Re: [ANN] LuaBinaries

[Daniel Silverstone <dsilvers@...>]

On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 10:30 -0300, Roberto Ierusalimschy wrote:
> > On POSIX systems with ELF (or similar) binary formats I compile
> > everything into a single 'lua' executable that is made with -Wl,-E
> > (or equivalents). Loadable modules depend on symbols from the
> > executable.
> So, another poll: in Unix systems, should the standard makefile
> create static libraries (.a)? Does anyone still needs the standard
> liblua.a/liblualib.a files? Maybe the standard makefile could create
> only the 'lua' executable...

Lua was made for embedding as well as extending yes?

If it was only made to be extended then making a single lua executable
is fine. But assuming you want to continue with the tradition of lua
being easily embedded into other programs then not making libraries
would be a death-blow to Lua

As it stands; Debian replaces a chunk of the standard Lua makefiles in
order to make shared objects properly.

If you want to change Lua's makefiles in a positive way then making it
possible to build shared objects more cleanly would be nice; but
reducing the makefiles to only building the lua (and luac I assume)
executables just seems pointless.

D.

-- 
Daniel Silverstone                         http://www.digital-scurf.org/
PGP mail accepted and encouraged.            Key Id: 2BC8 4016 2068 7895