[SFLphone] SFLphone on openSUSE Build Service

[Pierre-Luc Bacon]

Thank you for your work. The pjproject-1.0.3 directory contains the
PJSIP library, which is the SIP stack that we use. PJSIP is still not
included in any major distributions but we would all gain it that could
happen at some point. 

> The patches concern mainly the autofoo build files of 0.9.6,
especially those under sflphone-common/libs/pjproject-1.0.3 which are
subject to cleant up IMHO

Yes, it is ! ;) This is a big build system meant to work on pretty much
any architecture that you can think of (symbian, windows, mac, power pc)
I guess that explains why it's such a mess to work with. 

On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 12:18 +0200, René Krell wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> towards to clean builds of SFLphone for openSUSE i put the source, rpm spec 
> file and a couple of patches to get it compiled to my home project at the 
> openSUSE Build Service (https://build.opensuse.org).
> 
> I would appreciate if people that are interested in packaging it for openSUSE 
> could help also.
> 
> The openSUSE Build Service is more convenient than building a package on a 
> local platform, because you can schedule builds from one and the same spec 
> file for all supported openSUSE distributions (as 11.1, 11.2, ...) and all 
> possible architectures (x86, x86_64). All you need is an account there and you 
> can look at it, even better actively support the SFLphone deployment.
> 
> After registering and logging in you can see what I've made here:
> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=sflphone&project=home%3Arenekrell
> 
> The patches concern mainly the autofoo build files of 0.9.6, especially those 
> under sflphone-common/libs/pjproject-1.0.3 which are subject to cleant up 
> IMHO. The best would be to be able to autoreconf and ./configure --prefix=... 
> --libdir=... ... and let the things roll. An example is that installing 
> doesn't work on openSUSE 64 bit versions, because the target folder for shared 
> libraries is /usr/lib64 and not /usr/lib. Just look at the patches, which are 
> a result of straight-forward patching to get it compiled. This does not mean 
> that the packaging trouble can't be solved in a different way.
> 
> One more note: I made one big rpm spec file for all - sfl-common, sfl-client-
> kde and sfl-client-gnome and renamed them:
> - sflphone (main package)
> - sflphone-kde (subpackage)
> - sflphone-gnome (subpackage)
> This seemed more convenient to me, you might have a different opinion about 
> this, of course ;-)
> 
> Thanks,
> René
> _______________________________________________
> SFLphone mailing list
> SFLphone at lists.savoirfairelinux.net
> http://lists.savoirfairelinux.net/mailman/listinfo/sflphone