On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 01:07:53PM +0300, Axel Thimm wrote:
> The packages at ATrpms try to be as upstream/vanilla/generic as
> possible, I wouldn't want to base them on a downstream project like
> AsteriskNOW (I even try to keep any RHEL/Fedora specifics out of them,
> so people can even rebuild on other rpm platforms). As you wrote in a
> trimmed part of the mail, for example relying on the downstream of
> AsteriskNOW resulted in forgetting setting up init files needed for
> standalone operation.
>
> But serving a downstream project is a different beast and worthwhile
> doing it. Are there any bits in the ATrpms packages that need
> adjustment/fixing wrt AsteriskNOW? If so is it possible to keep the
> packages still generic, and FHS/LSB compliant?
OTOH, there seem to be some 6 or so sets of packages of Asterisk et al.
There is no real reason for that. Apart from the National Institutes of
Health (NIH).
--
Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755 jabber:[email protected]
+972-50-7952406 mailto:[email protected]
http://www.xorcom.com iax:[email protected]/tzafrir
_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
