On 12/21/07, Thorsten Leemhuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 21.12.2007 05:38, Mike McGrath wrote: > > Michael Stahnke wrote: > >> On Dec 20, 2007 1:19 PM, Jeffrey Ollie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> I've had a number of requests to branch the Asterisk packages that are > >>> now (finally) in F-7+ for EL-4 and EL-5. Most of the dependencies > >>> have been (or soon will be) taken care of. The one problematic package > >>> is speex. The Asterisk package requires speex version 1.2 which is > >>> available in Fedora 7 and onwards. However, speex in RHEL5 is at > >>> version 1.0.5. Would it be acceptable to create a speex12 package in > >>> EPEL so that Asterisk can be branched? The speex12 package would be > >>> for EL-4 and EL-5 only since RHEL6 will presumably provide speex 1.2 > >>> itself. > >> Can a bug be filed with RHEL and have them bump/backport the required > >> features for Speex in a future update? > > If possible, I think this is the best route. Won't hurt to try it. > > +1 -- but that could take a while. If it takes to long or if it looks > like it won't happen then I'd we should consider to ship a newer speex. > > But we should never ever disturb the RH bits, thus the speex libs should > not be in the default dynamic linker path, as then other packagers > linked against speex might use it (or has it a differnt .so name?) .
Yeah, I haven't looked at the code yet, but I was hoping that it would be relatively easy to make a speex12 package that would be parallel installable with the RHEL speex package and you would need to -lspeex12 instead of -lspeex. Jeff _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
