Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 13:07:14 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> To: Jeremy Messenger <mezz7@cox.net> Cc: multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: speex upgrade to 1.1.12 ? Message-ID: <20070221130714.A93464@xorpc.icir.org> In-Reply-To: <op.tn372ibm9aq2h7@mezz.mezzweb.com>; from mezz7@cox.net on Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 02:19:20PM -0600 References: <20070221073447.A89386@xorpc.icir.org> <op.tn31gkon9aq2h7@mezz.mezzweb.com> <20070221095911.D90766@xorpc.icir.org> <op.tn34fuds9aq2h7@mezz.mezzweb.com> <20070221112414.E91427@xorpc.icir.org> <op.tn372ibm9aq2h7@mezz.mezzweb.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 02:19:20PM -0600, Jeremy Messenger wrote: > On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 13:24:14 -0600, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 01:00:56PM -0600, Jeremy Messenger wrote: > >> On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 11:59:11 -0600, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> wrote: > >> > >> > On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 11:56:34AM -0600, Jeremy Messenger wrote: > >> >> On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 09:34:47 -0600, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> > >> wrote: > > ... > >> >> > Some packages start checking for recent (1.1.x) version of speex, > >> > >> After checking, which port are you talking about? I only see one > >> (net/opal) and it is not depend on speex-devel by default. Unless, my > >> grep > >> is incorrect? > > > > linphone originally depends on speex.1.1.12, and there is a patch > > in the port to change the test and look for 1.0.5 (which may work, > > but while 1.1.x is backward compatible, it is not clear that code > > written to use 1.1.12 will be happy to use an older version.) > > > > ./net/asterisk-bristuff also has a patch to change the path > > for the old speex location. So far, that's all. > > It looks like the net/asterisk-bristuff supports stable and unstable > version by default in its source code when I took a look at maybe. anyways let's see (no hurry) what you find is the most popular choice in linux, and then try to match their choices to make life easier with ports. Then there is the other issue of how to automate the handling of conflicting ports in cases like this one, so that the average user does not have to manually override packages or do other things he is not comfortable with. > >> You can add a check in Makefile for if speex exists, then mark it as > >> IGNORE and tell users to uninstall speex and install speex-devel. > > > > can it be automated or it requires manually doing things ? > > Manual. > > >> > http://downloads.us.xiph.org/releases/speex/ > >> > > >> > speex-devel is now the 1.2 branch > >> > Am i missing something ? > >> > >> Yes, it is wrong place to check. Why don't you check its website instead > >> of that ftp or list of distfiles? > > > > got it... looks like we should bump speex-devel to 1.2 :) > > Yep. ;-) If I am going to update it, then will you test it for me? Because sure, will give it a try later. > To me, it looks like it is not complete backwards compatible if some ports > have the hardcore path of header? Because of speex and speex-devel have a > bit different headers path (see net/asterisk-bristuff for example). If all well my point is that in many ports written for linux (and multimedia surely has lots of them), our dependencies lag behind what is used on linux. So quite often we need to patch the 'configure' or 'Makefile' etc to fix paths and the like. Upgrading libraries (such in the speex case) should help removing some of these patches and moving to cleaner ports. Certainly there might be a bit of breakage, but this is a good time to do these changes, because next releases are reasonably far away and we have time to deal with the breakage. cheers luigi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070221130714.A93464>