Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

[Jayanth Acharya <jayachar88@...>]

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 2:07 AM, joshua simmons <simmons.44@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think you mean biggest advantages.

For a newbies especially, it is probably a 'glass is half empty'
effect -- a meta-package of good-rocks would really give a warm & cozy
feeling, especially so for people who need to switch between two
platforms (Win / Linux for instance). Flexibility is good, no doubt,
but it has it's costs.

> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Enrico Tassi <gareuselesinge@libero.it>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 07:18:54PM +0000, Matthew Wild wrote:
>> > On 3 March 2011 19:07, Jayanth Acharya <jayachar88@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:47 PM, steve donovan
>> > > Okay... but is there anything like a "golden package of rocks" /
>> > > "extensions" -- something that most developers use, i.e. most
>> > > developers use for the common purpose (e.g. parsing XML, templating,
>> > > bit-operations etc.). Going through the rocks catalog for instance, I
>> > > found that there are several of those, for same purpose, so how do I
>> > > pick & choose. Do I stick to the ones supplied by Ubuntu repos, or go
>> > > beyond, and if I do -- which ones ??
>>
>> I tried not to put too many duplicates in the Debian archive, thus you
>> will not find many alternatives there. Of course you can use luarocks to
>> get any library that is not packaged.
>>
>> The point of not having a meta-package depending a standard set of
>> libraries is that there is no such standard set, and this is IMO one of
>> the biggest problems of this technology (Lua I mean, not your linux
>> distribution).
>>
>> Cheers
>> --
>> Enrico Tassi
>>
>
>