lib/lua/5.1 is hardcoded in places

[hishamhm]

This prevents LuaRocks from installing cleanly in 64-bit systems that use lib64/ (and this will have to be changed anyway when LR gets support for Lua 5.2).

Related info: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.lua.luarocks/2415/

[hishamhm]

All references to lib/lua/5.1 are now configurable through the luarocks.cfg mechanisms.

[ildar]

Sorry for the noise.
As an example of the fix, the right /etc/luarocks/config.lua for x86_64 platform would be:

rocks_servers = {
[[http://luarocks.org/repositories/rocks]]
}
rocks_trees = {
home..[[/.luarocks]],
{ root = /usr,
bin_dir = /usr/bin,
lib_dir = /usr/lib64/lua/5.1,
lua_dir = /usr/share/lua/5.1
}
}

Works for me.

[ildar]

Though the fix is not complete:
when using --tree arg, LR doesn't look at rocks_trees and builds path with lib_modules_path, which is hardcoded to "/lib/lua/"..lua_version.
I filed FR: #83

Care to reopen?

[hishamhm]

Yes, it uses lib_modules_path from cfg.lua, but that is overrideable in config.lua as well. I'll keep #83 as valid, but lib/lua/5.1 is not hardcoded (it's just an overrideable defult).

[ildar]

Yes! exactly. Again, sorry for the noise.
Then the correct /etc/luarocks/config.lua for x86_64 platform would be:

rocks_servers = {
[[http://luarocks.org/repositories/rocks]]
}
rocks_trees = {
home..[[/.luarocks]],
[[/usr]]
}
lib_modules_path = "/lib64/lua/"..lua_version

Works for me, even with --tree option.

[qbarnes]

I just started playing with luarocks a few days ago and hit this problem, so consider me a luarocks noob.

Your reply above using lib_modules_path certainly works for me, but when I first hit this problem a couple of days ago, I had thought the way to fix this was to change the definition of LUA_LIBDIR in the site_config.lua file from "/usr/lib" to "/usr/lib64". However, that approach didn't work. Hisham, could you comment on whether this approach should have worked or not?

[hishamhm]

No, they are different things. LUA_LIBDIR is the place where the shared library of the Lua interpreter is supposed to be. lib_modules_path is the path fragment for where Lua modules written in C should be installed to.

[qbarnes]

Sounds like (also) changing LUA_LIBDIR to "/usr/lib64" on x86_64 is still a correct thing to do; it just doesn't address this problem, right?

I think I follow your explanation. That's why this variable is called "LUA_LIBDIR" rather than something like "LUAROCKS_LIBDIR".

[hishamhm]

Sounds like (also) changing LUA_LIBDIR to "/usr/lib64" on x86_64 is still a correct thing to do

If your liblua_.so_ is there, then yes.