On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Patrick Donnelly <pdonnell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Supporting multiple versions of Lua isn't a good idea. I suggest > sticking with Lua 5.3. [This has the consequence of making LuaJIT > unsupported by cls-lua but I'm personally okay with that. There isn't > any strong reason to maintain support with LuaJIT and it lacks many > new Lua facilities we will want (like string.pack).] One compelling reason for LuaJIT is that it supports linking against C libraries dynamically. So for instance linking against ImageMagick to create thumbnail compression plugin is possible without writing any C glue. But really the first version of cls_lua is probably not the last version and that sort of thing can come later. > Is it not okay to require distributions to build our bundled Lua if > they don't have 5.3 in their repos? I too would very much prefer supporting a single version (5.3). Since distro-provided versions of Lua don't satisfy our goal of supporting a single Lua version, the two+ options are: 1) statically link the Lua VM into Ceph like we had been doing 2) produce distro-specific packages only for Ceph (I think once upon a time this was done for LevelDB?) 3) ?? - Noah -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
