[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Lua 5.2 compat



As I had couple of spare cycles, the updated package is now in experimental.

I don't have the time to test all the downstream dependencies, so I would
appreciate if you can walk through all the packages that Build-Depend or
Depend on luajit and test whether everything works as expected.

If you send me your salsa login, I can add you as a co-maintainer of the
luajit package.

(I'm not subscribed to d-d).

Ondrej
--
Ondřej Surý (He/Him)
ondrej@sury.org

> On 19. 12. 2025, at 8:37, Xiyue Deng <manphiz@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I'm now CCing debian-devel@.  Please excuse the top posting where I
> explain the status quo and seek for advice.
> 
> Bug#781728 is about enabling Lua 5.2 compatible mode in LuaJIT, which
> has been supported for at least 13 years (see the last commit touching
> the macro definition at [1]).  The main client using this is Aegisub
> which since 3.4.2 requires LuaJIT to enable 5.2 compatible mode.
> Currently Aegisub embeds its own LuaJIT so as to enable this, but as the
> embedded official LuaJIT doesn't support some of the release archs
> e.g. ppc64el, riscv64, and s390x.  The LuaJIT in Debian supports riscv64
> and s390x and can support ppc64el in newer versions.  I have filed
> Bug#1116248 to Aegisub for tracking.  It would be great if the LuaJIT in
> Debian can just enable this so that Aegisub does not need to embed it.
> (Also CCing the Aegisub maintainer just in case.)
> 
> There may be concerns on binary compatibility on enabling Lua 5.2
> compatibility mode.  I'm not an expert on library API/ABI compatibility,
> though I have done some rudimentary analysis based on library symbols,
> e.g. output of `nm -D' of libluajit-5.1.so.2.1.1737090214 from
> libluajit-5.1-2 package, and besides symbol addresses there is no diff
> (please see the nm-luajit-unpatched.txt, nm-luajit-patched.txt for the
> symbols before and after applying the patch, and
> nm-luajit-unpatched-vs-patched.diff for the diff).  I think this should
> suggest that it is a safe change, and even if it is not, a transition
> should be sufficient to resolve any incompatibility.
> 
> The reason for including debian-devel@ in the discussion is that there
> has been no reply from the Lua maintainers or package uploaders since.
> I'd like to first state that this email has no ill-intention, as people
> may be busy due to life, work, etc. so it's totally understandable.  I
> would just like to try to move things forward.  Of course, if the Lua
> maintainers or uploaders would like to provide any guidance it would
> still be welcome.  But in case there is none, I wonder what would be the
> best way to proceed?  As currently I don't claim that I have the
> required specialty to be an uploader, would a NMU be acceptable (and
> commit to Salsa so that this doesn't get lost)?  As a DM, I would still
> need a sponsor if this is the way forward.
> 
> Thanks in advance!  And any advice (or suggestion to better handle this
> situation) would be appreciated.
> 
> (Please also see below for previous communications on this bug.)
> 
> Xiyue Deng <manphiz@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> Xiyue Deng <manphiz@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>>> (CCing the package uploaders.)
>>> 
>>> Xiyue Deng <manphiz@gmail.com> writes:
>>> 
>>>> Xiyue Deng <manphiz@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, 27 Dec 2024 13:08:17 +0100 =?UTF-8?Q?Aniol_Mart=C3=AD?= 
>>>>> <aniol.marti@riseup.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Maintainer,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> i am the maintainer of Aegisub. Version 3.4.0 was recently released but 
>>>>>> it requires LuaJIT with Lua 5.2 compat. Are there any plans about 
>>>>>> supporting it?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We are currently discussing it in 
>>>>>> https://github.com/TypesettingTools/Aegisub/issues/239. One option that 
>>>>>> I'm considering is bundling LuaJIT with Aegisub, but the Debian Policy 
>>>>>> encourages not doing that. Do you know if there are any other packages 
>>>>>> in a similar situation?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Aniol
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> As David mentioned in [1], this should be as simple as adding 
>>>>> "-DLUAJIT_ENABLE_LUA52COMPAT" to CFLAGS and it should be ABI/API 
>>>>> compatible.  Please consider adding this support so that Aegisub and 
>>>>> other packages can use it directly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=781728#16
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Xiyue Deng
>>>> 
>>>> I have tested adding the flags and the result is promising: aegisub can
>>>> now directly build against libluajit-5.1-dev built with the flags and
>>>> works well.
>>>> 
>>>> I have created a MR on Salsa[1] and hope it can be reviewed and merged.
>>>> 
>>>> [1] https://salsa.debian.org/lua-team/luajit/-/merge_requests/3
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Friendly ping.  This is a blocking issue for Aegisub and currently
>>> preventing it from migrating to Forky.
>>> 
>>> Though my previous claim may be wrong that enabling this flag may
>>> probably require a transition.  I would like to help analyze the
>>> situation and move this bug forward.  TIA!
>>> 
>> 
>> Friendly ping.  It's concerning that we still haven't heard back from
>> the Lua team, though it's understandable that the Lua team may be busy
>> with daily life/work.  I intend to bring this topic to debian-devel@ for
>> comments next, not for pushing, but to seek for suggestions on resolving
>> this issue.
>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Xiyue Deng
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Regards,
>>> Xiyue Deng
> 
> [1] https://github.com/LuaJIT/LuaJIT/commit/23932a6c8b7ef434bc963139b4160b1058fa6f7f
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Xiyue Deng
> <nm-luajit-patched.txt><nm-luajit-unpatched.txt><nm-luajit-unpatched-vs-patched.diff>


Reply to: