Please find herewith an ebuild for asterisk-1.4.39.2. The changes relative to 1.4.39.1 are as follows: * Resolves bug 352059 and bug 354763 * Uses menuselect binary to enable/disable features and feature groups (as per the 1.8 ebuild) * Otherwise adapted to follow the structure of the 1.8 ebuild in so far as is possible * Defunct flags "static" and "vanilla" removed from IUSE IMPORTANT: I liked the idea of using menuselect but I didn't like the way it was implemented in the 1.8 ebuild. I think it is convoluted and difficult to read and manage. Therefore, may I also present to you a fledgling asterisk eclass which, at present, contains just one function: # @FUNCTION: menuselect_use_enable # USAGE: <flag> <option> [option] ... # @DESCRIPTION: # Utilises the menuselect binary in asterisk in order to enable or disable # asterisk components. The first parameter should be a USE flag with one or # more menuselect option names following. If the menuselect tool does not # already exist then it will be compiled beforehand. As a result, the ebuild enables/disables options in this manner which, I'm sure you'll agree, is much easier to comprehend: menuselect_use_enable imap IMAP_STORAGE menuselect_use_enable debug DEBUG_CHANNEL_LOCKS DEBUG_THREADS DEBUG_FD_LEAKS I think that this eclass could be used in other ways to ensure greater consistency between the ebuilds moving forwards. I am running this in production now and intend to do some more build tests tomorrow in order to test the various USE flag combinations. Speaking of which, repoman will moan about bad USE flags but it's lying. @Chainsaw: if you intend to commit this, please do not modify it beforehand without consulting me. Thanks!
Created attachment 263737 [details] ebuild for asterisk-1.4.39.2
Created attachment 263739 [details] eclass (provides menuselect_use_enable function)
Created attachment 263741 [details, diff] Fix for bug 354763 This should be dropped in to the existing ast14 patchset tarball and bumped to 0.2
As an aside, the tabulation looks off if you view the ebuild in a browser but it's fine once downloaded and viewed in a proper editor (ergo, vim with the default gentoo syntax files).
Created attachment 263743 [details] revised ebuild for asterisk-1.4.39.2 (use DONT_OPTIMIZE instead of flag-o-matic) Sorry, there was nothing wrong with the prior attachment but it's not the one I meant to upload. I decided just to enable DONT_OPTIMIZE as a feature in the debug case instead of faffing around with flag-o-matic (as the differences are nebulous and the prior approach diverged from upstream). Now the ebuild is even shorter and more concise ...
(In reply to comment #0) > @Chainsaw: if you intend to commit this, please do not modify it beforehand > without consulting me. Thanks! I am unable to work under such conditions; particularly if you are not present on IRC at all. 1.4 was an experiment in involving the community further; whilst I believe we have both learned from the experience I do not intend to continue it. 1.4 will be removed from portage (together with the unloved 1.2 ebuilds) once 1.6.2 has been stabilised.
Excuse me? Unlike you, I'm on IRC almost 24/7 in irssi/screen, although sometimes I drop out of channels following maintenance. I made it very clear to you privately that I was going through a very tough time in RL and that I might not be able to continue maintenance anyway after a few months. I only noticed one ping from you since that occasion - you'd gone by the time I saw it and, actually, I looked out for you but don't recall seeing you spend much time in the channel either. Nor do I recall a single one of my emails ever being answered either. Ergo, I don't appreciate being described publically as having "evaporated". None of my contributions were ever really incorporated anyway - IMAP fix, various QA fixes etc - with the ebuilds becoming increasingly disparate, and I certainly won't be offering any of the others brewing in my private tree. Furthermore, your disposition to 1.4 has been erractic to say the least; verging on hostility initially, followed by eventual acceptance then sudden allusions to being interested in it as a target for stabilisation and now a throwaway comment about it having caused so much "trouble" and thus here we are back at the beginning. It's a slap in the face and I'm entirely done with your general flippancy and bolshiness - not just to me but other contributors. Please remove me from the voip email alias and duly shove it.
