Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> writes:

> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 01:29:42PM +0000, Marius Bakke wrote:
>> * gnu/packages/lua.scm (lua): Update to 5.3.3.
>> [source]: Use https URL.
>> [home-page]: Use https URL.
>> (lua-5.2): New variable.
>> (lua-5.1)[source]: Use https URL.
>> ---
>>  gnu/packages/lua.scm | 23 ++++++++++++++++++-----
>>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/gnu/packages/lua.scm b/gnu/packages/lua.scm
>> index 8fdba61..55e529e 100644
>> --- a/gnu/packages/lua.scm
>> +++ b/gnu/packages/lua.scm
>> @@ -40,13 +40,13 @@
>>  (define-public lua
>>    (package
>>      (name "lua")
>> -    (version "5.2.4")
>> +    (version "5.3.3")
>>      (source (origin
>>               (method url-fetch)
>> -             (uri (string-append "http://www.lua.org/ftp/lua-"
>> +             (uri (string-append "https://www.lua.org/ftp/lua-"
>>                                   version ".tar.gz"))
>>               (sha256
>> -              (base32 "0jwznq0l8qg9wh5grwg07b5cy3lzngvl5m2nl1ikp6vqssmf9qmr"))
>> +              (base32 "18mcfbbmjyp8f2l9yy7n6dzk066nq6man0kpwly4bppphilc04si"))
>>               (patches (search-patches "lua-pkgconfig.patch"
>>                                        "lua52-liblua-so.patch"))))
>
> Does this lua52-liblua-so.patch still apply / is it still needed for Lua
> 5.3? I remember that there were significant differences between how Lua
> 5.1 and 5.2 in terms of building a dynamic Lua library.
>
> If so, I guess we should rename it.

I tried building 5.3 initially without patches and noticed the shared
library was not created. It applies cleanly and works as advertised.

Should I rename it to just lua-liblua-so.patch? IMO the version number
is useful information, even if it applies for a later minor release. I'm
in favor of keeping it, and create the lua54 equivalent if/when needed.