On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 08:09:19 +0300, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:25:00PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 18:31:03 +0200, > > > Why should we make peoples' lives harder getting the tools they > > > need? Example: Somebody without the DAHDI Kernel Modules would > > > probably not try to use the DAHDI Tools since he probably won't even > > > know what it's good for. However It makes things easier for the > > > people who do know what DAHDI is to have tools to use their DAHDI > > > hardware (they compiled/got the Kernel modules for) just a yum > > > install away. > > > > Not likely. dahdi-linux support is pretty spotty. atrpms can go a long time > > without having a version for a specific version Fedora. For example there > > is no rawhide version now and there was a long period without one for > > F11. > > Rawhide support has quite low demand and the kernel changes daily or > more frequently in early rawhide, so any kernel bound support is > outdated before it is released. We usually fire up the rawhide support Yes, but usually just rebuilding from the source rpm would work if I had an environment where I could do that. I am doing that now with the version based on a spec file from messinet.com. > about a month or so before the targeted release date (which means > about now). I don't think that F11 was w/o dahdi-linux kmdls for any > long period. Possibly it was during the F11 rawhide period that I looked and I didn't check back for a while after the release. Unfortunately my tdm card is in my only machine at home that has 3d graphics at all working using the drivers in Fedora. And I needed to go to rawhide to get that working more than I needed to having tdm card working (though in the end I got both). > > There are issues trying to rebuild atrpms src rpms on fedora. Just > > grabbing atrms-rpm-config doesn't help with recursion issues that Alex > > doesn't see because of his custom environment. > > Who's Alex, and why doesn't atrms-rpm-config work? You may see Sorry about misspelling your name. > `recursion' warnings due to rpm's limitation of macros depth (which > has nothing to do with recursion), which is at 16, but in reality > means about 3-4 nested macros. Yes. But I didn't see any clear instructions for how to work around it. It seems that for some people using --define can work around the problem if you know what to define. There was also a comment that you don't see the problem because of something in your environment but I didn't see any directions on how to set up a similar environment. > > What I had to do for F12 is grab a spec file (that get's updates at > > the source) that was proposed for rpmfusion (but never got adopted > > by them) and then use an svn version of dahdi that has a fix for a > > change in the way the kernel is being built (some compatibility > > feature that got dropped in 2.6.32). That box has been extra > > unstable lately, though I don't know if that is do to 3D graphics or > > dahdi-linux. > > Have you tried the common src.rpm at ATrpms? Maybe you should check > out ATrpms in a couple of days and see whether there is dahdi support > for F12 there. I tried using the dahdi-linux src rpm while having atrpms-rpm-config installed, but hit the recursion problem and got stuck there. I would still have had the problem with the last released dahdi not working with 2.6.31 kernels. But fixing that would have taken the same route as with the path I ended up taking. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
