November 2022 - Lua Packagers SIG - Fedora mailing-lists

[Bug 2050290] New: lua: typo on man page
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Mar '25

14 Mar '25

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2050290 Bug ID: 2050290 Summary: lua: typo on man page Product: Fedora Version: 35 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Component: lua Severity: low Assignee: spotrh(a)gmail.com Reporter: loganjerry(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: 4le(a)live.com, drjohnson1(a)gmail.com, lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, mhroncok(a)redhat.com, michel(a)michel-slm.name, rob.myers(a)gtri.gatech.edu, spotrh(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Description of problem: The man page says (in part): LUA_PATH, LUA_PATH_5_4 Initial value of package.cpath, the path used by require to search for Lua loaders. That should be package.path, not package.cpath. This caused me a minute or so of confusion. :-) Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): lua-5.4.3-4.fc35.x86_64 How reproducible: N/A Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2050290

1 12

[Bug 2073884] New: CVE-2022-28805 dev-lang/lua: heap buffer overread
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 09 May '23

09 May '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073884 Bug ID: 2073884 Summary: CVE-2022-28805 dev-lang/lua: heap buffer overread Product: Security Response Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: high Priority: high Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: ahanwate(a)redhat.com CC: 4le(a)live.com, drjohnson1(a)gmail.com, lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, mhroncok(a)redhat.com, michel(a)michel-slm.name, rob.myers(a)gtri.gatech.edu, spotrh(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Other singlevar in lparser.c in Lua through 5.4.4 lacks a certain luaK_exp2anyregup call, leading to a heap-based buffer over-read that might affect a system that compiles untrusted Lua code. https://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2022-02/msg00001.html https://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2022-02/msg00070.html https://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2022-04/msg00009.html https://github.com/lua/lua/commit/1f3c6f4534c6411313361697d98d1145a1f030fa -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073884

1 12

[Bug 2064772] New: CVE-2021-44964 lua: use after free allows Sandbox Escape
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 09 May '23

09 May '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064772 Bug ID: 2064772 Summary: CVE-2021-44964 lua: use after free allows Sandbox Escape Product: Security Response Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: high Priority: high Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: pdelbell(a)redhat.com CC: 4le(a)live.com, caswilli(a)redhat.com, csutherl(a)redhat.com, drjohnson1(a)gmail.com, fedora(a)famillecollet.com, fjansen(a)redhat.com, gzaronik(a)redhat.com, hdegoede(a)redhat.com, jburrell(a)redhat.com, jclere(a)redhat.com, jwon(a)redhat.com, kaycoth(a)redhat.com, krathod(a)redhat.com, lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, mhroncok(a)redhat.com, michel(a)michel-slm.name, moceap(a)hotmail.com, mschmidt(a)redhat.com, mturk(a)redhat.com, packaging-team-maint(a)redhat.com, pjindal(a)redhat.com, rob.myers(a)gtri.gatech.edu, spotrh(a)gmail.com, szappis(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Other Use after free in garbage collector and finalizer of lgc.c in Lua interpreter 5.4.0~5.4.3 allows attackers to perform Sandbox Escape via a crafted script file. References: http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2021-44964 https://github.com/Lua-Project/lua-5.4.4-sandbox-escape-with-new-vulnerabil… http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2021-44964 http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2021-12/msg00007.html http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2021-12/msg00015.html http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2021-12/msg00030.html http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2021-11/msg00186.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064772

1 29

[Bug 2047672] New: CVE-2021-43519 lua: stack overflow in lua_resume of ldo.c allows a DoS via a crafted script file
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 14 Mar '23

14 Mar '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2047672 Bug ID: 2047672 Summary: CVE-2021-43519 lua: stack overflow in lua_resume of ldo.c allows a DoS via a crafted script file Product: Security Response Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: mrehak(a)redhat.com CC: 4le(a)live.com, bdettelb(a)redhat.com, caswilli(a)redhat.com, csutherl(a)redhat.com, drjohnson1(a)gmail.com, fjansen(a)redhat.com, gzaronik(a)redhat.com, jburrell(a)redhat.com, jclere(a)redhat.com, jwon(a)redhat.com, kaycoth(a)redhat.com, krathod(a)redhat.com, lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, mhroncok(a)redhat.com, michel(a)michel-slm.name, mturk(a)redhat.com, packaging-team-maint(a)redhat.com, pjindal(a)redhat.com, rob.myers(a)gtri.gatech.edu, spotrh(a)gmail.com, szappis(a)redhat.com, tkasparek(a)redhat.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Other Stack overflow in lua_resume of ldo.c in Lua Interpreter allows attackers to perform a Denial of Service via a crafted script file. Reference: http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2021-11/msg00015.html http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2021-10/msg00123.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2047672

