[ATrpms-users] DAHDI packages
amessina at messinet.com
Wed Aug 20 04:29:59 CEST 2008
On Monday 18 August 2008 03:09:13 pm Axel Thimm wrote:
> Why not do it with kmdls from the start? Later one needs to cater for
> upgrade paths from the non-kmdl packaging etc.
no real reason. i just don't have my system set up for that. i only build a
few packages and mostly have them customized for my needs -- zaptel, for
example, removing the modules/tools i'll never use.
i do it mostly for a learning experience.
> Also w/o having yet looked into it, I assume that dahdi builds are not
> that much different than zaptel's, so one could probably just adjust
> the named in the zaptel specfile and use that as a first iteration
> (but as said these are just assertions made w/o having looked at dahdi
> closer, yet).
well, the build is easy and goes well. their numbering scheme and release
scheme is less than ideal for rpm bulding. i do think it'll be a bit simpler
after the release candidate portions are over as making the package names
compatible with the fedora package naming guidelines will become simpler.
the spec file i sent has all the file list all the files that are built, so at
least that my be of help.
Anthony - http://messinet.com - http://messinet.com/~amessina/gallery
8F89 5E72 8DF0 BCF0 10BE 9967 92DC 35DC B001 4A4E
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/atrpms-users/attachments/20080819/f4f677b6/attachment.bin
More information about the atrpms-users