[arch-dev-public] [RFC] The path to lua 5.2

[Stéphane Gaudreault]

Le 2012-09-18 17:54, Sébastien Luttringer a écrit :
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Sébastien Luttringer <seblu at seblu.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Stéphane Gaudreault
>> <stephane at archlinux.org> wrote:
>>> Le 2012-09-13 16:19, Sébastien Luttringer a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> Version 5.2 of lua is out since December 2011 [1] and last update
>>>> since June 2012.
>>>>
>>>> I suggest[2] to update our current lua package to 5.2.1 and introduce
>>>> a new package lua51.
>>>> As we need to rebuild and update dependencies of some packages, we can
>>>> benefits to adopt a clean naming (like for python) for lua libraries
>>>> like
>>>> - lua-lfs for lua 5.2 version, where "lfs" is the name in the lua require.
>>>> - lua51-lfs for 5.1 version.
>>>> for current package lua-filesystem.
>>>>
>>>> Example:
>>>> pkgbase=luafilsystem
>>>> pkgname=(lua-lfs lua-lfs51)
>>>>
>>>> The goal is to drop lua51* package once all package will only needs lua
>>>> 5.2.
>>>>
>>>> I currently have a lua (v5.2.1) and lua51 (v5.1.5) packages on my
>>>> computer which works correctly.
>>>>
>>>> The following packages are out of my hands:
>>>> seblu at brynhild ~ $ for i in extra testing; do sogrep $i lua.so; done
>>>> celestia
>>>> gnuplot
>>>> graphviz
>>>> gvim
>>>> lighttpd
>>>> nmap
>>>> pdns-recursor
>>>> rrdtool
>>>> vlc
>>>> weechat
>>>> wireshark-cli
>>>>
>>>> seblu at brynhild ~ $ for i in community community-testing ; do sogrep $i
>>>> lua.so; done
>>>> awesome
>>>> btanks
>>>> cegui
>>>> edje-svn
>>>> electricsheep
>>>> elinks
>>>> fillets-ng
>>>> geany-plugins
>>>> grafx2
>>>> hedgewars
>>>> highlight
>>>> highlight-gui
>>>> libquvi
>>>> luabind
>>>> lua-zlib
>>>> megaglest
>>>> notion
>>>> stone-soup
>>>> task
>>>> widelands
>>>> xmoto
>>>> widelands
>>>>
>>>> As there is not so many packages to update in community, I can do it
>>>> myself. I need some helps for those in extra/core.
>>>>
>>>> Comments? Objections?
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://www.lua.org/versions.html#5.2
>>>> [2] I'm not a lua expert, I use it only with awesome, so please tell
>>>> me if you see something bad.
>>>>
>>> Before looking at the package names, I would like  to see the list of
>>> packages that are not compatible (no patch available). For packages in this
>>> list, it could be interesting to look if upstream devs are still active and
>>> if they have plans to move to 5.2. If not, we could simply drop them or
>>> rebuild them without lua support when possible.
>> I started to build a list for lua library which are compatible to lua5.2:
Great !
>> - luaposix
>> - luabitop
>> - lua-zlib
>> - luaexpat
>> - luajit
>> - luasql (luasql-mysql)
>>
>> Otherwise:
>> - luabind (no yet)
I think that support for lua 5.2 were included in the Luabind repository:
See https://github.com/luabind/luabind/commits/0.9
>> - lualogging (no yet)
>> - luakit (no yet)
>> - luafilesystem [1]
>> - luasocket [2]
>> - luasec (no yet)
>> - luarocks (in progress [3])
>>
>> It's a bit longer for all packages and I will need help from maintainer.
>>
>> Do you think using the name of the library in filesystem instead of
>> project name is a good idea? e.g: lua-lfs instead of lua-filesystem.
I would vote to use the project name. If I found a project that provide 
something that could be useful in my code on the web and want to know if 
there is a corresponding package in Arch it is natural to search for the 
project name.
>> [1] https://github.com/keplerproject/luafilesystem/commit/f634765b26c52d03aceed88c2130130ab43f6fa9
>> [2] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12040601/is-there-a-lua-socket-library-compatibile-with-lua-5-2-1
>> [3] https://github.com/keplerproject/luarocks/commit/37aded056fae788088855b36281b1d23b0131fdb
> Here is an updated list of packages which need to be bumped. Built
> from 3 search.
> - expac -S %N lua|tr " " "\n"|grep -v ^$
> - pkgfile -isd /usr/lib/lua/|cut -f 2 -d /
> - for i in core extra testing community community-testing ; do sogrep
> $i lua.so; done
>
> http://pastebin.com/3siLkB34
>
> It's about 50 packages.
>
Just to make sure, are all those packages not listed in your previous 
mail compatible with 5.2 ?

Cheers,

Stéphane