On Mar 13, 2014, at 14:25, Terry Barnum <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Art. Thanks for your comments. While I agree the process may seem > confusing, if you look at their standard build instructions you'll see that > the bulk of the process I described is essentially identical. The only > differences are installing dependencies via macports versus homebrew or > manually, and passing CFLAGS and LDFLAGS to configure. The line about > modifying configure.in ended up being unnecessary.
In this regard, there’s no substantial difference here. You’re installing the dependencies and you’re setting the flags. > I agree this would be the best solution but the effort to convert their build > process to a port is beyond me. They include many additional source packages > in their source so I assume it would require time and effort to coordinate > with the devs for version control of these. My hope is/was as a starting > point to use macports for the handful of external dependencies, showing them > that it could be an easy and viable method for Mac users to build freeswitch. > Once they saw that there were few macports support issues they then might be > open to a freeswitch port. Sounds like they have created a build process that is hostile to package managers. That being said, this has nothing to do with saying “you need package X Y and Z installed” in the standard build instructions. If this were converted to a port, the entirely standard build process would be replaced: dependencies and flags would be set by MacPorts. _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
