Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
29 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

gmc1
Hi guys,

I created portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries (I think are important IMHO) included for those who are pretty frustrated from compilation of Lua C modules on Windows and installation help from the authors. Specially I want to mention lsqlite3 module, luasql-mysql module and luasec module. Such approach doesn't help to wider Lua usage.

Lua is very powerful and elegant language and not everyone who wants to learn it is experienced in C language. If you want to start your Lua adventure with latest Lua please feel free to download it. It runs even from USB.

Whats included:
lua 5.3.3
lpeg 1.0.0-1
lrexlib-pcre 2.8.0-1
lsqlite3 0.9.3-0
luafilesystem 1.6.3-2
luasec 0.6-1
luasocket 3.0rc1-2
luasql-mysql cvs-1
luautf8 0.1.1-1
md5 1.2-1
microlight 1.0-1
penlight 1.3.2-2 ... perfect for studying Lua code

You can find it here:
https://github.com/is73/Lua-5.3-Portable-Batteries-Windows-10-32bit

I.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

Dirk Laurie-2
2016-07-25 11:07 GMT+02:00 Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]>:

> lua 5.3.3
> ...
> luautf8 0.1.1-1

Remind us ... what does luautf8 provide that Lua 5.3's utf8 library
does not?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

gmc1
I can't find, say utf8.gsub() in Lua 5.3's utf8 library but any advice is appreciated.


** Mon, 25 Jul 2016 11:48:07 +0200 - "Lua mailing list" <[hidden email]> **

2016-07-25 11:07 GMT+02:00 Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]>:

> lua 5.3.3
> ...
> luautf8 0.1.1-1

Remind us ... what does luautf8 provide that Lua 5.3's utf8 library
does not?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

Hisham
In reply to this post by gmc1
On 25 July 2016 at 06:07, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> I created portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries (I think are important IMHO) included for those who are pretty frustrated from compilation of Lua C modules on Windows and installation help from the authors. Specially I want to mention lsqlite3 module, luasql-mysql module and luasec module. Such approach doesn't help to wider Lua usage.
>
> Lua is very powerful and elegant language and not everyone who wants to learn it is experienced in C language. If you want to start your Lua adventure with latest Lua please feel free to download it. It runs even from USB.
>
> Whats included:
> lua 5.3.3
> lpeg 1.0.0-1
> lrexlib-pcre 2.8.0-1
> lsqlite3 0.9.3-0
> luafilesystem 1.6.3-2
> luasec 0.6-1
> luasocket 3.0rc1-2
> luasql-mysql cvs-1
> luautf8 0.1.1-1
> md5 1.2-1
> microlight 1.0-1
> penlight 1.3.2-2 ... perfect for studying Lua code
>
> You can find it here:
> https://github.com/is73/Lua-5.3-Portable-Batteries-Windows-10-32bit

Nice!

Given that the version numbers above include LuaRocks revision
numbers, it's fair to assume that these were built thanks to their
rockspecs. :-D So that being the case, would you consider including
LuaRocks itself in the package, making life easy for users who would
like to use it to fetch other pure-Lua modules?

Cheers!

-- Hisham

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

gmc1
Hisham, Hisham

as a creator and maintainer of Luarocks will you do something with module naming conventions?

Luarocks is big help for Lua community, but it would be nice to ask module authors and maintainers they try to compile their work (specially if it is promoted as multi-platform) for themselves. I work mostly on Linux but most people I know work mostly in Windows, most of my clients also.

LuaSQL-MySQL is good example. It's luarock will never compile on that weird thing called Windows. It's because bad library name in module's rockspecs file. There is no library named mysqlclient.dll in MySQL installation on Windows. Right name is libmysql.dll. Nobody even the author can compile his own module with this rockspecs and never did. Never tried that, but uploaded it to Luarocks server and someone approved it.