1 17

[Bug 2135099] New: fennel-1.2.1 is available
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 21 Jan '23

21 Jan '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2135099 Bug ID: 2135099 Summary: fennel-1.2.1 is available Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: fennel Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged Assignee: michel(a)michel-slm.name Reporter: upstream-release-monitoring(a)fedoraproject.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: epel-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, michel(a)michel-slm.name Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Releases retrieved: 1.2.1 Upstream release that is considered latest: 1.2.1 Current version/release in rawhide: 1.2.0-1.fc38 URL: https://fennel-lang.org/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_M… Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from Anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/22691/ To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fennel -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2135099

1 12

[Bug 2111138] New: luac: free(): double free detected in tcache 2
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 04 Jan '23

04 Jan '23

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2111138 Bug ID: 2111138 Summary: luac: free(): double free detected in tcache 2 Product: Fedora Version: 36 Status: NEW Component: lua Assignee: spotrh(a)gmail.com Reporter: cra(a)fea.st QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: 4le(a)live.com, drjohnson1(a)gmail.com, lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, mhroncok(a)redhat.com, michel(a)michel-slm.name, rob.myers(a)gtri.gatech.edu, spotrh(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Created attachment 1899463 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1899463&action=edit proposed fix for luac double free Description of problem: luac crashes with a double free when building lsyncd on f36 on armv7hl. Strangely, it builds fine on f37 and on other f36 arches. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): lua-5.4.4-1.fc36 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. fedpkg clone lsyncd 2. fedpkg switch-branch f36 3. fedpkg scratch-build Actual results: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=90077485 Building target platforms: armv7hl Building for target armv7hl ... gmake[2]: Entering directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/lsyncd-2.3.0/redhat-linux-build' /usr/bin/cmake -E create_symlink /builddir/build/BUILD/lsyncd-2.3.0/tests tests Compiling built-in runner Compiling built-in default configs /usr/bin/luac -o defaults.out /builddir/build/BUILD/lsyncd-2.3.0/default.lua /builddir/build/BUILD/lsyncd-2.3.0/default-rsync.lua /builddir/build/BUILD/lsyncd-2.3.0/default-rsyncssh.lua /builddir/build/BUILD/lsyncd-2.3.0/default-direct.lua /usr/bin/luac -o runner.out /builddir/build/BUILD/lsyncd-2.3.0/lsyncd.lua free(): double free detected in tcache 2 gmake[2]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/lsyncd-2.3.0/redhat-linux-build' [ 22%] Built target prepare_tests [ 33%] Generating runner.c /usr/bin/cmake -E echo Generating\ built-in\ runner\ linkable Generating built-in runner linkable /usr/bin/lua /builddir/build/BUILD/lsyncd-2.3.0/bin2carray.lua runner.out runner runner.c gmake[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/lsyncd.dir/build.make:96: defaults.out] Aborted (core dumped) gmake[2]: *** Deleting file 'defaults.out' gmake[2]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/lsyncd-2.3.0/redhat-linux-build' gmake[1]: Leaving directory '/builddir/build/BUILD/lsyncd-2.3.0/redhat-linux-build' gmake[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:194: CMakeFiles/lsyncd.dir/all] Error 2 gmake: *** [Makefile:139: all] Error 2 Expected results: No crash Additional info: Upstream mailing list proposes this fix which I've attached as a patch: http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2022-02/msg00113.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2111138

1 14

[Bug 2104427] New: CVE-2022-33099 lua: heap buffer overflow in luaG_errormsg() in ldebug.c due to uncontrolled recursion in error handling
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 08 Dec '22

