lua-users home
lua-l archive

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

On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 04:40:20AM -0600, Jeff Pohlmeyer wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 4:19 AM, Rob Kendrick wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 02:25:46AM -0600, Jeff Pohlmeyer wrote:
> >>
> >> 1) The Makefile uses "lua5.1" for the pkg-config name but on archlinux
> >>    it is just named "lua".
> >>
> >
> > This seems like a bug in the Archlinux package.  How else could it
> > support multiple incompatible versions of Lua installed at the same
> > time?  (As can happen quite easily just after a new release and a couple
> > of years after.)
> The pc file in the lua 5.1.4 sources is named "lua.pc".

I've always seen this as an "example", as the Lua guys didn't want to
get into the sticky mess of package policy.

> Is there anything that tells the packager if and how it should be renamed?
> lua5.1.pc ?
> lua-5.1.pc ?
> lua51.pc ?

Debian seemed to lead the way in this; it's called lua5.1 there.  And
thus it's called that on the million of distributes based on it.  (Such
as Ubuntu and Mint.)  Might as well follow its inertia.

(All the libraries, and the directory containing headers, etc are named
similarly.  But if things use pkg-config, it shouldn't matter what the
actual library and header location look like, as long as they're
versioned somehow.)