lua-users home
lua-l archive

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

On Saturday, January 10, 2015, steve donovan <> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Dirk Laurie <> wrote:
> This is the point at which even my chutzpah runs out.

Having recently had precisely this problem with trying to install new
luaposix (which includes *integrated* curses support [1]) I feel your
pain.  Finally managed to get a build started with configure and it
did not know where the curses include files sit on a Debian/Ubuntu
system.  I suppose that occasionally it's fine to use a sledgehammer
to kill a mosquitto, but if after all it misses, you end up with a
broken desk.

So put me firmly in the Roberto simple, editable makefile camp. I do
these things with lakefiles these days, but I don't expect everyone to
subscribe to my religion.

[1] bad idea, IMHO. Perhaps 1 out of a 100 users of luaposix need
curses support, and now they must go through extra hoops.

I can't (yet) use luarocks in my workflow. So, I end up reading tea leaves, whenever I bring a module in, because, almost universally, the instructions consist of "luarocks install mymodule" 

My favorite tea leaves are...
0: no dependancies
1: a make file
2: the rockspec (almost tied for first)
3: the inter web ("build mymodule windows visual studio")

So my persona's messages to module authors are:

0: Only necessary dependancies please
1: Build and install instructions are awesome
2: Make files are great, too. LR spec files are generally easy to follow, but sometimes it can be difficult to know what to do with batch files or other weird things.
3: Thank you for making the module in the first place!