This is disgusting for Lua beginners. I tried that on myself, I know it. Language is cool but small, containing only base tools (it's for purpose and it's ok). If you need something more, you can install additional modules. But modules have confusing names, sometimes have no help for installation specially for Windows platform and sometimes are not tested by their authors :(

This is why Lua community is much smaller than communities of other languages. May be it is for purpose to have small community and still work (starting new projects) in Lua 5.1 (really don't blame it), I don't know :)

How many very popular C modules are there which provide what is easy installable in other languages or is a part of the standard library, standard installation, like connection via https or connection to mysql? 10? 20? Is it so hard to ask authors to verify their work? People want it, need it, these modules are on the list of most downloaded modules.

People in this mailing list are able to talk whole days about missing "continue" command or stupid holes in tables? What about to do something for newcomers, like Steve did with Unofficial FAQ or with his very well documented Penlight module. Sometime I have strong feeling that on Lua.org home page should be first links to download 5.1, luadist, luapower, ulua, zerobrane and download link for 5.3 should be at the very end.

This was written in good intensions. Going to compile something :)
Thank you.

I.

> ** Mon, 25 Jul 2016 22:20:59 -0300 - "Lua mailing list" <[hidden email]> **
>
> On 25 July 2016 at 06:07, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I created portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries (I think are important IMHO) included for those who are pretty frustrated from compilation of Lua C modules on Windows and installation help from the authors. Specially I want to mention lsqlite3 module, luasql-mysql module and luasec module. Such approach doesn't help to wider Lua usage.
> >
> > Lua is very powerful and elegant language and not everyone who wants to learn it is experienced in C language. If you want to start your Lua adventure with latest Lua please feel free to download it. It runs even from USB.
> >
> > Whats included:
> > lua 5.3.3
> > lpeg 1.0.0-1
> > lrexlib-pcre 2.8.0-1
> > lsqlite3 0.9.3-0
> > luafilesystem 1.6.3-2
> > luasec 0.6-1
> > luasocket 3.0rc1-2
> > luasql-mysql cvs-1
> > luautf8 0.1.1-1
> > md5 1.2-1
> > microlight 1.0-1
> > penlight 1.3.2-2 ... perfect for studying Lua code
> >
> > You can find it here:
> > https://github.com/is73/Lua-5.3-Portable-Batteries-Windows-10-32bit
>
> Nice!
>
> Given that the version numbers above include LuaRocks revision
> numbers, it's fair to assume that these were built thanks to their
> rockspecs. :-D So that being the case, would you consider including
> LuaRocks itself in the package, making life easy for users who would
> like to use it to fetch other pure-Lua modules?
>
> Cheers!
>
> -- Hisham

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

steve donovan
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> LuaSQL-MySQL is good example. It's luarock will never compile on that weird thing called Windows. It's because bad library name in module's rockspecs file. There is no library named mysqlclient.dll in MySQL installation on Windows. Right name is libmysql.dll.

Then that's a bug - bother the rockspec maintainer. Part of the
problem is most of us don't do the weird thing and don't _test_ on the
weird thing.  Certainly Hisham can't test all the rockspecs he gets
from people, it's the original author's responsibility and the
community's responsibility to alert the author.

> How many very popular C modules are there which provide what is easy installable in other languages or is a part of the standard library, standard installation, like connection via https or connection to mysql? 10? 20? Is it so hard to ask authors to verify their work?

We get spoiled on well-set up development boxes. For instance, Debian
packages most of the useful Lua libraries, it's an apt-get away.

Hence, the work you are doing is very important - you do the
compilation so that others don't have to !

steve d.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

steve donovan
In reply to this post by gmc1
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> People in this mailing list are able to talk whole days about missing "continue" command or stupid holes in tables?

Man, it bothers me too. It isn't representative of most happy users of
the language, but the question is, how do people get over the
difficulties to become happy users?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

gmc1
In reply to this post by steve donovan
Hi, Steve

I certainly don't want from Hisham to test rocks, just remind authors to do that, as I wrote.
There are only several C modules which people consider "normal" in other languages and try to install them, if it not works, they blame Lua, Luarocks, whole community. Internet is full of posts "Why not Lua" and every one is related to this problem.

I work on Arch Linux several years and use Luarocks which works well on Linux.
I think the problem is in the claim "You are not your user". Please think about it.

