On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:34:36PM +0200, Peter Ljung wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 3:18 PM, James Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:58:51PM +0200, Peter Ljung wrote: > >> This is my first attempt to make a port for the howl editor > >> (https://howl.io/). > >> > >> I think howl is a *really* good alternative editor which compares well > >> with e.g. > >> Sublime Text for my uses. > >> > >> Also it doesn't come with a huge baggage like the Electron based editors > >> Atom and VS Code. > >> > >> * The upstream code builds cleanly on OpenBSD since 0.4 release > >> * A stability issue (I found) on OpenBSD was fixed in last point release > >> 0.5.2 > >> > >> I have tried my best to create a suitable port. > >> > >> The current port is available at: > >> > >> https://github.com/peterljung/howleditor > >> > >> Some things I have came across ... > >> > >> * I have installed and tested the port on 6.1 and 6.2 release (amd64) > >> * It is called howleditor to avoid conflict with avahi > >> * Avahi has a "@conflict howl-*" in PLIST > >> * I made a small patch in the Makefile to force setting PREFIX variable > >> which otherwise is set by ports infrastructure > >> > >> Any tips for improvements? > >> > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > Port looks pretty good. Biggest thing you're going to want to fix is how > > Howl downloads external dependencies and builds them locally. You will > > want to use our ports versions. Ie. LuaJIT, LPEG and maybe others. > > > > -- > > James Turner > > Thanks for feedback! > > I actually asked upstream about using ports versions: > > As @kirbyfan64 said, we embed LuaJIT ourselves and link in statically. It > would > be theoretically possible to use 2.0.5, but we switched to 2.1-beta two years > ago so I can't say for sure. Also, any LuaJIT would need to be compiled with > the > correct compile options also (lua 5.2 compat enabled). We also patch > LUA_IDSIZE > to be slightly larger. > > In short I see the desire to use a system Lua version, but as we don't link it > dynamically there's nothing to gain with regards to executable size, and the > needed changes above makes it not worth the while IMO. Release tarballs > already > contain a bundled copy of LuaJIT. > > ... > > So there are some reasons not to use port versions, but someone with more > lua/porting experience might be able to determine what to do? >
Makes sense, I guess I was more concerned with the port downloading dependencies, but if they are bundled with the tarball that takes care of that concern. What are other peoples thoughts? -- James Turner
