hadn't seen it. yes, different build dir should work.

thanks ..ede

On 19.03.2012 15:05, Peter Wagner wrote:
> both packaes are build in a sepreate folders
> so yes - you can select both packages.
> 
> But you can also building both and testing it ;)
> 
> /Peter
> On Monday 19 March 2012 13:24:24 [email protected] wrote:
>> had a look at irssi. does this actually work when both packages are
>> selected? don't you end up with two packages both containing whatever was
>> build first?
>>
>> ..ede
>>
>> On 19.03.2012 13:18, Peter Wagner wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> look at the ctorrent or irssi Makefile. There you can see how to
>>> implement the nossl stuff in one Makefile.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> On Monday 19 March 2012 12:05:31 Christiane Ruetten wrote:
>>>> Hi Edgar,
>>>>
>>>>  just to be explicit: the idea is to have lighttpd-nossl in the
>>>>
>>>> official repo so I can get away with distributing a single
>>>> platform-independent opkg. So I was hoping that the current
>>>> maintainer could simply add a -nossl build instead of me having
>>>> to reproduce the complete build effort.
>>>>
>>>> What I could do, though, is provide for a package/lighttpd-nossl/
>>>> Makefile and company and someone else adds it to the official
>>>> build system, but chances are that testing my changes, and generally
>>>> making sure I didn't screw up might surpass the effort that
>>>> a knowledgable maintainer requires for a copy/modify operation
>>>> on the current package repo.
>>>>
>>>> I might be wrong there, and am grateful for any advice on
>>>> how to proceed.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Christiane
>>>>
>>>> Am 19.03.12 11:30, schrieb [email protected]:
>>>>> On 19.03.2012 10:52, Christiane Ruetten wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  would you be able to easily add a variant of the lighttpd
>>>>>>
>>>>>> package without the massive libopenssl dependency? It is almost
>>>>>> completely filling up the flash in 4 MByte routers, leaving
>>>>>> almost no headroom for further functionality, and https is not
>>>>>> always required.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  I am currently in the process of rewriting the PirateBox
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wifi deaddrop service in an OpenWRT-friendly way. The current
>>>>>> target router chosen by the PirateBox community is the
>>>>>> TL-MR3020 which unfortunately only has 4 MByte flash.
>>>>>> Installing just lighttpd with rewrite and cgi and minimal
>>>>>> modules for USB storage takes the system from 1.4M to under
>>>>>> 100K of free flash.
>>>>>
>>>>> hi christiane,
>>>>>
>>>>> take a look at the lighttpd makefile
>>>>>
>>>>>  https://dev.openwrt.org/browser/packages/net/lighttpd/Makefile
>>>>>
>>>>> how webdav is build in as selectable package.
>>>>>
>>>>> you could do something similar to the currently hard coded openssl
>>>>> support.
>>>>>
>>>>> ..ede
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> openwrt-devel mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> openwrt-devel mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> openwrt-devel mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> openwrt-devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
> _______________________________________________
> openwrt-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Reply via email to