Re: Standardizing lua names on *nix systems (and their distributions)

[Andrew Starks <andrew.starks@...>]

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Enrico Tassi <gares@fettunta.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 05:45:03AM -0500, Sean Conner wrote:
>>   That way, you won't run afoul of systems that use '.' to separate the main
>> file name from the extension (cough MS-DOS cough), and the name stil fits in
>> eight characters (cough MS-DOS cough).  I doubt we'll get to Lua 51.0 any
>> time soon ...
>
> Hem... the subject says *nix ;-) But yes, I see your point and I've just
> discovered luarocks runs on windows too.  Does it version directories
> avoiding the . or the 8.3 curse is nowadays gone?  Does windows has a
> notion of shebang for scripts?
>
> Best,
> --
> Enrico Tassi
>


Windows doesn't use the shebang but there are other tricks to get
similar behavior.

Also, I don't think the '.' matters. It hasn't mattered in Windows for
a very long time and even if it did, this is about distributions and
build tools. Does LR work on Pre-long-file-name systems? Do "you" want
to include those systems in compatibility checks? Lua's use cases are
far broader than the use case of standardization for desktop usage, I
would assume.

I would suggest that you keep things as they are in the *nix world and
make them the same in the Windows world, as it makes sense.

I don't wish to shed bicycles, and yet I do think that `lua` the
command and `lua5.2.so` the library are unique enough entities that it
may be worth considering the implications of their uses and why people
would want to download them.

That is, if I use Lua in bash/cmd/etc, then I probably want it stable
and for LR to work, etc. Linking different versions might be worth it
to some people, but for most, probably not that needed?

If I'm installing it to use as a library, then that's different. I
probably want a specific version with a specific set of flags set, and
a very specific set of modules, etc. and then perhaps I'm downloading
the source? In that case, would it be better to have a
lua51/2/3-source package and let the developer work with it? This may
all be nonsense, because I only play with Linux when I'm playing at
home, so I'll be happy to lurk from here on. :)

--Andrew