[Bug 1882] RTEMS Lua Support

[bugzilla-daemon at rtems.org]

https://www.rtems.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1882

Ralf Corsepius <ralf.corsepius at rtems.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ralf.corsepius at rtems.org

--- Comment #3 from Ralf Corsepius <ralf.corsepius at rtems.org> 2011-08-05 23:57:07 CDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I am on my way out the door. So this is just a question...
> 
> + Is this unmodified Lua source code?
This seems to be lua-5.1.4/src from http://www.lua.org/ftp/lua-5.1.4.tar.gz
with changes applied.

Most changes appear to be related to eleminating symbol clashes between lua and
the rest of the world, because liblua obviously is not symbol-namespace clean.

Whether all these changes are necessary, is not clear to me. My gut feeling is
some are, most probably aren't (but I could be wrong), and some probably are
reflections of RTEMS not being namespace clean.

When reverting these changes, only very few directly RTEMS related changes
remain. 

That said, I am in favor of not adding this tarball to RTEMS, but to
+ keep liblua as external add-package (Won't be trivial, due to lua's arcane
make system).
or
+ to apply the same approach as we did with librpc/httpd, i.e. to apply a
cascade of #define's/-D's to resolve the name-clashes, while trying to avoid to
modify the original source-code

Besides this: www.lua.org doesn't communicate "being an active project". Also,
I am stilll having general doubts on whether having liblua in RTEMS is worth
it.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://www.rtems.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.