X-Original-To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org Delivered-To: alpine-devel@mail.alpinelinux.org Received: from nm11-vm1.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm11-vm1.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [98.139.213.152]) by mail.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 85FC9DC00F6 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2014 19:27:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [66.196.81.173] by nm11.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jan 2014 19:27:27 -0000 Received: from [98.139.212.234] by tm19.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jan 2014 19:27:27 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1043.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Jan 2014 19:27:27 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 626133.80137.bm@omp1043.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 42743 invoked by uid 60001); 2 Jan 2014 19:27:27 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1388690847; bh=DEKXSoUndz9ieL3rTQKq15B01I/WqP01gnYhDPEc60o=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=prOhKylatZCR7BeIKiFh7uxXu9Ogp72lOJ9vhoZVZb5rDybTrDYTBv2Bh2NtxbegriqJl7pkUHDec34f3SJaMDvnFJmEAsFGynQ1vawdBtW/ilpn1ys84UOidWb1RKD2BQNjG2OSIJNQhKCK5IpKG2Nnc8v64BQYCwexEAuENLE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=FIQHyDgisRkgD1qe5qYZ+M0Bazv4xA73afJ0E4p/KbWIEDVdYEZdN2cX+vakcZDbWeyUPWlG2/lxNnSEcNL81LJvWPU0C8gUjll6B+k3AIoSMwMnQfhIEvQepRZ44O+O7terYX3i4mCp/F1O4eSSWGYNfSRw2+A1+WhmgtWKTcE=; X-YMail-OSG: w0aUgMgVM1lEuPrNYGy9P2UTd3b1EXdJzoWpV2e4gArtA2q Oymmvz.L3rg0356zk6oQe6mwkP_mQtk8VUiHIHSSs.YeNDx7uIUZgJNBkW2B Fpdr221F2A5BLhLUp9LiCRHGqhT6F0Tit.aHciGvVhJaNN2oKUuKXBBz2T_9 ZOz_5D3FcZmkJ6tpF7gyjIIagizjyRjZ_Yd5YoBdQyfNkcKNmn7Jd5O3eFiO qp9ofvwauSZvdf50Bv_kDvSOqT6ToCSvmfTeKY9qlmEWkwwyhl.rgJrl7K.t fA55TBweOP69BH_3vvv.XziI6EjEXcUgQZiFD7cYoXD1AmeWixS7U2bB1NoG yGpLcIWvj.zcyimWNcMeScNKJuWK.SStPsLCt.ufvW2IHV5yKC6En2eK6zNb Zo0GYRyhwEWiE8K2d8HCTFhgynhbx.MByvq57IdeqHPKaxXVxnLD5S.eEpDd UZVeaRN1H.kn_NVG_pculCF62IdwiJ70ncjJ4px6x5Bc9LqKUd5cNWQPGHiu kU.bBSpLaRnfE47QiZTLn47YrNVLL_YGT8GhF7S.gtjaSrDTd4dgjGyNKyfT bfhv5PP1h5DG7sQ-- Received: from [75.189.159.238] by web162801.mail.bf1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 02 Jan 2014 11:27:27 PST X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001,SXMgdGhlcmUgYW55dGhpbmcgYmVzaWRlcyBBQ0YgdGhhdCBpcyBwcmV2ZW50aW5nIHRoZSB3aG9sZXNhbGUgbW92ZSB0byBMdWEgNS4yPyBNeSBnb2FsIGlzIHRvIGdldCBBQ0Ygd29ya2luZyB3aXRoIEx1YSA1LjIgYmVmb3JlIHRoZSBuZXh0IHJlbGVhc2UuCgpUZWQKCgpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwogRnJvbTogTmF0YW5hZWwgQ29wYSA8bmNvcGFAYWxwaW5lbGludXgub3JnPgpUbzogYWxwaW5lLWRldmVsQGxpc3RzLmFscGluZWxpbnV4Lm9yZyAKU2VudDogVHVlc2RheSwgRGUBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.172.614 References: <20131231120758.50b5d559@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org> Message-ID: <1388690847.16371.YahooMailNeo@web162801.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 11:27:27 -0800 (PST) From: Ted Trask Reply-To: Ted Trask Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] Avoiding bloat for Lua 5.1/5.2 modules To: Natanael Copa , "alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org" In-Reply-To: <20131231120758.50b5d559@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org> X-Mailinglist: alpine-devel Precedence: list List-Id: Alpine Development List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="2065536479-31273915-1388690847=:16371" --2065536479-31273915-1388690847=:16371 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Is there anything besides ACF that is preventing the wholesale move to Lua = 5.2? My goal is to get ACF working with Lua 5.2 before the next release.=0A= =0ATed=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: Natanael Copa =0ATo: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org =0ASent: Tuesd= ay, December 31, 2013 6:07 AM=0ASubject: [alpine-devel] Avoiding bloat for = Lua 5.1/5.2 modules=0A =0A=0AHi,=0A=0AI am a bit in doubt how to handle the= Lua modules and 5.1 and 5.2 compat.