zaptel uploaded

Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo
Sat, 02 Apr 2005 11:05:19 +0200

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

El s=C3=A1b, 02-04-2005 a las 04:04 +0300, Tzafrir Cohen escribi=C3=B3:
> On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 01:57:35AM +0200, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> >=20
> >  Hi,
> >=20
> >  I have just uploaded zaptel to the archives with the following
> > considerations:
> >=20
> >   1. Don't wait for makedev. After all, Sarge has that bug still, so it
> > is not a regression at all
> >   2. Urgency set to medium. This will speed things up a bit, while
> > allowing us to have some checks of our changes for this version.
> One problem I see with the current package: you seem to copy
> debian/control to the source package instead of . The
> last time I ran 'm-a build zaptel' it ended up building zaptel-source,
> zaptel, libtonezone0 and libtonezone-dev, instead of zaptel-modules-*

 At all. I copy
 I am starting to be worried about you having older or different
versions than the ones in SVN. I recommend a general cleanup in your
part, as I think you have some kind of mixed rules among ours and yours.

> I also had a problem with building zaphfc. It seems that ZAPTELDIR was
> not passed and this cased the build to fail.

  If you could send a bug log... I haven't sufered that on any of my

> Also: s/$(ps/$(shell ps/ again. Also note that you may build kernel 2.4
> on a system with 2.6/udev, so you should check for both devfs and udev
> anyway.

  Can you tell me where that snippet of code is? I don't see where we
are checking for kernel version... =C2=BF?

> >  These two points have been agreed with Steve Langasek.
> >=20
> >   3. About the latest considerations from Tzafir, I am not 100% sure
> > about removing config file. About genzaptelconf, I would like to check
> > it  a bit before uploading. I think both can be done, but it does not
> > interest us so close to the release. First, we need to put new packages
> > in Sarge, and then, if the freeze does not happen in the meantime we ca=
> > try to push those other changes.
> I see no harm in including a buggy genzaptelconf as long as it is not
> run automatically. IMHO it is useful enough.

 OK, I will include it in next version. But please, add a (C) and
license statement to it, as it is not written by the same people than
asterisk itself.

Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada

Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)