08 Dec '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104427 Bug ID: 2104427 Summary: CVE-2022-33099 lua: heap buffer overflow in luaG_errormsg() in ldebug.c due to uncontrolled recursion in error handling Product: Security Response Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: vulnerability Keywords: Security Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: security-response-team(a)redhat.com Reporter: trathi(a)redhat.com CC: 4le(a)live.com, drjohnson1(a)gmail.com, lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, mhroncok(a)redhat.com, michel(a)michel-slm.name, rob.myers(a)gtri.gatech.edu, spotrh(a)gmail.com Target Milestone: --- Classification: Other An issue in the component luaG_runerror of Lua v5.4.4 and below leads to a heap-buffer overflow when a recursive error occurs. https://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2022-05/msg00035.html https://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2022-05/msg00073.html https://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2022-05/msg00042.html https://www.lua.org/bugs.html#Lua-stack%20overflow%20when%20C%20stack%20ove… https://github.com/lua/lua/commit/42d40581dd919fb134c07027ca1ce0844c670daf -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2104427

1 17

[Bug 2143056] Review Request: lua-cliargs - A command-line argument parser
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143056 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2149698 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149698 [Bug 2149698] Review Request: sile - The SILE Typesetter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143056

1 0

[Bug 2142653] Review Request: lua-cldr - Lua interface to Unicode CLDR data
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142653 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2149698 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149698 [Bug 2149698] Review Request: sile - The SILE Typesetter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142653

1 0

[Bug 2142798] Review Request: lua-fluent - Lua implementation of Project Fluent
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142798 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2149698 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149698 [Bug 2149698] Review Request: sile - The SILE Typesetter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142798

1 0

[Bug 2142786] Review Request: lua-epnf - Extended PEG Notation Format (easy grammars for LPeg)
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142786 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2149698 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149698 [Bug 2149698] Review Request: sile - The SILE Typesetter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142786

1 0

[Bug 2143391] Review Request: lua-utf8 - A UTF-8 support module for Lua
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143391 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2149698 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149698 [Bug 2149698] Review Request: sile - The SILE Typesetter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143391

1 0

[Bug 2143382] Review Request: lua-luarepl - REPL.lua - a reusable Lua REPL written in Lua
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143382 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2149698 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149698 [Bug 2149698] Review Request: sile - The SILE Typesetter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143382

1 0

[Bug 2143020] Review Request: lua-linenoise - A binding for the linenoise command line library
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143020 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2149698 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149698 [Bug 2149698] Review Request: sile - The SILE Typesetter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143020

1 0

[Bug 2143351] Review Request: lua-vstruct - Lua library to manipulate binary data
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143351 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2149698 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149698 [Bug 2149698] Review Request: sile - The SILE Typesetter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143351

1 0

[Bug 2143028] Review Request: lua-loadkit - Loadkit allows you to load arbitrary files within the Lua package path
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143028 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2149698 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149698 [Bug 2149698] Review Request: sile - The SILE Typesetter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143028

1 0

[Bug 2143050] Review Request: lua-zlib - Simple streaming interface to zlib for Lua
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143050 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2149698 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149698 [Bug 2149698] Review Request: sile - The SILE Typesetter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143050

1 0

[Bug 2142671] Review Request: lua-cosmo - Safe templates for Lua
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142671 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2149698 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2149698 [Bug 2149698] Review Request: sile - The SILE Typesetter -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142671

1 0

[Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(benson_muite@emai | |lplus.org) --- Comment #8 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> --- Could you run builds/updates? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593

1 0

[Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 21 Nov '22

21 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593

1 0

[Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 19 Nov '22

19 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 --- Comment #7 from Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org> --- It is helpful to have the old history. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593

1 0

[Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> --- Review approved! You miss a "v" in the Source0 in front of the last %{gittag}, please fix before import. Feel free to merge the %changelog as you feel is best or start fresh with your entry when you import the package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593

1 0

[Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 --- Comment #5 from Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org> --- Thanks for your review. Kept changelog Used standard versioning scheme Have used cp -p rather than the Makefile. Hopefully most packages that rely on this can be upgraded to use what is in Lua, but this may take some time. spec: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/fed500/lua-coxpcall/fedo… srpm: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/fed500/lua-coxpcall/fedo… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593

1 0

[Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2143563 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143563 [Bug 2143563] Review Request: lua-timerwheel - Pure Lua timerwheel implementation -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593

1 0

[Bug 2143563] Review Request: lua-timerwheel - Pure Lua timerwheel implementation
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143563 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |2143593 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 [Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143563