=0A=0AI originally wanted to have lua5.= 1- and lua5.2-=0Apackages because that would allow us to av= oid bloat. You could have a=0Apure lua5.2 system.=0A=0AI am not so sure any= more.=0A=0AWhat I wanted:=0A* separate arch specific modules (compiled C co= de) for 5.1 and 5.2 so=0A=A0 we don't get both installed unless wanted. Exa= mple: lua-filesystem.=0A* join arch agnostic lua modules (pure lua modules)= and use symlinks=0A=A0 for 5.1/5.2 compat. Since they normally support bot= h 5.1 and 5.2 the=0A=A0 code itself is identical. Rather than install 2 cop= ies of same lua=0A=A0 code, we want use symlinks. Example: lua-penlight.=0A= * the lua- (without lua version) should pull in both=0A=A0 lua5.1-m= odule and lua5.2-module. (or pull in the "current" lua=0A=A0 version of the= module)=0A=0ANow, this becomes a bit compilcated when dealing with depende= ncies.=0ALets take the example with lua-penlight and lua-filesystem.=0A=0AS= ince lua-penlight is a pure lua module and supports both 5.1 and 5.2=0Awe w= ant use symlinks. So lua5.1-penlight is just a symlink to=0Alua5.2-penlight= . However, if lua5.1-penlight depends on lua5.2-penlight=0Ait will also pul= l in the lua5.2-penlight dependency lua5.2-filesystem -=0Awhich we don't wa= nt for lua5.1-penlight.=0A=0AI think we have the following options:=0A=0A1)= Continue try avoid bloat and have a common package without dependency:=0A= =0A=A0 * lua5.1-filesystem:=A0 has lua 5.1 module=0A=0A=A0 * lua5.2-file= system:=A0 had lua 5.2 module=0A=0A=A0 * lua-filesystem:=A0 =A0 =A0 depen= ds on lua5.1-filesystem and=0A=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 lua5.2-filesystem.=0A=0A=A0 * lua-penlight-common: has the .lua fi= les but does not depend on=0A=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 lua-filesystem. in it self not useful. (maybe=0A=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 install the .lua files to /usr/share/lua/c= ommon)=0A=0A=A0 * lua5.1-penlight:=A0 =A0 depends on lua-penlight-common = and=0A=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 lua5.1-filesystem= . It has symlinks to the=0A=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 files provided by lua-penlight-common.=0A=0A=A0 * lua5.2-penlight:=A0 = =A0 depends on lua-penlight-common and=0A=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 lua5.2-filesystem. (might have symlinks too)=0A=0A=A0 = * lua-penlight:=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 depends on lua5.1-penlight and lua5.2-penlig= ht.=0A=0A=A0 This means 7(!) packages for 2 Lua modules.=0A=0A2) We embrac= e the bloat and always ship both lua 5.1 and 5.2 in same=0A=A0 package (li= ke Debian does):=0A=0A=A0 * lua-filesystem:=A0 ships both 5.1 and 5.2 modu= les.=0A=0A=A0 * lua-penlight:=A0 =A0 ships both 5.1 and 5.2 modues and dep= ends only=0A=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 lua-filesystem.=0A= =0A=A0 This is way simpler, but will mean that you will always get the=0A= =A0 moduels for both lua versions, regardless if you use both or not (I=0A= =A0 assume you normally only will want run one version of Lua). This=0A=A0= means bloat.=0A=0AWhat do you think? We keep it 'simple' and accept the b= loat, or we make=0Ait 'complicated' to avoid the bloat?=0A=0ASome things to= keep in mind: we have many more C modules (arch=0Aspecific) modules than n= oarch (pure Lua) modules.=0A=0A-nc=0A=0A=0A---=0AUnsubscribe:=A0 alpine-dev= el+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org=0AHelp:=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 alpine-devel+h= elp@lists.alpinelinux.org=0A--- --2065536479-31273915-1388690847=:16371 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Is there a= nything besides ACF that is preventing the wholesale move to Lua 5.2? My go= al is to get ACF working with Lua 5.2 before the next release.
=

