On 30 September 2013 10:18, Choonster TheMage <choonster.2...@gmail.com> wrote: > Following Steve Donovan's recent request for more binary rocks, I've > compiled Windows (MinGW) binary rocks for version 0.2.1-1 of my > lua_bufflib library. > > You can download the rocks from the GitHub release page: > https://github.com/Choonster/lua_bufflib/releases/tag/0.2.1-1 > > You'll need to rename the rocks to the format LuaRocks expects by > removing the `5.1_` or `5.2_` prefix before you can install them. > > Hisham, could you please add these to the repository?
We need to have some kind of process if we want binary rocks in the repository. We have a few binary rocks in the repo, most of them outdated by now, but they were made by the Kepler team in the early days of LuaRocks. Redistributing binary code is a sensitive matter, and compatibility issues are also a concern. LuaRocks can tell apart modules which are source-compatible with 5.1 or 5.2 through separate manifests, but it currently does not differentiate a binary rock compiled for Lua 5.1 or 5.2 if the 'dependencies' entry says something like "lua >= 5.1, < 5.3". One simple solution would be to host them in separate server URLs (ie, something like http://luarocks.org/repositories/contrib-bin-5.2/. There are also concerns with external library dependencies: how should that work on Windows with regard to binary rocks? -- Hisham ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60133471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list Luarocks-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luarocks-developers
