Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> writes: > On 2017/01/22 16:50, Edd Barrett wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 10:07:30PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: >> > > It seems to build for all the lua versions we support, so good :) >> > >> > This is often not enough: pure lua builds typically don't run the code >> > at build time, and C lua extensions might use lua C API functions only >> > available is some lua versions, with a failure to resolve missing >> > symbols at runtime. >> >> I've added a (minimal) test case, which seems to work for lua51-53, >> which is good :) >> >> > >> Regarding the port: better use "lua-mpack" or "lua-libmpack" as >> > >> PKGNAME-lua, for consistency and because the lang/lua module uses this >> > >> to provide automatic support for multiple versions. >> >> I think I got this (almost) right, but I had to jump through some hoops >> to get the lua subpackages with the right name (I think complicated by >> the fact that the lua bindings are MULTI_PACKAGES). >> >> I have a feeling that the FULLPKGPATH-lua needs a version suffix, but >> couldn't find a satisfying way (although what I currently have doesn't >> seem to cause any superficial issues). Any ideas?
If you're talking about having an additional -lua52/-lua53 suffix, then I can't see a reason for it and I'd find this confusing at best. >> Updated tarball attached. >> >> -- >> Best Regards >> Edd Barrett >> >> http://www.theunixzoo.co.uk > > > > I think you can get rid of the FULLPKGPATH-lua and use PKGNAME-lua > instead of FULLPKGNAME-lua. And adjust TEST_DEPENDS: > > $ grep PKG.*lua Makefile > PKGNAME-lua = ${_MODLUA_PKG_PREFIX}-mpack-${V} > TEST_DEPENDS += ${PKGNAME-lua}:${FULLPKGPATH-lua} > > This gives these, which seem right to me : > > $ make show=FULLPKGPATH-lua > devel/libmpack,-lua > $ make show=PKGNAMES > libmpack-1.0.3 lua-mpack-1.0.3 > $ make show=TEST_DEPENDS > lua-mpack-1.0.3:devel/libmpack,-lua > > $ FLAVOR=lua53 make show=FULLPKGPATH-lua > devel/libmpack,-lua,lua53 > $ FLAVOR=lua53 make show=PKGNAMES > libmpack-1.0.3 lua53-mpack-1.0.3-lua53 ^^^^^^ This doesn't look right, I expect "lua53-mpack-1.0.3", which is what I get with Edd's tarball. I can't find a meaning for "lua53-mpack-1.0.3-lua53": is it a lua53 FLAVOR of "lua53-mpack-1.0.3"? AFAIK no other port is named lua53-foo-lua53. > $ FLAVOR=lua53 make show=TEST_DEPENDS > lua53-mpack-1.0.3-lua53:devel/libmpack,-lua,lua53 ^^^^^^ Same here. The port looks fine, but I find all this FULLPKG-fu confusing. Splitting the port would make things more readable IMHO. Also: - please use FLAVORS = lua52 lua53 FLAVOR ?= just like in other lua ports - y u no like libmpack.la? :) -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
