From maillist at ovb.ch Sat Dec 1 04:36:47 2007 From: maillist at ovb.ch (Oliver von Bueren) Date: Sat Dec 1 04:36:51 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <20071130084253.R53707@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <200711291751.25402.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <20071130084253.R53707@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> Message-ID: <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > - Talk to hps if his i4b stack supports amd64 > > For 7.0 ISDN support is very limited because it lacks locking. > Good Day. I suggest to try the i4b by HPS, you'll find it here: http://www.turbocat.net/~hselasky/isdn4bsd/ Or better, you'll find how to get the latest by SVN, don't try the tar ball from the site, too old. I still don't know why nobody bothers to include the i4b by HPS into the main tree. I couldn't use the built-in stack since ages because of the lack of proper card support for passive cards with CAPI support, which is working in his version. Active ones might be better in the tree. Oliver From gary.jennejohn at freenet.de Sat Dec 1 06:35:27 2007 From: gary.jennejohn at freenet.de (Gary Jennejohn) Date: Sat Dec 1 06:35:32 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <200711291751.25402.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <20071130084253.R53707@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> Message-ID: <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 12:53:55 +0100 Oliver von Bueren wrote: > I still don't know why nobody bothers to include the i4b by HPS into the > main tree. I couldn't use the built-in stack since ages because of the > lack of proper card support for passive cards with CAPI support, which > is working in his version. Active ones might be better in the tree. > HPS has a rather arcane coding style which makes it hard to maintain his code in the tree. We don't want code in the tree which can be maintained/understood by only one external developer. As a port it would probably be OK, but it might be difficult to integrate it cleanly. Still, there are other ports which touch the kernel, so it should be doable. AFAIK HPS hasn't considered this possiblility. -- Gary Jennejohn From hselasky at c2i.net Sat Dec 1 09:19:37 2007 From: hselasky at c2i.net (Hans Petter Selasky) Date: Sat Dec 1 09:20:00 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> Message-ID: <200712011820.09373.hselasky@c2i.net> On Saturday 01 December 2007, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 12:53:55 +0100 > > Oliver von Bueren wrote: > > I still don't know why nobody bothers to include the i4b by HPS into the > > main tree. I couldn't use the built-in stack since ages because of the > > lack of proper card support for passive cards with CAPI support, which > > is working in his version. Active ones might be better in the tree. > > HPS has a rather arcane coding style which makes it hard to maintain > his code in the tree. We don't want code in the tree which can be > maintained/understood by only one external developer. > > As a port it would probably be OK, but it might be difficult to > integrate it cleanly. Still, there are other ports which touch the > kernel, so it should be doable. AFAIK HPS hasn't considered this > possiblility. Hi Gary, Regarding code style I have a script that will make the code more FreeBSD KNF compliant. I just haven't had time to work so much at it. If you think you can do better I will gladly accept patches and improvements into my SVN repo. When I started out on ISDN4BSD more than 6 years ago everything was greek to me. Now I understand it all. Maybe that is the problem. You have to spend more time to understand others code ? --HPS From maillist at ovb.ch Sun Dec 2 03:31:07 2007 From: maillist at ovb.ch (Oliver von Bueren) Date: Sun Dec 2 03:31:12 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <200712011820.09373.hselasky@c2i.net> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> <200712011820.09373.hselasky@c2i.net> Message-ID: <47529779.3070901@ovb.ch> Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > On Saturday 01 December 2007, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > >> On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 12:53:55 +0100 >> >> Oliver von Bueren wrote: >> >>> I still don't know why nobody bothers to include the i4b by HPS into the >>> main tree. I couldn't use the built-in stack since ages because of the >>> lack of proper card support for passive cards with CAPI support, which >>> is working in his version. Active ones might be better in the tree. >>> >> HPS has a rather arcane coding style which makes it hard to maintain >> his code in the tree. We don't want code in the tree which can be >> maintained/understood by only one external developer. >> >> As a port it would probably be OK, but it might be difficult to >> integrate it cleanly. Still, there are other ports which touch the >> kernel, so it should be doable. AFAIK HPS hasn't considered this >> possiblility. >> > > Hi Gary, > > Regarding code style I have a script that will make the code more FreeBSD KNF > compliant. I just haven't had time to work so much at it. If you think you > can do better I will gladly accept patches and improvements into my SVN repo. > > When I started out on ISDN4BSD more than 6 years ago everything was greek to > me. Now I understand it all. Maybe that is the problem. You have to spend > more time to understand others code ? > > Hi Gary and Hans Petter I'm not a contributor to FreeBSD but I do software development in the ISDN area and like to add some comments myself about the coding style and usability for the end-user of the ISDN stack in FreeBSD in general. It can be debated which coding style one should use for C programming. C/R is one, it is quite good, with some small problems as it was thought out in the days where the display was 80x25. I don't think this is the case today. The code in i4b is formated well. Compared to other randomly picked code in the sys/-tree I can't see much differences. If you like to debate the location of the opening { after an if/else/... statement, I prefer the one on the next line, which is not C/R. It just makes it very clear what a block is, start to end. It's much harder to match a starting if with the closing } as it is to match two braces, opening { to closing } aligned correctly. So IMHO the style of code formating can't be the problem with the code written by HPS. This leaves only the complexity of the code itself, or better what it has to provide