Ted
<= br>
<= span style=3D"font-weight:bold;">From: Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpin= elinux.org>
To: alp= ine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
= Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 6:07 AM
Subject: [alpine-devel] Avoiding bloat for Lu= a 5.1/5.2 modules

Hi,=

I am a bit in doubt how to handle the Lua modules and 5.1 and 5.2 c= ompat.

I originally wanted to have lua5.1-<module> and lua5.2-= <module>
packages because that would allow us to avoid bloat. You = could have a
pure lua5.2 system.

I am not so sure anymore.
What I wanted:
* separate arch specific modules (compiled C code) for 5= .1 and 5.2 so
  we don't get both installed unless wanted. Example:= lua-filesystem.
* join arch agnostic lua modules (pure lua modules) and use symlinks
  for 5.1/5.2 compat. Since they normally support bot= h 5.1 and 5.2 the
  code itself is identical. Rather than install 2= copies of same lua
  code, we want use symlinks. Example: lua-penl= ight.
* the lua-<module> (without lua version) should pull in both=
  lua5.1-module and lua5.2-module. (or pull in the "current" lua  version of the module)

Now, this becomes a bit compilcated = when dealing with dependencies.
Lets take the example with lua-penlight = and lua-filesystem.

Since lua-penlight is a pure lua module and supp= orts both 5.1 and 5.2
we want use symlinks. So lua5.1-penlight is just a= symlink to
lua5.2-penlight. However, if lua5.1-penlight depends on lua5= .2-penlight
it will also pull in the lua5.2-penlight dependency lua5.2-f= ilesystem -
which we don't want for lua5.1-penlight.

I think we h= ave the following options:

1) Continue try avoid bloat and have a common package without dependency:

  * lua5.1-filesyst= em:  has lua 5.1 module

  * lua5.2-filesystem:  ha= d lua 5.2 module

  * lua-filesystem:      depen= ds on lua5.1-filesystem and
            &n= bsp;             lua5.2-filesystem.

&n= bsp; * lua-penlight-common: has the .lua files but does not depend on
&= nbsp;                    =     lua-filesystem. in it self not useful. (maybe
  &nbs= p;                     &n= bsp; install the .lua files to /usr/share/lua/common)

  * lua5= .1-penlight:    depends on lua-penlight-common and
  &nb= sp;                     &= nbsp; lua5.1-filesystem. It has symlinks to the
                        &nbs= p; files provided by lua-penlight-common.

  * lua5.2-penlight:=     depends on lua-penlight-common and
      &= nbsp;                   lua5.2= -filesystem. (might have symlinks too)

  * lua-penlight: =       depends on lua5.1-penlight and lua5.2-penlight.
  This means 7(!) packages for 2 Lua modules.

2) We embrace = the bloat and always ship both lua 5.1 and 5.2 in same
  package (= like Debian does):

  * lua-filesystem:  ships both 5.1 an= d 5.2 modules.

  * lua-penlight:    ships both 5.1 a= nd 5.2 modues and depends only
           =           lua-filesystem.

  This is = way simpler, but will mean that you will always get the
 =20 moduels for both lua versions, regardless if you use both or not (I
&nb= sp; assume you normally only will want run one version of Lua). This
&n= bsp; means bloat.

What do you think? We keep it 'simple' and accept= the bloat, or we make
it 'complicated' to avoid the bloat?

Some = things to keep in mind: we have many more C modules (arch
specific) modu= les than noarch (pure Lua) modules.

-nc


---
Unsubscrib= e:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpi= nelinux.org
Help:        alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---



=
--2065536479-31273915-1388690847=:16371-- --- Unsubscribe: alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org Help: alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org ---