> ** Tue, 26 Jul 2016 10:47:25 +0200 - "Lua mailing list" <[hidden email]> **
>
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > LuaSQL-MySQL is good example. It's luarock will never compile on that weird thing called Windows. It's because bad library name in module's rockspecs file. There is no library named mysqlclient.dll in MySQL installation on Windows. Right name is libmysql.dll.
>
> Then that's a bug - bother the rockspec maintainer. Part of the
> problem is most of us don't do the weird thing and don't _test_ on the
> weird thing.  Certainly Hisham can't test all the rockspecs he gets
> from people, it's the original author's responsibility and the
> community's responsibility to alert the author.
>
> > How many very popular C modules are there which provide what is easy installable in other languages or is a part of the standard library, standard installation, like connection via https or connection to mysql? 10? 20? Is it so hard to ask authors to verify their work?
>
> We get spoiled on well-set up development boxes. For instance, Debian
> packages most of the useful Lua libraries, it's an apt-get away.
>
> Hence, the work you are doing is very important - you do the
> compilation so that others don't have to !
>
> steve d.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

gmc1
In reply to this post by steve donovan
I create manual for them :)


** Tue, 26 Jul 2016 10:48:50 +0200 - "Lua mailing list" <[hidden email]> **

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> People in this mailing list are able to talk whole days about missing "continue" command or stupid holes in tables?

Man, it bothers me too. It isn't representative of most happy users of
the language, but the question is, how do people get over the
difficulties to become happy users?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

Dirk Laurie-2
In reply to this post by steve donovan
2016-07-26 10:48 GMT+02:00 steve donovan <[hidden email]>:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> People in this mailing list are able to talk whole days about missing "continue" command or stupid holes in tables?
>
> Man, it bothers me too. It isn't representative of most happy users of
> the language, but the question is, how do people get over the
> difficulties to become happy users?

As a non-Windows user, I am happy that the OP has hijacked his own
thread with the remark you quote (my take on it is that those discussions
are a form of "creative procrastination" — google it) but as someone
who feels that a major strength of Lua is its near platform-independence.

There is a website of Lua modules with a less pemissive attitude than
"the more the merrier". Someone who likes the module (need not be the
author) nominates it, and the site keeps track of how many people
endorse it. That site (I have no issue with it, it is a step in the right
direction, so I'm not naming-and-flaming) just does not go far enough.
The information "This module has been reported to/not to work with
Lua x.y on system z" should be available, preferably as a colour-coded
table. Nothing less than operability across Windows.Mac/Linux/Android
should be acceptable for all-green.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

gmc1
Thank you


** Tue, 26 Jul 2016 11:07:31 +0200 - "Lua mailing list" <[hidden email]> **

2016-07-26 10:48 GMT+02:00 steve donovan <[hidden email]>:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> People in this mailing list are able to talk whole days about missing "continue" command or stupid holes in tables?
>
> Man, it bothers me too. It isn't representative of most happy users of
> the language, but the question is, how do people get over the
> difficulties to become happy users?

As a non-Windows user, I am happy that the OP has hijacked his own
thread with the remark you quote (my take on it is that those discussions
are a form of "creative procrastination" — google it) but as someone
who feels that a major strength of Lua is its near platform-independence.

There is a website of Lua modules with a less pemissive attitude than
"the more the merrier". Someone who likes the module (need not be the
author) nominates it, and the site keeps track of how many people
endorse it. That site (I have no issue with it, it is a step in the right
direction, so I'm not naming-and-flaming) just does not go far enough.
The information "This module has been reported to/not to work with
Lua x.y on system z" should be available, preferably as a colour-coded
table. Nothing less than operability across Windows.Mac/Linux/Android
should be acceptable for all-green.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

Xavier Wang
In reply to this post by Hisham
2016-07-26 9:20 GMT+08:00 Hisham <[hidden email]>:

> Given that the version numbers above include LuaRocks revision
> numbers, it's fair to assume that these were built thanks to their
> rockspecs. :-D So that being the case, would you consider including
> LuaRocks itself in the package, making life easy for users who would
> like to use it to fetch other pure-Lua modules?
>
> Cheers!
>
> -- Hisham
>

Hi dear Hisham,

I love Lua language, and now my hobby is writing Lua C module for fun.
But I found luarocks is far more difficult to maintain all my modules.

