From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf1-x42f.google.com (mail-pf1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42f]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE33E3844015 for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 01:20:36 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org DE33E3844015 Received: by mail-pf1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id f63so188416pfa.13 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 17:20:36 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eEntbJXMmjtwUWVMc+4iokc8N/6eZZwZ5abbLcTtt9U=; b=h0YQe6jT4DbyWqgGM6pOuYyMcHVRLqY1g40HVMhQCwVzO+dN0Qiqi3RRbD4KpZ7KeO 9Zn7/4NGVjZb4aujhariK6E3tAI2aukuXaew5f1iH0ljm7b4Qda0IVUT1Hl/kFPLymDj Ukb2EP+RSyHaMxW06HGOt8Jd5zYvUFGohorEVUAXjyGeoDXPyr056wK2iov1sFZT7UIH TJ263jfTi8GU4psMX21HIC0Elai5nzZdzEBYPsXErq/Ba5jup9MHPdRhwmqqsP1SC7a+ IR/uIYYWMI8DI2aJ37oV1rSFVXHHVjxJh/utY+Q6XSAFPr3+jK1kWD06CeB6AJlQgaz7 LvXg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Xw19vlEkaZjiwU3ZJkukx2ZbZruxBsWCrY8ZbKHC7v4sPZfaq z9LBqIyuNY7zS6yXbraW3XfwbkD6bak= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzODx0gwpCyM2uHo8fXJxb4uJR3Z52rxGfC7o/G9qsj67LdXxsy2ootIXxx7JofSJqoOjPrpw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:ec4f:: with SMTP id r15mr19957945pgj.344.1610846435736; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 17:20:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.3.11] ([2400:2411:aa20:4300:f05d:df7e:19bd:960c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b7sm12013525pff.96.2021.01.16.17.20.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 16 Jan 2021 17:20:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 10:20:35 +0900 From: Lemures Lemniscati To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Subject: Re: [PATCH cygport] A patch to add a flag __SKIP_LIST_DEPS_LUA In-Reply-To: <877dodbcj7.fsf@Otto.invalid> References: <20210116081623.C2D8.50F79699@gmail.com> <877dodbcj7.fsf@Otto.invalid> Message-Id: <20210117102033.2CCA.50F79699@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.75.02 [ja] X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 210116-4, 2021/01/17), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Cygwin package maintainer discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 01:20:45 -0000 On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 07:50:52 +0100, ASSI > Lemures Lemniscati via Cygwin-apps writes: > > And I'm trying to package luarocks for lua5.3 and lua5.4 > > (lua5.3-luarocks and lua5.4-luarocks) by a single cygport file. > > The packages should be named lua53-luarocks and lua54-luarocks (no dot > in the version number), like OpenSUSE (they seem to be the only > distribution with a multi-version lua and that particular naming scheme > you've chosen). Alpine linux has multiple versions of lua, also [1]. And packages names have periods in them when lua-versions are specified [2]. [1]: https://pkgs.alpinelinux.org/packages?name=lua5.4 https://pkgs.alpinelinux.org/packages?name=lua5.3 https://pkgs.alpinelinux.org/packages?name=lua5.2 https://pkgs.alpinelinux.org/packages?name=lua5.1 [2]: https://pkgs.alpinelinux.org/packages?name=lua* Among cygwin packages, guile packages have dots in their package names. [3]: https://cygwin.com/packages/summary/guile3.0-src.html https://cygwin.com/packages/summary/guile2.2-src.html https://cygwin.com/packages/summary/guile2.0-src.html https://cygwin.com/packages/summary/guile1.8-src.html And, I'm wondering about no-dot-in-the-version scheme... What should we do if its version comes to 5.10 or higher (just a hypothecical example). It will be lua510-* without dots, but I would feel uneasy for it (just in my opinion). > A different question is if you really want to package this particular > feature. Just like all the other "package managers" that come with a > specific language or interpreter I'd expect this one to need (maybe > extensive) modifications to work correctly on Cygwin, especially if it > ends up building dynamic objects. Does it mean that we should have a way to rebase such dynamic objects automatically? > That's one reason I discourage the > use of CPAN on Cygwin, since folks tend to shoot themself into the foot > more often than not by using it. All right. Maybe, I should calm myself down. I will try simply to build subpackges for lua-5.4.2 (test), for the time being. Regards, Lem