| Message ID | 20200728062141.2969363-1-francois.perrad@gadz.org |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | package/prosody: fix dependency | expand |
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 08:21:40 +0200 Francois Perrad <fperrad@gmail.com> wrote: > LuaBitOp is not available with Lua 5.3 > > Signed-off-by: Francois Perrad <francois.perrad@gadz.org> > --- > package/prosody/Config.in | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/package/prosody/Config.in b/package/prosody/Config.in > index 4b7ea9425..bb3a5025f 100644 > --- a/package/prosody/Config.in > +++ b/package/prosody/Config.in > @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ config BR2_PACKAGE_PROSODY > depends on BR2_USE_MMU # fork > depends on BR2_PACKAGE_HAS_LUAINTERPRETER > depends on !BR2_STATIC_LIBS # luaexpat, luasec, luasocket, luafilesystem > - select BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP if !BR2_PACKAGE_LUAJIT # runtime > + select BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP if BR2_PACKAGE_LUA_5_1 # runtime The commit log is probably not very clear. Indeed, if LuaBitOp is not available with Lua 5.3, one would think you would need the external BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP when using something else than 5.1, i.e the opposite of what your change is doing. Shouldn't the commit log rather be: The luabitop functionality is available built-in in Lua 5.3 and LuaJIT, so only Lua 5.1 needs the additional external luabitop package. Could you confirm ? Thomas
Le mar. 28 juil. 2020 à 09:21, Thomas Petazzoni < thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> a écrit : > On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 08:21:40 +0200 > Francois Perrad <fperrad@gmail.com> wrote: > > > LuaBitOp is not available with Lua 5.3 > > > > Signed-off-by: Francois Perrad <francois.perrad@gadz.org> > > --- > > package/prosody/Config.in | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/package/prosody/Config.in b/package/prosody/Config.in > > index 4b7ea9425..bb3a5025f 100644 > > --- a/package/prosody/Config.in > > +++ b/package/prosody/Config.in > > @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ config BR2_PACKAGE_PROSODY > > depends on BR2_USE_MMU # fork > > depends on BR2_PACKAGE_HAS_LUAINTERPRETER > > depends on !BR2_STATIC_LIBS # luaexpat, luasec, luasocket, > luafilesystem > > - select BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP if !BR2_PACKAGE_LUAJIT # runtime > > + select BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP if BR2_PACKAGE_LUA_5_1 # runtime > > The commit log is probably not very clear. Indeed, if LuaBitOp is not > available with Lua 5.3, one would think you would need the external > BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP when using something else than 5.1, i.e the > opposite of what your change is doing. > > Shouldn't the commit log rather be: > > The luabitop functionality is available built-in in Lua 5.3 and > LuaJIT, so only Lua 5.1 needs the additional external luabitop > package. > > Could you confirm ? > bitwise operators are built-in in Lua 5.3, LuaBitOp is a built-in library in LuaJIT, so only Lua 5.1 needs the additional external LuaBitOp package. François > > Thomas > -- > Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering > https://bootlin.com > _______________________________________________ > buildroot mailing list > buildroot@busybox.net > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot >
François, All, On 2020-07-28 11:21 +0200, François Perrad spake thusly: > Le mar. 28 juil. 2020 à 09:21, Thomas Petazzoni < [1]thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> a écrit : > > LuaBitOp is not available with Lua 5.3 > The commit log is probably not very clear. Indeed, if LuaBitOp is not > available with Lua 5.3, one would think you would need the external > BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP when using something else than 5.1, i.e the > opposite of what your change is doing. > > Shouldn't the commit log rather be: > > The luabitop functionality is available built-in in Lua 5.3 and > LuaJIT, so only Lua 5.1 needs the additional external luabitop > package. > > Could you confirm ? > > bitwise operators are built-in in Lua 5.3, > LuaBitOp is a built-in library in LuaJIT, > so only Lua 5.1 needs the additional external LuaBitOp package. OK, thanks for the explanations. However, luabitop depends on !lua-5.3, and I see in your latest series that you extended the dependency to !lua-5.4. Maybe we should also fix that, no? That is, we should have: config BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP depends on BR2_PACKAGE_LUA_5_1 However, you are saying (emphasize mine): "only Lua 5.1 **needs** the additional external LuaBitOp" Does that mean that it can still be used with other versions of Lua? That is, if we are using lua-5.3, and a package selects luabitop, will this fail to build? To run? In other words, is it a problem if a pacakge ends up using luabitop on another version of lua? Regards, Yann E. MORIN.