I have several modules, but maintain them are very difficult. After
make changes, I had to:
  - test on many platform
  - assign a new version (and a new version to rockspec itself)
  - update my rockspecs
  - commit it to github
  - make a release
  - write release note
  - make a source rock
  - login in luarocks.org, and upload this rock (I still can not find
out how to use upload command of luarocks)

I know, I know, npm is a company, and luarocks is freeware, no one pay
for you for it. I know mostly is I don't know how to use luarocks,
it's not luarocks' fault. But it really makes me unhappy! I even
doesn't have once success when type "luarocks install luarocks". I use
my own layout of Lua (build it myself to support both MinGW and MSVC),
so everytime I upgrade luarocks (yes, by hand), I will carefully
manually edit config.lua to make luarocks happy. I just hope when I
want to make some changes to my module, I only need commit to github,
and give it a tag, and users can happily use luarocks update
<rockname> to get lastest result. I hope I (and users) could get
binary modules directly, static linked with libcmt.lib, optimized well
and lies comfortably in my own Lua installations, no need fight with
the terrible build environment on Windows. I hope everything could
easy as npm or cpan or pacman or even brew. But currently luarocks
really makes me feel bad.

But I still love luarocks, it's the only package manager of Lua
language. Lua is so perfect, but have not huge modules like Python. I
hope someday I could use Lua to make everything I make in Python
before. Because write Lua is SO FREEDOM! I only hope it could be
better. it may have a cache system, needn't download rocks times and
times when build failure (and I manually use "download" command to
solve it). it may split build system and other misc things into
standalone rocks, to build a rocks, just a little script(just like
brew) requiring some standard rocks module, it will done
automatically. it may support github or bitbucket or whatever directly
and needn't require a "url" entry in rockspecs file. it may
download(and upload) binary modules by default, and author could
easily upload them own. it support local deps repo and global repo as
well (just like package.json and node_modules directory things of
npm). I hope use luarocks makes me happy, makes life easy, and makes
more and more people start to use Lua to solve daily task.

Still thanks for write this great software for Lua. I know it becoming
better and better now. I just hope it could be the best.

Sorry for my noise.

--
regards,
Xavier Wang.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

John Hind
In reply to this post by gmc1
> | On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | > People in this mailing list are able to talk whole days about missing
> | "continue" command or stupid holes in tables?
> |
> | Man, it bothers me too. It isn't representative of most happy users of
the
> | language, but the question is, how do people get over the difficulties
to
> | become happy users?

I think you both misread this: people obsess about the tiny imperfections in
Lua precisely because they are very happy users. It is because Lua is
already so very good that people think it has a shot at perfection.
Personally I would never bother to contribute to a discussion about
improving JavaScript because it is such a steaming mess that I would not
know where to start. Only Forth is worse, and it at least is interestingly
bad!



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

Coda Highland
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 8:40 AM, John Hind <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> | On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> | > People in this mailing list are able to talk whole days about missing
>> | "continue" command or stupid holes in tables?
>> |
>> | Man, it bothers me too. It isn't representative of most happy users of
> the
>> | language, but the question is, how do people get over the difficulties
> to
>> | become happy users?
>
> I think you both misread this: people obsess about the tiny imperfections in
> Lua precisely because they are very happy users. It is because Lua is
> already so very good that people think it has a shot at perfection.
> Personally I would never bother to contribute to a discussion about
> improving JavaScript because it is such a steaming mess that I would not
> know where to start. Only Forth is worse, and it at least is interestingly
> bad!
>

This. Those tiny imperfections are the things that very happy users
see as the only major obstacles (besides marketing) preventing other
developers from also becoming very happy users. The stuff that gets
the most discussion is the stuff that pretty much everyone will bump
their head on at some point, and the idea that fixing those little
things could result in a flawless jewel of a language is ever so
tantalizing.

