Re: Moving Lua source codes

[Marc Balmer <marc%msys.ch@localhost>]

Am 09.10.13 10:53, schrieb Justin Cormack:
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Thomas Klausner <wiz%netbsd.org@localhost> 
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:37:23AM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
>>> So if no one really objects the plan is as follows:
>>>
>>> - Import Lua 5.2 to src/sys/external/
>>> - Remove Lua 5.1 from src/external/
>>
>> apb suggested using "src/common/external/<licence>/<name>" and lots of
> 
> Trying to describe a license in a filename is an exercise in futility;
> I can see the case for gpl as a generic license class maybe, but in
> general you need to read the licenses for all the code, there are lots
> of them.
> 
>> people asked for working examples first. What's your reply to that?
> 
> Various people have posted things they are working on. While there is
> no proposal to remove it, upgrading makes sense; certainly the stuff I
> am working on targets 5.2 as a preference. Also the 5.1 series is no
> longer getting bug fixes, and there is a hostile code fix in 5.2 that
> Wikipedia found in their code audit when they added user facing Lua to
> Wikipedia.

I updated all my code to 5.2 by now (I have lots of modules written in
C, so the API changes were a real issue for me).  I am currently
updating Lua in my dev machine to 5.2 to see whether everything still works.

I found out that several programs already have Lua bindings, but for
unknown reasons that code is not enabled by default, which is kind of
weird given that the Lua library is in base...  So we have Lua bindings
in our code, whe have Lua as well, but yet we don't enable it and
continue to whine about nothing using Lua, that's weirder than weird ;)

fwiw, personally I use Lua in sysinst and to use gpio and sqlite (which
is the reason why there are gpio and sqlite modules...)