Re: Where is 'luavs.bat' in 5.2

[Peter Drahoš <drahosp@...>]

LuaDist can be built using Microsoft Compilers, while we do not
generate binaries for it it is entirely possible to do so.

However I am puzzled by your claim of problems with generating
self-contained apps using the MinGW compiler. One of the reasons
LuaDist uses MinGW and not MSC is because there are problems with
outdated MSC libraries. This is the primary problem of the original
Lua For Windows distribution, just look in the list archives. The
MinGW based LuaDist binaries on the other hand are entirely
self-contained and work without any system dependencies on Windows XP
and up.

The luadist utility does not at the moment provide the means to create
static builds with preloaded c modules, however it is possible to
generate static libraries of any binding/library in luadist that you
can then link in yourself. This feature is being worked on and it will
be supported directly by the luadist utility.

Maybe you could also elaborate on your requirements for
"self-contained" application. If by this you mean a application that
has all its dependencies contained in a single directory then LuaDist
is exactly designed for this. If you need a single executable with no
additional files then you need to be aware that you will still need to
link against certain libraries dynamically anyway if  specified in the
associated license. This severally limits this type of deployment.

However it is also possible to pack LuaDist apps as single executable
by using 3rd party apps and tools such as Cameyo.

pd


On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Ulrich Schmidt <u.sch.zw@gmx.de> wrote:
> I see you are a fan of luadist, thats ok. I took a look at the luadist web
> site. Please correct me if i am wrong, but it looks like luadist only
> supports gcc on windows? Thats ok in case i only want to write programs for
> my own needs. I install mingw and i am done.
>
> What i want to do (and have to do) is: write (fast as possible) simple
> stinger-like fire and forget self-containing programs, other people can use
> without any installation difficulties. I cant do this with gcc. I need to
> deliver at least one runtime-dll too. Sure you can say MSC needs mscrt.dll
> but this library is already present almost everywhere.
>
> I would like to become a fan of luadist in case
> - i can use ms compilers
> - i can create self containing programs (including preloaded c modules)
> - optional: i can do this for wxlua too.
>
> Ulrich.
>
> Am 11.01.2014 12:46, schrieb Philipp Janda:
>
>> Am 11.01.2014 12:19 schröbte Ulrich Schmidt:
>>>
>>> I did not work with cmake before so i cant say anything pro or against
>>> cmake. What i kept in mind, preferring lake, is the fact, that lake can
>>> use BOTH toolchains, gcc and msvc.
>>
>>
>> :-)
>>
>>> I dont have cmake when i only use MSSDK for instance.
>>
>>
>> You typically don't have lake either. The question is: do you install a
>> binary copy of lake, or a binary copy of cmake.
>>
>>> The second fact is that lakefiles can use lua to modify c sources to
>>> #define something or to preload c modules. (like luabuild shows).
>>
>>
>> True, cmake uses its own (horrible) scripting language instead of Lua,
>> but I think luadist has already implemented some of your required
>> feature set. Maybe Peter Drahos can shed some light ...
>>
>>>
>>> Ulrich.
>>
>>
>> Philipp
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Am 11.01.2014 12:07, schrieb Philipp Janda:
>>>>
>>>> What about luadist? I appreciate that a simple batch file has a very
>>>> small set of prerequisites, but if you want something full-featured
>>>> installing cmake shouldn't be an unreasonable requirement (plus luadist
>>>> certainly could use some more guys with cmake-knowledge).
>>>>
>>>> Philipp
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>