[ANN] LuaRocks 3.0.4

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[ANN] LuaRocks 3.0.4

Hisham
Hello list,

This is a quick announcement that version 3.0.4 of LuaRocks, the Lua
package manager, has been tagged and uploaded to the usual locations.
You can find all links at https://luarocks.org — source packages for
all supported platforms and binaries for Windows and Linux x86-64 are
available.

LuaRocks 3.0.4 is a minor maintenance release. What's new:

* Fork-free platform detection at startup
* Improved detection of the default rockspec in commands such as `luarocks test`
* Various minor bugfixes

Cheers!

-- Hisham

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANN] LuaRocks 3.0.4

Dirk Laurie-2
Op Wo., 31 Okt. 2018 om 01:57 het Hisham <[hidden email]> geskryf:

> This is a quick announcement that version 3.0.4 of LuaRocks, the Lua
> package manager, has been tagged and uploaded to the usual locations.
> You can find all links at https://luarocks.org — source packages for
> all supported platforms and binaries for Windows and Linux x86-64 are
> available.

This is not criticism, it's just a comment from a Lua user, one that
has never lamented Lua's lack of a Python-like ecosystem.

What I miss most about version 3 is a seamless transition from version
2.2. I understand that 'luarocks install luarocks' cannot work,
building from source has so far also eluded me, but a binary for Linux
x86-64 might be painless, I hoped.

I unzipped it into a directory not in $PATH, and tried

$ /usr/local/src/PACKAGES/luarocks-3.0.4-linux-x86_64/luarocks list

Rocks installed for Lua 5.3
---------------------------
$

I.e. it does not find my 33 existing rocks.

There is a subtle difference (extra whitespace) in where they say the
configution file is.

Luarocks 2.2.1-2 says
System: /usr/local/etc/luarocks/config-5.3.lua (ok)

Luarocks 3.0.4 says:
System  : /usr/local/etc/luarocks/config-5.3.lua (ok)

BTW the "After installation, a default config file called config.lua
will be installed at the directory defined by --sysconfdir." seems not
to apply to luarocks 3.0.4

$ /usr/local/src/PACKAGES/luarocks-3.0.4-linux-x86_64/luarocks --sysconfdir

Error: Invalid argument: unknown flag --sysconfdir. See --help.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANN] LuaRocks 3.0.4

Sean Conner
It was thus said that the Great Dirk Laurie once stated:

> Op Wo., 31 Okt. 2018 om 01:57 het Hisham <[hidden email]> geskryf:
>
> > This is a quick announcement that version 3.0.4 of LuaRocks, the Lua
> > package manager, has been tagged and uploaded to the usual locations.
> > You can find all links at https://luarocks.org — source packages for
> > all supported platforms and binaries for Windows and Linux x86-64 are
> > available.
>
> This is not criticism, it's just a comment from a Lua user, one that
> has never lamented Lua's lack of a Python-like ecosystem.
>
> What I miss most about version 3 is a seamless transition from version
> 2.2. I understand that 'luarocks install luarocks' cannot work,
> building from source has so far also eluded me, but a binary for Linux
> x86-64 might be painless, I hoped.

  I had the same issue last month; Hisham and I went back and forth a few
times on the LuaRocks Developers mailing list.  Here's the thread:

        https://sourceforge.net/p/luarocks/mailman/message/36416169/

  -spc (It was not a painless upgrade for me either ... )


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANN] LuaRocks 3.0.4

Dirk Laurie-2
Op Wo., 31 Okt. 2018 om 09:01 het Sean Conner <[hidden email]> geskryf:

>
> It was thus said that the Great Dirk Laurie once stated:
> > Op Wo., 31 Okt. 2018 om 01:57 het Hisham <[hidden email]> geskryf:
> >
> > > This is a quick announcement that version 3.0.4 of LuaRocks, the Lua
> > > package manager, has been tagged and uploaded to the usual locations.
> > > You can find all links at https://luarocks.org — source packages for
> > > all supported platforms and binaries for Windows and Linux x86-64 are
> > > available.
> >
> > This is not criticism, it's just a comment from a Lua user, one that
> > has never lamented Lua's lack of a Python-like ecosystem.
> >
> > What I miss most about version 3 is a seamless transition from version
> > 2.2. I understand that 'luarocks install luarocks' cannot work,
> > building from source has so far also eluded me, but a binary for Linux
> > x86-64 might be painless, I hoped.
>
>   I had the same issue last month; Hisham and I went back and forth a few
> times on the LuaRocks Developers mailing list.  Here's the thread:
>
>         https://sourceforge.net/p/luarocks/mailman/message/36416169/
>
>   -spc (It was not a painless upgrade for me either ... )

Well, I'm going with the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" approach. It
is indeed ironic that the very package that is supposed to make Lua
packages easy to install and maintain, itself isn't.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANN] LuaRocks 3.0.4

Hisham
In reply to this post by Dirk Laurie-2
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 03:21, Dirk Laurie <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Op Wo., 31 Okt. 2018 om 01:57 het Hisham <[hidden email]> geskryf:
>
> > This is a quick announcement that version 3.0.4 of LuaRocks, the Lua
> > package manager, has been tagged and uploaded to the usual locations.
> > You can find all links at https://luarocks.org — source packages for
> > all supported platforms and binaries for Windows and Linux x86-64 are
> > available.
>
> This is not criticism, it's just a comment from a Lua user, one that
> has never lamented Lua's lack of a Python-like ecosystem.
>
> What I miss most about version 3 is a seamless transition from version
> 2.2. I understand that 'luarocks install luarocks' cannot work,
> building from source has so far also eluded me, but a binary for Linux
> x86-64 might be painless, I hoped.
>
> I unzipped it into a directory not in $PATH, and tried
>
> $ /usr/local/src/PACKAGES/luarocks-3.0.4-linux-x86_64/luarocks list
>
> Rocks installed for Lua 5.3
> ---------------------------
> $

Looking at the bright side, I'm happy that the binary did run in your
system without any library clashes. :)

> I.e. it does not find my 33 existing rocks.

