[Asterisk-Dev] asterisk (less hardware) ported to FreeBSD

[Tilghman Lesher]

On Saturday 02 August 2003 12:14, Jim Mercer wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 11:59:53AM -0500, Tilghman Lesher wrote:
> > On Saturday 02 August 2003 11:16, Jim Mercer wrote:
> > > and i have some ideas about making the build process a little
> > > less linux specific (ie. putting configs in
> > > /usr/local/etc/asterisk or other user defined location).
> >
> > The location for the configuration files is configurable in the
> > Makefile, so it can be customized per installation.  Note that the
> > placement of configuration files in /usr/local/etc is not less
> > Linux- specific; in fact, it's FreeBSD-specific.  And, before you
> > call me a Linux-nazi, note that my email client is running on a
> > FreeBSD desktop.
>
> my terminology was in-accurate.
>
> my comments were more related to the fact that while you can set some
> things in the Makefile, there are a number of places in the code
> which use static strings (ignoring the Makefile).
>
> so saying "The location for the configuration files is configurable
> in the Makefile" is misleading.  if you try that out of the box, you
> will find that some files/modules/etc will not be found due to a
> hardcoded /etc/asterisk or somesuch.

Those hardcoded locations should be fixed to use the #defines in the
Makefile.  I think a patch to do this would also be welcome.

> > > i am not comfortable with CVS update privileges, and i wonder if
> > > an existing developer could take me under their wing, and submit
> > > my patches on my behalf?
> >
> > Go to http://bugs.digium.com and submit a bug report, with your
> > patch. Unified diffs (cvs diff -u) are the patch format
> > recommended.
>
> that should work well enough.  how active are the core on picking up
> on bugs submitted that way?  ie. what's a "normal" turnaround?

Given that bugs.digium.com is new, I don't think there's any useful
metric on what yet is normal or typical.

-Tilghman