From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id 6EIFM2OCM2A/cgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 10:07:31 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id sGtvLmOCM2AlJgAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 10:07:31 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7AFD41866E for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 11:07:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:35780 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lE87m-0006ae-M8 for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 05:07:30 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45640) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lE85P-0004u9-Ea for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 05:05:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:44140) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lE85O-0000DG-Kn for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 05:05:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lE85O-0006WB-GD for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 05:05:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#46231] Add emilua Resent-From: Nicolas Goaziou Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 10:05:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46231 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Vin=C3=ADcius?= dos Santos Oliveira Cc: 46231@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 46231-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B46231.161398829325036 (code B ref 46231); Mon, 22 Feb 2021 10:05:02 +0000 Received: (at 46231) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Feb 2021 10:04:53 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55686 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lE85E-0006Vk-JS for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 05:04:52 -0500 Received: from relay6-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.198]:59097) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lE85C-0006VS-Lj for 46231@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 05:04:51 -0500 X-Originating-IP: 185.131.40.67 Received: from localhost (40-67.ipv4.commingeshautdebit.fr [185.131.40.67]) (Authenticated sender: admin@nicolasgoaziou.fr) by relay6-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 751A4C0005; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 10:04:43 +0000 (UTC) From: Nicolas Goaziou References: <875z2mxljt.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 11:04:42 +0100 In-Reply-To: ("=?UTF-8?Q?Vin=C3=ADcius?= dos Santos Oliveira"'s message of "Sun, 21 Feb 2021 09:04:25 -0300") Message-ID: <875z2kwh8l.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -2.37 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 7AFD41866E X-Spam-Score: -2.37 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: WfdQ8xQdUCzz Hello, Vin=C3=ADcius dos Santos Oliveira writes: Thank you for your detailed answer! Some comments follow. > I've used "define" instead "define-public" so it wouldn't be really > available elsewhere in the system. I know. But this does not prevent to choose an explicit name. > However after some thought I do agree that this dependency can be > generally useful to more people and should have a proper name. > > What do you think about the name openresty-luajit-lua52? The trend in other distributions is to use luajit-openresty, in this order. So maybe luajit-lua52-openresty? Or luajit-openresty if that is unambiguous. It is not a big issue anyway. >> - I see that emilua uses #:recursive? set to #true. Could some >> submodules could be unbundled by any chance? > > Some, yes, but not all. A Debian packager asked me the same and I > already started to unbundle the dependencies where it can make sense > to use the one found in the system. I can offer more details on why a > few dependencies still must be provided as submodules if requested. > Next emilua version (a couple of weeks away) should use more > dependencies from the system and less bundled dependencies, but you'll > still need #:recursive? set to #true for the bundled dependencies that > will remain. Then could you add a comment explaining what will be required, and what can be removed later on (as a TODO)? > I intend to solve this issue and I already started to investigate so > it'll eventually be solved, but in the meantime I just disabled the > tests. I don't control the paths the Lua VM generates so improving the > AWK script is really my only choice here. OK. Then could you add a short comment explaining the issue, and that it is being worked on? > Sure. Let's get the openresty-luajit-lua52 package in first and then > I'll work on the second patch. Great! > Here's the patch for openresty-luajit-lua52 alone: > https://gitlab.com/emilua/emilua/-/snippets/2079960 The version should be "2.1-20201027" and the commit (string-append "v" version). Don't forget to remove the string-append in the description. Also, the description itself is not particularly clear. Maybe This package provides the official OpenResty branch of LuaJIT. It is not to be considered a fork, since changes are regularly synchronized from the upstream LuaJIT project. Could you send this to this ML using git format-patch? Regards, --=20 Nicolas Goaziou