Le mar. 28 juil. 2020 à 22:25, Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> a écrit : > François, All, > > On 2020-07-28 11:21 +0200, François Perrad spake thusly: > > Le mar. 28 juil. 2020 à 09:21, Thomas Petazzoni < [1] > thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> a écrit : > > > LuaBitOp is not available with Lua 5.3 > > The commit log is probably not very clear. Indeed, if LuaBitOp is not > > available with Lua 5.3, one would think you would need the external > > BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP when using something else than 5.1, i.e the > > opposite of what your change is doing. > > > > Shouldn't the commit log rather be: > > > > The luabitop functionality is available built-in in Lua 5.3 and > > LuaJIT, so only Lua 5.1 needs the additional external luabitop > > package. > > > > Could you confirm ? > > > > bitwise operators are built-in in Lua 5.3, > > LuaBitOp is a built-in library in LuaJIT, > > so only Lua 5.1 needs the additional external LuaBitOp package. > > OK, thanks for the explanations. > > However, luabitop depends on !lua-5.3, and I see in your latest series > that you extended the dependency to !lua-5.4. Maybe we should also > fix that, no? > > That is, we should have: > > config BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP > depends on BR2_PACKAGE_LUA_5_1 > > Correct. > However, you are saying (emphasize mine): > > "only Lua 5.1 **needs** the additional external LuaBitOp" > > Does that mean that it can still be used with other versions of Lua? > > That is, if we are using lua-5.3, and a package selects luabitop, will > this fail to build? To run? In other words, is it a problem if a pacakge > ends up using luabitop on another version of lua? > > LuaBitOp fails to build with Lua 5.3 & 5.4. LuaBitOp could be built with : - Lua 5.1 - Lua 5.2 which is now retired of BR - LuaJIT which uses ABI 5.1, but useless (because already built-in) François Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. > > -- > > .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. > | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' > conspiracy: | > | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ > | > | +33 561 099 427 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is > no | > | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v > conspiracy. | > > '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------' >
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 08:21:40 +0200 Francois Perrad <fperrad@gmail.com> wrote: > LuaBitOp is not available with Lua 5.3 > > Signed-off-by: Francois Perrad <francois.perrad@gadz.org> > --- > package/prosody/Config.in | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Applied to master with an improved commit log. Thanks. Thomas
diff --git a/package/prosody/Config.in b/package/prosody/Config.in index 4b7ea9425..bb3a5025f 100644 --- a/package/prosody/Config.in +++ b/package/prosody/Config.in @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ config BR2_PACKAGE_PROSODY depends on BR2_USE_MMU # fork depends on BR2_PACKAGE_HAS_LUAINTERPRETER depends on !BR2_STATIC_LIBS # luaexpat, luasec, luasocket, luafilesystem - select BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP if !BR2_PACKAGE_LUAJIT # runtime + select BR2_PACKAGE_LUABITOP if BR2_PACKAGE_LUA_5_1 # runtime select BR2_PACKAGE_LUAEXPAT # runtime select BR2_PACKAGE_LUASEC # runtime select BR2_PACKAGE_LUASOCKET # runtime
LuaBitOp is not available with Lua 5.3 Signed-off-by: Francois Perrad <francois.perrad@gadz.org> --- package/prosody/Config.in | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)