Re: [ANN] Lua 5.2.3 (rc1) now available

[Jose Luis Hidalgo <joseluis.hidalgo@...>]

Same, here, works fine, but I don't use the makefiles either.

BTW, I would love to see lua in an amalgamated version, the same way
sqlite does. Considering there is a lot of people out there that wants
to easily integrate something inside an existing project (not caring
too much about makefiles) having lua as a one single big chunk of C
code would be really nice.

In the meanwhile, I'm more than pleased with current's lua packaging.

Regards,
   JLH

On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Jean-Luc Jumpertz <jean-luc@celedev.eu> wrote:
>
> Le 4 déc. 2013 à 16:52, Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo <lhf@tecgraf.puc-rio.br> a écrit :
>
>> We are about to freeze Lua 5.2.3, having received almost no feedback on rc1.
>>
>> Now is the last chance to remind us of any glitches you have found in
>> Lua 5.2. In particular, problems in the Makefiles.
>
> No compilation issue on my side, but I am not using the provided makefiles neither.
>
> The few tests that I've had the time to run are ok too.
>
> There is just just a small annoying thing when checking changes between versions 5.2.2 and 5.2.3:
>
> It seems that every source file in version 5.2.3 had its header version upgraded, even if the file's content hasn't changed in version 5.2.3.
> For example, lapi.c show the following change (and only this one):
>  /*
> -** $Id: lapi.c,v 2.171 2013/03/16 21:10:18 roberto Exp $
> +** $Id: lapi.c,v 2.171.1.1 2013/04/12 18:48:47 roberto Exp $
>  ** Lua API
>  ** See Copyright Notice in lua.h
>  */
>
> I have checked the diffs 5.2.0-->5.2.1 and 5.2.1-->5.2.2: only changed files had their header updated. Unchanged files were just ... well ... unchanged.
>
> Is this deliberate for some mysterious reason? Or is it just a "glitch" when formalizing the release? ;-)
>
> Jean-Luc



-- 
JLH