On 26 May 2014 12:12, Philipp Janda <siffie...@gmx.net> wrote: > Am 26.05.2014 13:49 schröbte Thijs Schreijer: >> Maybe best to add as a request to the issue tracker? [1] as it breaks >> rockspec compatibility, it can then be tagged as a possible 3.0 feature. > > Most of the proposal doesn't break rockspec compatibility: Some Rocks > already install static libraries (e.g. LuaPosix). Creating a static > library in addition to the shared library in the "builtin" build mode > just requires one new command line in each compiler backend. > > But where do we put the generated include files? One common directory > relative to the rocks tree? In the rocks dir?
If we ship .h files it would have to be in $root_dir/include, like we do for scripts (ie, /usr/local/include, analogous to /usr/local/bin). > Do we need a new `luarocks > cflags luafilesystem` command for linking to the static library? That would be interesting. > And do we really need the `--static` option? Are there situations where > building a shared library will succeed, but building a static one will not? > > (Creating a github issue won't hurt, though, and we can move the > discussion there.) I'd rather keep open-ended discussion here and keep the bugtracker more focused on bugs. -- Hisham ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The best possible search technologies are now affordable for all companies. Download your FREE open source Enterprise Search Engine today! Our experts will assist you in its installation for $59/mo, no commitment. Test it for FREE on our Cloud platform anytime! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=145328191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list Luarocks-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luarocks-developers
