorts). -hadriel On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:34 AM, Hadriel Kaplan <hadriel.kap...@oracle.com> wrote: > > 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, 2014, at 11:25 AM, Pascal Quantin <pascal.quan...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> 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 > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > 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
___________________________________________________________________________ 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