/s/ Adam

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

Andrew Starks-2
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Coda Highland <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 8:40 AM, John Hind <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> | On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> | > People in this mailing list are able to talk whole days about missing
>>> | "continue" command or stupid holes in tables?
>>> |
>>> | Man, it bothers me too. It isn't representative of most happy users of
>> the
>>> | language, but the question is, how do people get over the difficulties
>> to
>>> | become happy users?
>>
>> I think you both misread this: people obsess about the tiny imperfections in
>> Lua precisely because they are very happy users. It is because Lua is
>> already so very good that people think it has a shot at perfection.
>> Personally I would never bother to contribute to a discussion about
>> improving JavaScript because it is such a steaming mess that I would not
>> know where to start. Only Forth is worse, and it at least is interestingly
>> bad!
>>
>
> This. Those tiny imperfections are the things that very happy users
> see as the only major obstacles (besides marketing) preventing other
> developers from also becoming very happy users. The stuff that gets
> the most discussion is the stuff that pretty much everyone will bump
> their head on at some point, and the idea that fixing those little
> things could result in a flawless jewel of a language is ever so
> tantalizing.
>
> /s/ Adam
>

I have the same notion: for what Lua is, it may be close to perfect.

If you're a football fan, you can stand in front of your television
and scream advice to your favorite team. On this list, anyone who
knows how to operate a computer can decide to try their hand at
language design and offer up extensions, complete with implementation
advice, to people with doctorates.

Meanwhile, most developers that I know hate it when their manager
comes in with half-baked solutions to problems that they're paid to
solve.

My complaint is that we (the segment of the internet that hangs out
here) have a habit forget that sharing experience and real problems
are helpful and advice is only accepted when it is sparingly,
carefully and humbly given. It's easy to understand why it happens:
people are often passionate, want their ideas to be valued and to be
thought of as competent and creative. Unfortunately, it also displays
a lack of empathy that works against making the language better and
the conversations less grinding.


--
Andrew Starks

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

Sean Conner
In reply to this post by gmc1
It was thus said that the Great Pavel Drotar once stated:
> Hi guys,
>
> I created portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10)
> with some batteries (I think are important IMHO) included for those who
> are pretty frustrated from compilation of Lua C modules on Windows and
> installation help from the authors. Specially I want to mention lsqlite3
> module, luasql-mysql module and luasec module. Such approach doesn't help
> to wider Lua usage.

  Are you aware of ULua: Universal Lua Distribution?

        http://ulua.io

  -spc (Seems like it has a similar goal)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

Dirk Laurie-2
In reply to this post by John Hind
2016-07-26 17:40 GMT+02:00 John Hind <[hidden email]>:

> Only Forth is worse, and it at least is interestingly bad!

At least you can redefine _everything_ in Forth. If it is still
bad, it's your own fault.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

gmc1
In reply to this post by Sean Conner
Hi Sean,

thanks for your suggestion, I am aware of it but as far as I know it doesn't contain luasec module (I need it) or am I wrong?

I


** Tue, 26 Jul 2016 12:02:15 -0400 - "Lua mailing list" <[hidden email]> **

It was thus said that the Great Pavel Drotar once stated:
> Hi guys,
>
> I created portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10)
> with some batteries (I think are important IMHO) included for those who
> are pretty frustrated from compilation of Lua C modules on Windows and
> installation help from the authors. Specially I want to mention lsqlite3
> module, luasql-mysql module and luasec module. Such approach doesn't help
> to wider Lua usage.

Are you aware of ULua: Universal Lua Distribution?

http://ulua.io

-spc (Seems like it has a similar goal)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

Sean Conner
It was thus said that the Great Pavel Drotar once stated:

 ...

First off, you are sending HTML-only replies.  Not all of us can deal with
this (I can't, at least, not easily).  

  Secondly (and I did read your reply), you are right, ULua does not contain
luasec, but only because Windows Is Not Unix and thus, doesn't come with
OpenSSL (and OS-X is problematic because it doesn't like OpenSSL).

