Mail archive

Re: [alpine-aports] [PATCH] testing/lua-fun: new aport

From: Muh Muhten <>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 01:57:54 -0500

On 2016-03-01 1:36 AM, Timo Teras wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 04:16:41 -0500
> Muh Muhten <> wrote:]
>> ---
>> +_split() {
>> + install_if="lua$1 $pkgname=$pkgver-r$pkgrel"
>> + pkgdesc="$pkgdesc for Lua $1"
>> +
>> + cd "$_builddir"
>> + install -Dm644 fun.lua "$subpkgdir/usr/share/lua/$1/fun.lua"
>> || return 1 +}
> It's the same file installed in three separate packages - just to
> separate directory.
> I wonder if we should ship this in some common folder. _at_ncopa Do we
> have any shared lua path that would be usable in all lua versions?
> Or should this be single package that provides all three files and just
> ships symlinks/hardlinks?

Yes, it's unfortunate. Some light inspection (see below) suggests that
*all* lua libs get installed under versioned dirs. Most of our lua
packages seemed to work this way. I don't think hardlinks are a viable
solution, since the versions get split into separate tarballs, which we
can't practically annotate to indicate hardlinks. symlink is at least
possible, but it's not clear how to organise.

% for ea in 5.1 jit 5.2 5.3; do lua$ea -e
"print('lua$ea:\t'..package.path)"; done | sed 's/;/\n\t/g'
lua5.1: ./?.lua
luajit: ./?.lua
lua5.2: /usr/local/share/lua/5.2/?.lua
lua5.3: /usr/local/share/lua/5.3/?.lua

Received on Tue Mar 01 2016 - 01:57:54 UTC