[ATrpms-users] Asterisk dependencies

[Philip Prindeville]

Axel Thimm wrote:
> Asterisk always needs zaptel. You need to have a good timing module, and
>>>>> only the zaptel kmdl provides them (ztdummy). The rc.d script for 
>>>>> loading the kmdl is in the zaptel module.  And zaptel depends on 
>>>>> libtonezone.
>>>>>           
>
>   
>>>> There were some noises about further breaking Asterisk down into
>>>> finer granularity.  That would be a good thing, and would more
>>>> fully exploit the ability to tailor/configure Asterisk to a wide
>>>> range of applications.
>>>>         
>>> Do you have a pointer?
>>>       
>> I'm thinking back to your message of 5/31 (ref: <20060601000953.GJ2163 at neu.nirvana>).
>>     
>
> I thought you meant something upstream. :)
>   

Ok, I'm unclear.  The version on ATrpms:  is this just a build for FC5 of
the stock version (since it's not carried by Redhat in the FC5 distro), or
have their been any changes made to it?

And does the .spec file come from Asterisk itself, or from ATrpms?


>>>> Has there been any movement on this?
>>>>
>>>> And what is the strategy?
>>>>         
>>> Not sure whether you mean some discussion at upstream level or at
>>> package level.
>>>       
>> I didn't look to see if Asterisk came with packaging done upstream
>> or if ATrpms generates its own packaging (or heavily modifies
>> upstream packaging).
>>     
>
> No, there isn't any upstream strategy.
>   

Meaning what exactly?

You're using the .spec that comes with Asterisk?

>>>> Could the timing module ztdummy (since it doesn't actually correspond
>>>> to real hardware, if I've understood correctly) be made part of a
>>>> stand-alone asterisk-kmdl rpm instead?
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Technically yes, but what would the gain be? A smaller kmdl package?
>>> Zaptel kmdls are about 250-350k, not really big (if compared for
>>> instance to the kernel rpm).
>>>   
>>>       
>> Well, I'm thinking that most of the zaptel package should be support for
>> various physical cards.  If you're running pure VoIP with SIP peering
>> with other call-managers, then you don't need to support any sort of
>> trunking (FXS, FXO, PRI, T1/CCS, etc).
>>     
>
> OK so far, but where is the drawback in having all of them? The loss
> of 200k?
>   

The issue is that all Asterisk installations require ztdummy from what I 
can tell,
so it should be part of the core fileset.

Not all installations (especially those with SIP phones) don't require any
hardware support, since the phones themselves are network attached devices.

In a SIP-handset only config, you should be able to get by without the
zaptel kernel modules.


>> The ztdummy module, on the other hand, sounds like it doesn't
>> correspond to any particular hardware... it just provides a kernel
>> service required by Asterisk itself.
>>     
>
> You could argue about the whole kernel rpm that way, and people with
> that hardware would prefer not to have drivers for all the other
> hardware etc.
>   

Well, I'm willing to divide the universe into installs with hardware 
(key-sets,
analogue handsets, etc) versus installs without hardware (where all the
phones are network devices and don't require any device drivers local to
the Asterisk PBX application server).

-Philip