|Summary:||lang/luajit: Update to 2.1.0-beta3|
|Product:||Ports & Packages||Reporter:||Greg V <greg>|
|Component:||Individual Port(s)||Assignee:||Sergey A. Osokin <osa>|
|Severity:||Affects Only Me||CC:||adamw, daniel.engberg.lists, garga, mikael, w.schwarzenfeld|
|Bug Depends on:||226537, 226541|
Description Greg V 2018-01-20 18:19:24 UTC
Created attachment 189934 [details] luajit-2.1.beta3.patch You might want to wait for 2.1.0 final release, but just throwing this out there — it works on arm64!
Comment 1 Sergey A. Osokin 2018-01-20 19:03:01 UTC
Hi Greg, thanks for the report. At first look the patch looks incomplete: PORTREVISION should be removed. Also, several ports depend on lang/luajit and should be updated with this change, this is why I've recommended to garga@ to raise a review in Phabricator.
Comment 2 Greg V 2018-01-21 12:26:06 UTC
benchmarks/wrk was fixed upstream: https://github.com/wg/wrk/issues/314 asked them for a release. editors/neovim fixed a non-fatal error, not related to the update but to arm64: https://github.com/neovim/neovim/issues/7879 Apparently "it doesn't seem like a final release [of LuaJIT 2.1] will be out anytime soon". Debian testing is shipping 2.1.0-beta3 already.
Comment 3 Walter Schwarzenfeld 2018-03-11 19:27:53 UTC
Could this included or is it out of time? bugs #191476.
Comment 5 Greg V 2018-03-11 23:11:16 UTC
Created attachment 191436 [details] luajit-2.1.beta3.patch v2 (In reply to w.schwarzenfeld from comment #3) I'm not sure what exactly you meant, but I've included that pthread patch in this update. Plus fixes for dependent ports. I think most of them should work now…
Comment 6 Sergey A. Osokin 2018-04-21 05:00:04 UTC
Looks very good for me.
Comment 7 Greg V 2018-08-07 16:50:41 UTC
Created attachment 195982 [details] luajit-2.1.beta3.patch Updated with fixes for more dependent ports.
Comment 8 Adam Weinberger 2019-01-05 21:33:30 UTC
What's the status here? It would be nice to see luajit get updated.
Comment 9 Mikael Urankar 2020-02-03 18:04:31 UTC
Comment 10 Adam Weinberger 2020-02-03 21:33:49 UTC
Sergey, are you planning on committing this?
Comment 11 Sergey A. Osokin 2020-02-10 21:11:36 UTC
Thanks for the new patch. Looks good for me. There are several ports are involved in this update. I believe we can test (do a build?) those propertly before we commit the change.
Comment 13 daniel.engberg.lists 2020-03-20 08:47:04 UTC
Perhaps it would be worth looking at porting moonjit https://github.com/moonjit/moonjit or raptorjit https://github.com/raptorjit/raptorjit instead which seems to be much more active and make it default instead?
Comment 14 Greg V 2020-03-21 00:14:18 UTC
(In reply to daniel.engberg.lists from comment #13) Huh, moonjit is the integration fork I sent a PR to before it was called moonjit. https://github.com/moonjit/moonjit/pull/1 I'm for moonjit then. Though my interest in this has significantly lowered since neovim gained support for normal lua.. (and I switched to another editor later anyway lol)
Comment 15 Adam Weinberger 2020-03-21 19:25:51 UTC
Greg and Daniel, I really appreciate your input here! You know far more about this than I do. Do you have a feel for moonjit vs raptorjit? Also, is there a substantive benefit to luajit over lua in neovim?
Comment 16 Greg V 2020-03-22 20:27:57 UTC
(In reply to Adam Weinberger from comment #15) Moon expands portability (powerpc64, s390x), Raptor destroys portability ("removing #ifdef features that are not required for Linux/x86-64 e.g. Windows support, 32-bit heap support, and non-x86 backends"). Raptor is not suitable for replacing an OS package of luajit, Moon is.
Comment 17 Mikael Urankar 2020-11-17 16:07:31 UTC
any progress on this?
Comment 18 daniel.engberg.lists 2020-12-02 08:42:07 UTC
moonjit is dead so I'd suggest that we should point everything to openresty fork.