Where are they installed? LuaRocks 3 dropped default support for
unversioned rocks trees (which caused problems for users with multiple
Lua versions), so if the path looks like /usr/lib/luarocks/rocks, it
needs to be converted to /usr/lib/luarocks/rocks-5.x (for the proper
Lua version).

Auto-converting is risky because users may have customizations in
their config files. But I think adding a warning message when an
unversion lib/luarocks/rocks dir is found would be a big improvement.

If your rocks tree lives at /usr/local/lib/luarocks/rocks or
$HOME/.luarocks/rocks, I believe simply renaming the "rocks" directory
to "rocks-5.3" should make LuaRocks 3 pick it up. Could you give that
a try? If it doesn't work, reverting will be safe and nothing will
break in your LR2 install.

> There is a subtle difference (extra whitespace) in where they say the
> configution file is.

This is true, but this is textual output meant for users to read, not
scripts. Scripts should use `luarocks config --system-config` to get
that information, and `luarocks config` to inspect the current active
LuaRocks configuration.

> Luarocks 2.2.1-2 says
> System: /usr/local/etc/luarocks/config-5.3.lua (ok)
>
> Luarocks 3.0.4 says:
> System  : /usr/local/etc/luarocks/config-5.3.lua (ok)

Out of curiosity, what are the contents of
/usr/local/etc/luarocks/config-5.3.lua ?

> BTW the "After installation, a default config file called config.lua
> will be installed at the directory defined by --sysconfdir." seems not
> to apply to luarocks 3.0.4

Is this from https://github.com/luarocks/luarocks/wiki/Installation-instructions-for-Unix
? The --sysconfdir flag there refers to the configure script which is
being discussed in that section. The instructions in that page do not
apply to the prebuilt binary.

> $ /usr/local/src/PACKAGES/luarocks-3.0.4-linux-x86_64/luarocks --sysconfdir
>
> Error: Invalid argument: unknown flag --sysconfdir. See --help.

I would love to add "setter" options to `luarocks config` so that
users can customize their configuration using commands, like `git
config` does. I am however, wary of rewriting user configuration files
which may contain arbitrary Lua code.

Thank you for the constructive feedback!

-- Hisham

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANN] LuaRocks 3.0.4

Hisham
In reply to this post by Dirk Laurie-2
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 04:18, Dirk Laurie <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Well, I'm going with the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" approach. It
> is indeed ironic that the very package that is supposed to make Lua
> packages easy to install and maintain, itself isn't.

It has to jump through all the hoops so that the other Lua packages
don't have to, so arguably it performs a harder task. :)

-- Hisham

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ANN] LuaRocks 3.0.4

Dirk Laurie-2
In reply to this post by Hisham
Op Wo., 31 Okt. 2018 om 16:00 het Hisham <[hidden email]> geskryf:

>
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 03:21, Dirk Laurie <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Op Wo., 31 Okt. 2018 om 01:57 het Hisham <[hidden email]> geskryf:
> >
> > > This is a quick announcement that version 3.0.4 of LuaRocks, the Lua
> > > package manager, has been tagged and uploaded to the usual locations.
> > > You can find all links at https://luarocks.org — source packages for
> > > all supported platforms and binaries for Windows and Linux x86-64 are
> > > available.
> >
> > This is not criticism, it's just a comment from a Lua user, one that
> > has never lamented Lua's lack of a Python-like ecosystem.
> >
> > What I miss most about version 3 is a seamless transition from version
> > 2.2. I understand that 'luarocks install luarocks' cannot work,
> > building from source has so far also eluded me, but a binary for Linux
> > x86-64 might be painless, I hoped.
> >
> > I unzipped it into a directory not in $PATH, and tried
> >
> > $ /usr/local/src/PACKAGES/luarocks-3.0.4-linux-x86_64/luarocks list
> >
> > Rocks installed for Lua 5.3
> > ---------------------------
> > $
>
> Looking at the bright side, I'm happy that the binary did run in your
> system without any library clashes. :)
>
> > I.e. it does not find my 33 existing rocks.
>
> Where are they installed?

In /usr/local/lib/luarocks/rocks/

> But I think adding a warning message when an unversion l
> ib/luarocks/rocks dir is found would be a big improvement.

Not just that, a hint like the one below. And no, I can't be sure all
those are actually 5.3 rocks.

> If your rocks tree lives at /usr/local/lib/luarocks/rocks or
> $HOME/.luarocks/rocks, I believe simply renaming the "rocks" directory
> to "rocks-5.3" should make LuaRocks 3 pick it up. Could you give that
> a try?

Yes, it works, thanks.

> Out of curiosity, what are the contents of
> /usr/local/etc/luarocks/config-5.3.lua ?

rocks_trees = {
   { name = [[user]], root = home..[[/.luarocks]] },
   { name = [[system]], root = [[/usr/local]] }
}

Now that the binary works, can it be used to install itself as a rock?



-- Dirk