lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index] 


22.4.2005 kello 16:45, Mike Pall kirjoitti:

 Hi,


Asko Kauppi wrote:
Having "lua/5.1" in LUA_LDIR means any system scripts will remain valid 
only until the user upgrades to a new X.X Lua version.  Say, you have
Lua 5.1, Lumikki and Hamster installed.  You "apt-get upgrade",
bringing Lua to 5.2.  Poof, the scripts won't be found.


Perl and Python have done it that way for years.


That, per se, is not a reason. :)



Considering the Lua release cycle (1-2 years between minor versions)
this is a non-issue. You won't find a universal mechanism that
covers anticipated future (non-)compatibility, anyway. How do you
know that all your installed scripts will be compatible with
a hypothetical Lua 5.2?
I won't. The samle I gave was considering time when those are already out, and I believe it to be quite possible to code in a compatible fashion, at least between minor versions. C side is a different story.
So, while this is not a major issue, it's not a non-issue either. Once 5.1 comes out, it's a practical issue for me concerning Lua-only script packages. 



In fact I have both Lua 5.0 and Lua 5.1 installed and I certainly
don't want to mix up the installed modules. In fact they are
not compatible (neither the C modules, nor the Lua modules).
Lua modules can be. But it's up to their author to check and maintain that, and confirm it as a >=, <= dependency in the package discription. No promises of future versions would be made. 



BTW: Asko, could you please configure your mail client to a sane
     posting mode? Attaching the whole posting you are replying to
     at the bottom is neither helpful nor readable. Thank you.


Whooo...  Using OS X Mail, no-one else has complained.  :!

-ak


       http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
     (written for Usenet, but applies to mailing lists as well)

Bye,
     Mike
**from the looks of that link, this will generate flames. I disagree, without flames. I think putting your response at the -bottom- of the message is grose** ;)