> as NuttX does not support the function system() Hmm, I don't think this is true. You just need to enable `system()` in configuration
http://nuttx-config.nxtlabs.pl/#/?current=SYSTEM_SYSTEM Am Do., 10. Juni 2021 um 17:52 Uhr schrieb Fotis Panagiotopoulos < f.j.pa...@gmail.com>: > Regarding Lua. > > I have been using Lua in MCU environment for many years now. > This is the first time to use it along with NuttX. > > I am using Lua 5.2.4, for which I have ported the LTR patch, as described > here: > http://www.eluaproject.net/doc/v0.9/en_arch_ltr.html > > The way I am using it, is to enable the end user to provide their own logic > to the system. > Essentially they provide the end application that runs on my hardware. > Custom Lua libraries allow the Lua scripts to interface the board. > > "Porting" Lua to NuttX was a piece of cake*. > I just downloaded the source code, configured luaconf.h and built it. > The only modification that I did to the source code was to comment out the > os.execute function, as NuttX does not support the function system(). > I am not sure if this can be easily fixed in NuttX or Lua, or whether this > functionality is generally required in an MCU environment. > > (*Note however that this is a WIP for me, so it is not properly tested yet. > Issues may arise, but for the moment I don't see any reason for .) > > Στις Πέμ, 10 Ιουν 2021 στις 2:57 μ.μ., ο/η Xiang Xiao < > xiaoxiang781...@gmail.com> έγραψε: > > > It would be great to put NuttX special build files to apps/interpreters > > folder after you finish the port, so other people can benefit from your > > work and improve it in the future. For the code change, I would > > suggest that: > > 1. If the api called by 3rd party is very common in other Unix variants > but > > NuttX is not implemented or the implementation is wrong, it's better to > > improve NuttX instead of hacking the 3rd party code. > > 2. If the api is hard to implement in NuttX(e.g. fork), but there is a > more > > portable way to write the same functionality(e.g. > > posix_spawn/pthread_create), it's better to make a common change not > > specific to NuttX.(e.g. > > https://gitlab.com/libssh/libssh-mirror/-/merge_requests/174). > > 3.The last resort is to add __NuttX__ around the broken code. > > Last, it's better to upstream your change to NuttX and 3rd party > community, > > so both sides can maintain and improve your change in the long term. > > > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 5:58 PM Flavio Castro Alves Filho < > > flavio.al...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > We really ought to talk to the Lua team and see if we can upstream > the > > > > changes. Unsupported ports in NuttX don't have good shelf life. > > > > > > > > > > I believe that one of the reasons is that Lua's major use case is to > > > be embedded inside applications, isn't it? > > > > > > I don't know if Lua is used so much as a replacement for bash, perl or > > > python .. > > > > > > In this case, maybe a document explaining how to add on a project > > > could be enough :-| > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Flavio > > > > > >
