As I had couple of spare cycles, the updated package is now in experimental.
I don't have the time to test all the downstream dependencies, so I would appreciate if you can walk through all the packages that Build-Depend or Depend on luajit and test whether everything works as expected. If you send me your salsa login, I can add you as a co-maintainer of the luajit package. (I'm not subscribed to d-d). Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý (He/Him) [email protected] > On 19. 12. 2025, at 8:37, Xiyue Deng <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm now CCing debian-devel@. Please excuse the top posting where I > explain the status quo and seek for advice. > > Bug#781728 is about enabling Lua 5.2 compatible mode in LuaJIT, which > has been supported for at least 13 years (see the last commit touching > the macro definition at [1]). The main client using this is Aegisub > which since 3.4.2 requires LuaJIT to enable 5.2 compatible mode. > Currently Aegisub embeds its own LuaJIT so as to enable this, but as the > embedded official LuaJIT doesn't support some of the release archs > e.g. ppc64el, riscv64, and s390x. The LuaJIT in Debian supports riscv64 > and s390x and can support ppc64el in newer versions. I have filed > Bug#1116248 to Aegisub for tracking. It would be great if the LuaJIT in > Debian can just enable this so that Aegisub does not need to embed it. > (Also CCing the Aegisub maintainer just in case.) > > There may be concerns on binary compatibility on enabling Lua 5.2 > compatibility mode. I'm not an expert on library API/ABI compatibility, > though I have done some rudimentary analysis based on library symbols, > e.g. output of `nm -D' of libluajit-5.1.so.2.1.1737090214 from > libluajit-5.1-2 package, and besides symbol addresses there is no diff > (please see the nm-luajit-unpatched.txt, nm-luajit-patched.txt for the > symbols before and after applying the patch, and > nm-luajit-unpatched-vs-patched.diff for the diff). I think this should > suggest that it is a safe change, and even if it is not, a transition > should be sufficient to resolve any incompatibility. > > The reason for including debian-devel@ in the discussion is that there > has been no reply from the Lua maintainers or package uploaders since. > I'd like to first state that this email has no ill-intention, as people > may be busy due to life, work, etc. so it's totally understandable. I > would just like to try to move things forward. Of course, if the Lua > maintainers or uploaders would like to provide any guidance it would > still be welcome. But in case there is none, I wonder what would be the > best way to proceed? As currently I don't claim that I have the > required specialty to be an uploader, would a NMU be acceptable (and > commit to Salsa so that this doesn't get lost)? As a DM, I would still > need a sponsor if this is the way forward. > > Thanks in advance! And any advice (or suggestion to better handle this > situation) would be appreciated. > > (Please also see below for previous communications on this bug.) > > Xiyue Deng <[email protected]> writes: > >> Xiyue Deng <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> (CCing the package uploaders.) >>> >>> Xiyue Deng <[email protected]> writes: >>> >>>> Xiyue Deng <[email protected]> writes: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, 27 Dec 2024 13:08:17 +0100 =?UTF-8?Q?Aniol_Mart=C3=AD?= >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Dear Maintainer, >>>>>> >>>>>> i am the maintainer of Aegisub. Version 3.4.0 was recently released but >>>>>> it requires LuaJIT with Lua 5.2 compat. Are there any plans about >>>>>> supporting it? >>>>>> >>>>>> We are currently discussing it in >>>>>> https://github.com/TypesettingTools/Aegisub/issues/239. One option that >>>>>> I'm considering is bundling LuaJIT with Aegisub, but the Debian Policy >>>>>> encourages not doing that. Do you know if there are any other packages >>>>>> in a similar situation? >>>>>> >>>>>> Aniol >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> As David mentioned in [1], this should be as simple as adding >>>>> "-DLUAJIT_ENABLE_LUA52COMPAT" to CFLAGS and it should be ABI/API >>>>> compatible. Please consider adding this support so that Aegisub and >>>>> other packages can use it directly. >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=781728#16 >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Xiyue Deng >>>> >>>> I have tested adding the flags and the result is promising: aegisub can >>>> now directly build against libluajit-5.1-dev built with the flags and >>>> works well. >>>> >>>> I have created a MR on Salsa[1] and hope it can be reviewed and merged. >>>> >>>> [1] https://salsa.debian.org/lua-team/luajit/-/merge_requests/3 >>>> >>> >>> Friendly ping. This is a blocking issue for Aegisub and currently >>> preventing it from migrating to Forky. >>> >>> Though my previous claim may be wrong that enabling this flag may >>> probably require a transition. I would like to help analyze the >>> situation and move this bug forward. TIA! >>> >> >> Friendly ping. It's concerning that we still haven't heard back from >> the Lua team, though it's understandable that the Lua team may be busy >> with daily life/work. I intend to bring this topic to debian-devel@ for >> comments next, not for pushing, but to seek for suggestions on resolving >> this issue. >> >>>> -- >>>> Regards, >>>> Xiyue Deng >>> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> Xiyue Deng > > [1] > https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/commit/23932a6c8b7ef434bc963139b4160b1058fa6f7f > > -- > Regards, > Xiyue Deng > <nm-luajit-patched.txt><nm-luajit-unpatched.txt><nm-luajit-unpatched-vs-patched.diff>