1 0

[Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 --- Comment #4 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "MIT License". 22 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/jonny/tmp/2143593-lua-coxpcall/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 4 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 31, packages: 1 lua-coxpcall.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.17.0-1 ['1_17_0-1.fc38', '1_17_0-1'] 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/keplerproject/coxpcall/archive/v1_17_0/coxpcall-1_17_0.t… : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6044f70fcc01f50cae3a191cba13c252dcf9e6f169502e3d9c4a151934c46be0 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6044f70fcc01f50cae3a191cba13c252dcf9e6f169502e3d9c4a151934c46be0 Requires -------- lua-coxpcall (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): lua(abi) Provides -------- lua-coxpcall: lua-coxpcall Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2143593 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: SugarActivity, Ocaml, Python, Java, Haskell, Perl, PHP, R, C/C++, fonts Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH Issues: ======= - Package does not use a name that already exists. Following these steps after review have been approved https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Retirement… Consider keeping the old %changelog? - Follow the same version scheme as upstream and most other RPM packages with dot instead of underscore. Upstream also use dot for versions that are distributed to luarocks. Personal preferences ==================== - Upstream uses http://keplerproject.github.io/coxpcall/ as URL/homepage both at luarocks and in their README. - Could use the provided Makefile to install (but it lacks the preserve flag...) %install %make_install LUA_DIR=%{lua_pkgdir} - Remove the recursive flag for > cp -pr src/coxpcall.lua %{buildroot}%{lua_pkgdir}/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593

1 0

[Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593

1 0

[Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |hegjon(a)gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> --- I am doing a package review since this package was retired two years ago. > Retired Fedora packages (rawhide branch retired) require a re-review if they are retired for more than eight weeks or if there is no previous review of the package. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Retirement… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593

1 0

[Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |hegjon(a)gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> --- I did not notice this review request before now. Adding email I just sent: You can use the following expression to convert from standard version numbers to the gittag by the following: %global gittag %(v=%{version}; echo v${v//./_}) Version: 1.17.0 Source0: %{url}/archive/%{gittag}/coxpcall-%{gittag}.tar.gz $ spectool -l lua-coxpcall.spec Source0: https://github.com/keplerproject/coxpcall/archive/v1_17_0/coxpcall-v1_17_0.… -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593

1 0

[Bug 2143593] Review Request: lua-coxpcall - Better error handling of protected coroutine calls
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593 Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org --- Comment #1 from Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org> --- Will need to unretire https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/lua-coxpcall -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143593

1 0

[Bug 2143563] Review Request: lua-timerwheel - Pure Lua timerwheel implementation
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143563 --- Comment #2 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "MIT License". 21 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/jonny/tmp/2143563-lua-timerwheel/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/lua/5.4/timerwheel [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/lua/5.4/timerwheel [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 4 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [!]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 31, packages: 1 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/Tieske/timerwheel.lua/archive/refs/tags/1.0.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : a3d0159bcf996f3c73ac20d6168d2aaedcd6877df8f7ae6a1994010ad8492784 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a3d0159bcf996f3c73ac20d6168d2aaedcd6877df8f7ae6a1994010ad8492784 Requires -------- lua-timerwheel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): lua lua(abi) Provides -------- lua-timerwheel: lua-timerwheel Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2143563 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: PHP, Python, Haskell, R, fonts, Java, Perl, SugarActivity, C/C++, Ocaml Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH ===== Review feedback ===== [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/lua/5.4/timerwheel rpm -qf /usr/share/lua/5.4/timerwheel file /usr/share/lua/5.4/timerwheel is not owned by any package [!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. Missing coxpcall [!]: Package functions as described. Due to missing Requires [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. Smoke tests with including installed files in %{buildroot} in $LUA_PATH would be great! Other: Line 9: > #Source0: %{url}/archive/v%{version}/timerwheel-%{version}.tar.gz Comment should be removed Line 30: > cp -pr src/timerwheel/init.lua %{buildroot}%{lua_pkgdir}/timerwheel Explicit copy one file, but using recursive flag. I would prefer removing flag (or copy folder recursive), to explicit declare what your intentions are. Line 13: > Requires: lua I am not sure what the best practice is, but the lua rpm macro is adding this requires lua(abi) = 5.4. Since we are installing the files into /usr/share/lua/5.4 then I think it wrong and not needed to also require (unversioned) lua. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143563

