On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:30 AM, George Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:
> I understand the packaging issue and I'd like to hear from packagers like > Jared Smith. Not sure what to say here -- bundling pjproject with Asterisk causes me a world of hurt from a packaging standpoint. Having them as separate projects makes my job as a packager much much easier. > We could simply require a specific version of Asterisk to be statically > linked to a specific version of pjproject and let the packaging process > insure it's there. For rpms, a BuildRequires would do that. There's be no > runtime dependency after that. And a "Requires:" would force that particular version to be present to install the package -- but you're right -- it doesn't enforce it at *run time*. If there are things that I can do from a packaging standpoint to make things easier (either on the pjproject side or the Asterisk side) of the Fedora/RHEL/CentOS packages, please don't hesitate to reach out to me. I've already made one change last week (that George asked me to make), and I'd be happy to make more. I just don't play with Asterisk and pjproject every day like I once could, so I often miss out on the little nuances these days :-/ -- Jared Smith
-- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
