Control: reopen -1 Control: found -1 luajit/2.1.0+openresty20251030-1~exp1 Hi Ondřej
Ondřej Surý <[email protected]> writes: > Sure, go ahead. I just didn’t know that this exists. Thanks for your upload on experimental. However, it looks like there is a small mistake in this commit[1] that DEB_CFLAGS_MAINT_APPEND was not exported so that it didn't really take effect. I have pushed a fix at [2] and tested it to be working. Can you help make another upload (~exp3)? As a DM, I can also help with the upload if given upload privilege on dak, but I would understand I should demonstrate that my work is trustworthy before you may want to grant me access. Let me know which you prefer. Thanks! > -- > Ondřej Surý (He/Him) > > On 19. 12. 2025, at 12:36, Jérémy Lal <[email protected]> wrote: > > Any reason to not use > > https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline#enable-build-reverse-dependencies > > ? > I can do it if needed. > > Le ven. 19 déc. 2025 à 09:37, Ondřej Surý <[email protected]> a écrit : > > 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> > > _______________________________________________ > pkg-lua-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-lua-devel > [1] https://salsa.debian.org/lua-team/luajit/-/commit/1c32a90c43858ef7c3af36033e00766328c4a19c [2] https://salsa.debian.org/lua-team/luajit/-/commit/8104bdfa6bb40bbc06f8ffca74cebeeeaf327b53 -- Regards, Xiyue Deng
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