1 0

[Bug 2143563] Review Request: lua-timerwheel - Pure Lua timerwheel implementation
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143563 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> --- Missing Requires for coxpcall $ lua -e 'wheel = require "timerwheel"' lua: /usr/share/lua/5.4/timerwheel/init.lua:33: module 'coxpcall' not found: no field package.preload['coxpcall'] no file '/usr/share/lua/5.4/coxpcall.lua' no file '/usr/share/lua/5.4/coxpcall/init.lua' no file '/usr/lib64/lua/5.4/coxpcall.lua' no file '/usr/lib64/lua/5.4/coxpcall/init.lua' no file './coxpcall.lua' no file './coxpcall/init.lua' no file '/usr/lib64/lua/5.4/coxpcall.so' no file '/usr/lib64/lua/5.4/loadall.so' no file './coxpcall.so' stack traceback: [C]: in function 'require' /usr/share/lua/5.4/timerwheel/init.lua:33: in main chunk [C]: in function 'require' (command line):1: in main chunk [C]: in ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143563

1 0

[Bug 2143563] Review Request: lua-timerwheel - Pure Lua timerwheel implementation
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143563 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |hegjon(a)gmail.com CC| |hegjon(a)gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143563

1 0

[Bug 2143563] Review Request: lua-timerwheel - Pure Lua timerwheel implementation
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 17 Nov '22

17 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143563 Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143563

1 0

[Bug 2143391] Review Request: lua-utf8 - A UTF-8 support module for Lua
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 16 Nov '22

16 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143391 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org --- Comment #2 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> --- A dependency for SILE https://sile-typesetter.org/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143391

1 0

[Bug 2143382] Review Request: lua-luarepl - REPL.lua - a reusable Lua REPL written in Lua
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 16 Nov '22

16 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143382 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143382

1 0

[Bug 2143050] Review Request: lua-zlib - Simple streaming interface to zlib for Lua
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 16 Nov '22

16 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143050 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143050

1 0

[Bug 2143351] Review Request: lua-vstruct - Lua library to manipulate binary data
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 16 Nov '22

16 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143351 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143351

1 0

[Bug 2143056] Review Request: lua-cliargs - A command-line argument parser
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 16 Nov '22

16 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143056 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143056

1 0

[Bug 2142653] Review Request: lua-cldr - Lua interface to Unicode CLDR data
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 16 Nov '22

16 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142653 --- Comment #3 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> --- Updated the spec file to run smoke test during %check Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=94240167 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142653

1 0

[Bug 2143028] Review Request: lua-loadkit - Loadkit allows you to load arbitrary files within the Lua package path
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 15 Nov '22

15 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143028 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143028

1 0

[Bug 2143020] Review Request: lua-linenoise - A binding for the linenoise command line library
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 15 Nov '22

15 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143020 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143020

1 0

[Bug 2142798] Review Request: lua-fluent - Lua implementation of Project Fluent
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 15 Nov '22

15 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142798 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142798

1 0

[Bug 2142653] Review Request: lua-cldr - Lua interface to Unicode CLDR data
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 15 Nov '22

15 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142653 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2142798 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142798 [Bug 2142798] Review Request: lua-fluent - Lua implementation of Project Fluent -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142653

1 0

[Bug 2142786] Review Request: lua-epnf - Extended PEG Notation Format (easy grammars for LPeg)
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 15 Nov '22

15 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142786 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2142798 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142798 [Bug 2142798] Review Request: lua-fluent - Lua implementation of Project Fluent -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142786

1 0

[Bug 2142786] Review Request: lua-epnf - Extended PEG Notation Format (easy grammars for LPeg)
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 15 Nov '22

15 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142786 --- Comment #2 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> --- A dependency for SILE https://sile-typesetter.org/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142786

1 0

[Bug 2142786] Review Request: lua-epnf - Extended PEG Notation Format (easy grammars for LPeg)
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 15 Nov '22

15 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142786 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142786

1 0

[Bug 2142671] Review Request: lua-cosmo - Safe templates for Lua
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 15 Nov '22

15 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142671 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142671

1 0

[Bug 2142653] Review Request: lua-cldr - Lua interface to Unicode CLDR data
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 15 Nov '22

15 Nov '22

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142653 Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lua-packagers-sig(a)lists.fed | |oraproject.org -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2142653

1 0

Successful Mail Delivery Report
by mailer-daemon＠fedoraproject.org 14 Nov '22

14 Nov '22

The content of this message was lost. It was probably cross-posted to multiple lists and previously handled on another list.

1 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

Lua Packagers SIG November 2022