Re: [Freeswitch-dev] Compiling error - libsndfile.so
Like I said, I will have much more interest in the build process when I get to that point in my devel track. Meanwhile, before we optimize anything furthur in that way, I'd like to see how that 32 cpu box does in the same testing I have already performed on linux and mac with the code in the same state it already is. Can we come visit it soon? =D Anthony Minessale II FreeSWITCH http://www.freeswitch.org/ ClueCon http://www.cluecon.com/ AIM: anthm MSN:anthony_minessale@hotmail.com JABBER:anthony.minessale@gmail.com IRC: irc.freenode.net #freeswitch FreeSWITCH Developer Conference sip:888@66.250.68.194 iax:guest@66.250.68.194/888 googletalk:freeswitch@gmail.com pstn:712-432-7800 ----- Original Message ---- From: Roman Shaposhnik <rvs@sun.com> To: freeswitch-dev@lists.freeswitch.org Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 11:01:49 PM Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-dev] Compiling error - libsndfile.so On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 05:58 -0700, Anthony Minessale wrote:
Stuart, Since this is a mailing list I am going to talk to some other people to save time on mutiple emails, excuse me a minute:
Roman, Here is the downside to your suggestion, this guy is unhappy just because he *thinks* we keep his code in our tree.
I sort of disagree. I believe that this guys is unhappy because what we have in FreeSwitch now is kind of worst of both worlds -- we don't really want to rely on preinstalled and prepackaged libraries available on the system, yet we also don't want to bite the bullet and privatize the code. Personally, I think this is one of the greatest myth of OpenSource that all you have to do in order to build a reliable package is: ./configure && make && make install. What we currently have in FreeSwith is an attempt to rely on that. I've used to do lots of packaging for Solaris and believe me -- there's not much else I hate more than autotools complexity. :-( Anyway, it looks like my proposal doesn't really resonate with lots of folks here, which means I have to come up with extra benefits. My angle would be a performance one. Stay tuned... Thanks, Roman. _______________________________________________ Freeswitch-dev mailing list Freeswitch-dev@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-dev UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-dev http://www.freeswitch.org
On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 05:17 -0700, Anthony Minessale wrote:
Like I said, I will have much more interest in the build process when I get to that point in my devel track.
Meanwhile, before we optimize anything furthur in that way, I'd like to see how that 32 cpu box does in the same testing I have already performed on linux and mac with the code in the same state it already is. Can we come visit it soon? =D
The box runs Solaris/SPARC. My hacked build of FreeSwitch fails to run there. It complains about unresolved symbols from one of the libraries (I forgot which one at the moment). I need to debug it, but I'd rather just clean it up once and for all. If you can provide me with an archive of a SPARC Solaris 10 build of FreeSwitch I'd be happy to test that for you. Thanks, Roman.
participants (2)
-
Anthony Minessale
-
Roman Shaposhnick