[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Packaging Lua libraries
- From: Andre Nathan <andre@...>
- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 15:39:07 -0300
On Wed, 2004-03-31 at 15:08, Jay Carlson wrote:
> Obviously .so files need to live in /usr/lib somewhere. If we think
> people are going to build their own custom interpreters that don't
> dynamically load with loadlib, the extensions probably need to start
> with "lib" so people can link them in when they build their
> executables. Version numbering would be good too.
Yeah, thinking about those who build their custom interpreters, this is
a good idea (even though some libraries don't have version numbers :)
How do people do it on other languages, which don't have the "lib"
prefix? Or they simply don't do it?
> The stub .lua loaders are arguably architecture-dependent---you could
> have different naming conventions or directory paths from platform to
My initial idea was to do something similar, but is anyone affected by
this in practice? I mean, does anyone need binary libraries for more
than one architecture on the same machine?
I followed python, which has a "lib-dynload" directory, and just called
the directory "lib", without any architecture information.
Anyone has more thoughts on this?
There are no data that cannot be plotted on a straight line if the axis
are chosen correctly.