On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 11:23 AM, David M. Lee wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tzafrir Cohen
> wrote:
>>
>> This is funny. In 11 pjproject is bundled (though patching it out is not
>> an issue). In 12 it is not included in the tree an
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
> Yep, it's only a question of someone having the time to do the work,
> which hasn't been me.
>
Well, I made some time today. And I've made pretty good progress. As
always, you can follow along at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Matthew Jordan wrote:
>>
>> I would
>> love to see patches proposed for Asterisk that removed some of the
>> external libraries (editline and mxml are two that come readily to
>> mind).
>
> I'm pretty sure we
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> Nothing wrong with embedded libraries if the system libraries can be
> used instead (preferably: by default). This is the case with editline
> as of asterisk 11. The system copy of libedit can be used now.
>
Now if I could just get a patch t
: David M. Lee
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 5:30 PM
To: Asterisk Developers Mailing List
Subject: Re: [asterisk-dev] CentOS packaging
On Feb 28, 2014, at 10:23 AM, David M. Lee wrote:
On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tzafrir Cohen
wrote
On Feb 28, 2014, at 10:23 AM, David M. Lee wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tzafrir Cohen
>> wrote:
>> This is funny. In 11 pjproject is bundled (though patching it out is not
>> an issue). In 12 it is not included in the tree any
On Feb 27, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tzafrir Cohen
> wrote:
> This is funny. In 11 pjproject is bundled (though patching it out is not
> an issue). In 12 it is not included in the tree anymore.
>
> I know, and the humor isn't lost on me. :-) That
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 04:51:29PM -0500, Jared Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Matthew Jordan wrote:
>
> > (1) I fully appreciate the annoyance of having embedded libraries in
> > Asterisk. While some of those embedded libraries may be difficult to
> > extract, some - most likel
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Matthew Jordan wrote:
> (1) I fully appreciate the annoyance of having embedded libraries in
> Asterisk. While some of those embedded libraries may be difficult to
> extract, some - most likely - could be removed at this point. I would
> love to see patches propo
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Matthew Jordan wrote:
>>
>> If the packages were restructured, it could be set up so that Asterisk
>> only provides chan_dahdi in a subpackage - although there are
>> obviously some issues with subpackages a
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Matthew Jordan wrote:
> If the packages were restructured, it could be set up so that Asterisk
> only provides chan_dahdi in a subpackage - although there are
> obviously some issues with subpackages as well. I'm still not sure of
> a good structure for subpackag
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> This is funny. In 11 pjproject is bundled (though patching it out is not
> an issue). In 12 it is not included in the tree anymore.
>
I know, and the humor isn't lost on me. :-) That being said, I'm hoping to
get the Asterisk fork of pjproj
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:56:03AM -0600, Matthew Jordan wrote:
> If that is the policy of Fedora, then quite frankly, it should just
> stop including packages of Asterisk. There have been embedded
> libraries in Asterisk all the way back to version 1.0.0 - and if the
> Fedora packagers are going
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:26:02AM -0600, Matthew Jordan wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
> > After a conversation with Rusty last week, I've become aware that for a
> > simple installation of asterisk (11) from the CentOS repositories at
> > http://packages.asterisk.o
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 7:48 AM, Jared Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately those packages are of Asterisk 1.8:
>> http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/repoview/asterisk.html. That's
>> a total no-go for me, I'm afraid, but thanks for th
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Sean Darcy wrote:
> On 02/26/2014 02:02 AM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 05:04:26PM -0500, Sean Darcy wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/25/2014 02:03 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
>>>
After a conversation with Rusty last week, I've become aware that for a
>
On 02/26/2014 02:02 AM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 05:04:26PM -0500, Sean Darcy wrote:
On 02/25/2014 02:03 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
After a conversation with Rusty last week, I've become aware that for a
simple installation of asterisk (11) from the CentOS repositories at
http:
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
> After a conversation with Rusty last week, I've become aware that for a
> simple installation of asterisk (11) from the CentOS repositories at
> http://packages.asterisk.org/centos/, the 'current' repo at
> http://packages.digium.com/centos is
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 08:48:49AM -0500, Jared Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately those packages are of Asterisk 1.8:
> > http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/repoview/asterisk.html.
> > That's a total no-go for me, I'm afraid, but th
Thank you very much for the offer, but unless these would become the
official packages, I don't think that would serve the purpose I'm trying to
raise in this thread, which is to simplify the official community install
method to a single repository. For my cases I can work around this
complexity, a
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
> Unfortunately those packages are of Asterisk 1.8:
> http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/repoview/asterisk.html.
> That's a total no-go for me, I'm afraid, but thanks for the suggestion :)
>
Sure, the current EPEL packages themselve
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 05:04:26PM -0500, Sean Darcy wrote:
> On 02/25/2014 02:03 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
> >After a conversation with Rusty last week, I've become aware that for a
> >simple installation of asterisk (11) from the CentOS repositories at
> >http://packages.asterisk.org/centos/, the '
On 02/25/2014 02:03 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
After a conversation with Rusty last week, I've become aware that for a
simple installation of asterisk (11) from the CentOS repositories at
http://packages.asterisk.org/centos/, the 'current' repo at
http://packages.digium.com/centos is required to sat
On Tuesday 25 February 2014 15:04:12 Jared Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
>
> > After a conversation with Rusty last week, I've become aware that for a
> > simple installation of asterisk (11) from the CentOS repositories at
> > http://packages.asterisk.org/c
Unfortunately those packages are of Asterisk 1.8:
http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/6/x86_64/repoview/asterisk.html.
That's a total no-go for me, I'm afraid, but thanks for the suggestion :)
On 25 February 2014 17:04, Jared Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
> After a conversation with Rusty last week, I've become aware that for a
> simple installation of asterisk (11) from the CentOS repositories at
> http://packages.asterisk.org/centos/, the 'current' repo at
> http://packages.digium.com/centos i
After a conversation with Rusty last week, I've become aware that for a
simple installation of asterisk (11) from the CentOS repositories at
http://packages.asterisk.org/centos/, the 'current' repo at
http://packages.digium.com/centos is required to satisfy the dependency of
the 'asterisk' package
27 matches
Mail list logo
