On 29 Nov 2013 14:11, "Lourival Vieira Neto" <lourival.n...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Marc Balmer <m...@msys.ch> wrote: > > Am 29.11.13 12:38, schrieb Lourival Vieira Neto: > >>> It will be interesting to see by how much memory the addition of the > >>> standard libraries will grow lua(4). lneto claims it does not grow at > >>> all. If it should, we can still move the standard libraries to a kmod. > >> > >> I just double checked now (using nm to confirm). In fact, I was > >> commenting the wrong portion of the Makefile to test. Sorry about that > >> =(. Here is the result in amd64: 240K with stdlibs and auxlib, 166K > >> with only auxlib and 154K solo. Anyway, I still think that is 86K is > >> not that much to have things like {base, string, table}lib. However, > >> though I think stdlibs could be in another kmod, I think that is not a > >> good idea to have auxlib in another one. Lua auxlib is just an > >> extension of the Lua C API and 12K is really a fair price to have a > >> more complete Lua library in kernel, IMO. > > > > We could for now just go ahead, put auxlib and the stdlibs in lua(4) as > > foreseen, and when the need arises, we can still factor out the stdlibs > > to their own kmod. > > Agreed. Anyone opposes? >
Sounds fine.