RE: windows binary in luarocks, a common practice ?

[Thijs Schreijer <thijs@...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lua-l-bounces@lists.lua.org [mailto:lua-l-bounces@lists.lua.org] On
> Behalf Of Gaspard Bucher
> Sent: dinsdag 21 januari 2014 22:31
> To: Lua mailing list
> Subject: windows binary in luarocks, a common practice ?
> 
> Hi list,
> 
> I saw that LuaXML installs "lua.exe", "lua51.dll", "LuaXML_lib.dll",
> "LuaXML_lib.so" before compiling some other "LuaXML_lib.so".

They are included in the zip file, for some reason... They should not be used, but I'm not entirely sure they are unused. I don't know what happens when LuaRocks tries to compile the sources where it links to lua51.dll. Will the linker, using the current path, use this file, or will it use the one installed in the system... 

The rock should be fixed to remove the binaries I think.

> 
> This looks pretty wrong to me (especially on a mac) and I wonder if
> compilation on Windows is such an issue that we must pack binary versions
> into luarocks...

We shouldn't, but binary rocks in itself are ok. As long as everybody uses the same assumptions when building (eg. runtimes, etc)

> 
> Luafilesystem does not need to do this so there seems to be other solutions
> to deploy on Windows...
> 
> What is the proper way to make sure installation Windows is as smooth as
> possible ?

Publish a LuaRocks rockspec and make sure to use the 'builtin' backend for compilation (eg. not make files). LuaDist can also handle those rocks. And, unlike this rock; don't include binaries...

Thijs

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
>                                                                Gaspard