  -spc


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries

Nagaev Boris
In reply to this post by gmc1
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hisham, Hisham
>
> as a creator and maintainer of Luarocks will you do something with module naming conventions?
>
> Luarocks is big help for Lua community, but it would be nice to ask module authors and maintainers they try to compile their work (specially if it is promoted as multi-platform) for themselves. I work mostly on Linux but most people I know work mostly in Windows, most of my clients also.
>
> LuaSQL-MySQL is good example. It's luarock will never compile on that weird thing called Windows. It's because bad library name in module's rockspecs file. There is no library named mysqlclient.dll in MySQL installation on Windows. Right name is libmysql.dll. Nobody even the author can compile his own module with this rockspecs and never did. Never tried that, but uploaded it to Luarocks server and someone approved it.

It depends on distribution. For example, in MXE it is called libmysqlclient.dll

I think, the most convenient way of building something for Windows is
to cross-compile it. That is why I added luarocks and several packages
(rocks) to MXE:
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.lua.luarocks/5865


> This is disgusting for Lua beginners. I tried that on myself, I know it. Language is cool but small, containing only base tools (it's for purpose and it's ok). If you need something more, you can install additional modules. But modules have confusing names, sometimes have no help for installation specially for Windows platform and sometimes are not tested by their authors :(
>
> This is why Lua community is much smaller than communities of other languages. May be it is for purpose to have small community and still work (starting new projects) in Lua 5.1 (really don't blame it), I don't know :)
>
> How many very popular C modules are there which provide what is easy installable in other languages or is a part of the standard library, standard installation, like connection via https or connection to mysql? 10? 20? Is it so hard to ask authors to verify their work? People want it, need it, these modules are on the list of most downloaded modules.
>
> People in this mailing list are able to talk whole days about missing "continue" command or stupid holes in tables? What about to do something for newcomers, like Steve did with Unofficial FAQ or with his very well documented Penlight module. Sometime I have strong feeling that on Lua.org home page should be first links to download 5.1, luadist, luapower, ulua, zerobrane and download link for 5.3 should be at the very end.
>
> This was written in good intensions. Going to compile something :)
> Thank you.
>
> I.
>
>> ** Mon, 25 Jul 2016 22:20:59 -0300 - "Lua mailing list" <[hidden email]> **
>>
>> On 25 July 2016 at 06:07, Pavel Drotar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > Hi guys,
>> >
>> > I created portable binary distribution of Lua 5.3.3 (32bit on Windows 10) with some batteries (I think are important IMHO) included for those who are pretty frustrated from compilation of Lua C modules on Windows and installation help from the authors. Specially I want to mention lsqlite3 module, luasql-mysql module and luasec module. Such approach doesn't help to wider Lua usage.
>> >
>> > Lua is very powerful and elegant language and not everyone who wants to learn it is experienced in C language. If you want to start your Lua adventure with latest Lua please feel free to download it. It runs even from USB.
>> >
>> > Whats included:
>> > lua 5.3.3
>> > lpeg 1.0.0-1
>> > lrexlib-pcre 2.8.0-1
>> > lsqlite3 0.9.3-0
>> > luafilesystem 1.6.3-2
>> > luasec 0.6-1
>> > luasocket 3.0rc1-2
>> > luasql-mysql cvs-1
>> > luautf8 0.1.1-1
>> > md5 1.2-1
>> > microlight 1.0-1
>> > penlight 1.3.2-2 ... perfect for studying Lua code
>> >
>> > You can find it here:
>> > https://github.com/is73/Lua-5.3-Portable-Batteries-Windows-10-32bit
>>
>> Nice!
>>
>> Given that the version numbers above include LuaRocks revision
>> numbers, it's fair to assume that these were built thanks to their
>> rockspecs. :-D So that being the case, would you consider including
>> LuaRocks itself in the package, making life easy for users who would
>> like to use it to fetch other pure-Lua modules?
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> -- Hisham
>



--


Best regards,
Boris Nagaev

12