Allow LuaJIT 2.1 to be used #1910
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
victorhora
added
enhancement
RIP - Type - Config Improvement
RIP - libmodsecurity
3.x
Contributor
Author
|
Merged as of 20ef01d |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Simple change to allow for LuaJIT 2.1 to be used with ModSecurity.
The issue happened due to luaL_setfuncs() already being defined in LuaJIT 2.1 (see lauxlib.h#L88).
Commit dee9898#diff-f120b67754e2c3ff8a98d4e3007f12efR111 defines this func as it is being used by the Lua engine inside ModSecurity (lua.cc#L138) but it is lacking in Lua 5.1 to make it compatible.
An extra if defined condition (WITH_LUA_JIT_2_1) was added to cover for LuaJIT 2.1.
Should fix #1909.