a solution for. Having programmed ISDN protocols myself, I've to say that he sticked to the layer model of ISDN quite well. That said, and with the comment HPS made himself, with the knowledge he now has, it would be far easier to re-write the complete code into a cleaner structure. I value the work HPS has done a lot and would never ask him to re-do that just for the sake of a somewhat cleaner code structure. And I'm not sure this would achieve a goal in terms of maintainability anyway. What it does not change is the complexity of the ISDN protocol itself. Without reading some ECMA or ITU-T documents nobody will get what the code does. But that is nothing the developer can be blamed for. ISDN is a protocol which evolved over some generations which introduced quirks one would not start with in the first place. So it you like to tell us that the ISDN protocol itself is arcane, there is some truth about it. It did take me some time to get used to it, but with some practice every programmer able to read technical documentation can maintain that code, given enough time to get into it. For me FreeBSD is the OS of choice for many years now, starting out with 2.1x. The ISDN support in the current system is still the one done by Hellmuth at that time. For todays needs it is no more what is required. He did good work in that time but at some point he quit that project and moved on. He has to get credits for starting this of and maintaining it for some time. So for me it's the choice of having old code in the tree, which kind of works but does not cover my needs anymore OR move on and incorporate a newer version having moved into the current days with support of hardware that is available. Or does someone still use the 8bit Teles ISA ISDN card? I have once, but they are long gone, don't have a system with ISA anymore. My rant has got quite long and I do not intend to start a war about coding style. These are just my thoughts about usability form an end-user point of view. Integrating it into the main tree would perhaps attract some more developers and it would be possible to have it on all builds, amd64 included, as a working stack, if enough interest is around. Cheers, Oliver From bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net Sun Dec 2 04:00:09 2007 From: bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net (Bjoern A. Zeeb) Date: Sun Dec 2 04:00:12 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <47529779.3070901@ovb.ch> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> <200712011820.09373.hselasky@c2i.net> <47529779.3070901@ovb.ch> Message-ID: <20071202115320.P81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Oliver von Bueren wrote: Hi, > So for me it's the choice of having old code in the tree, which kind of works > but does not cover my needs anymore OR move on and incorporate a newer > version having moved into the current days with support of hardware that is > available. Or does someone still use the 8bit Teles ISA ISDN card? I have > once, but they are long gone, don't have a system with ISA anymore. I still have some Teles cards around and they have been working fine, so why should I replace them? I don't need a PCIE only quad core machine to drive an ISDN line. That said, what would "your needs" be? List them. All. With details. People need to know about them. > view. Integrating it into the main tree would perhaps attract some more > developers and it would be possible to have it on all builds, amd64 included, > as a working stack, if enough interest is around. If there would be enough interest, more people would have stood up and - helped with the current code - helped hps with his code to get it in - ... No, there is great demand but only few hands. -- Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT Software is harder than hardware so better get it right the first time. From maillist at ovb.ch Sun Dec 2 05:00:39 2007 From: maillist at ovb.ch (Oliver von Bueren) Date: Sun Dec 2 05:00:44 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <20071202115320.P81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> <200712011820.09373.hselasky@c2i.net> <47529779.3070901@ovb.ch> <20071202115320.P81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> Message-ID: <4752AC76.6070703@ovb.ch> Hi Bjoern >> So for me it's the choice of having old code in the tree, which kind >> of works but does not cover my needs anymore OR move on and >> incorporate a newer version having moved into the current days with >> support of hardware that is available. Or does someone still use the >> 8bit Teles ISA ISDN card? I have once, but they are long gone, don't >> have a system with ISA anymore. > > I still have some Teles cards around and they have been working fine, > so why should I replace them? I don't need a PCIE only quad core > machine to > drive an ISDN line. > > That said, what would "your needs" be? List them. All. With details. > People > need to know about them. I don't have the very latest quad-core hardware around either, but having the need to upgrade FreeBSD 4.x system, which have ISA cards in, to a more recent hardware, perhaps to no more used servers aged around 3 years old, I have to buy new cards because of the lack of ISA bus. I don't need massive CPU power for the ISDN lines, these machines often do a hole range of tasks. My needs are to have a CAPI interface for "recent" passive cards like the AVM Fritz PCI and the multi-port cards by various brands, http://www.beronet.net/ is a starting point, but there are others which use the same chipset. The hardware for obvious reasons, I can't get my old Teles cards to work in the more recent servers. The CAPI because of many apps require it. Like CallWeaver or Asterisk, like some fax apps. BTW: I belief the old Teles ISA card is still supported by the HPS-Version of i4b. My intention was not to throw out support for older hardware, but to integrate the new ones and make newer interfaces like CAPI available in the base system. > No, there is great demand but only few hands. I know that, believe me. I did and sometimes still do some debugging to get "my" stuff working and if I somehow can, I give my patches back so others can use them if they like to. And it's the time or better lack thereof which prevents me from taking on a project to move it forward. Most of us have a busy life. Some twenty years ago, I could spend considerable time developing software. The Internet was not what it is today, my software was for the FidoNet, which some might remember. Cheers, Oliver From gary.jennejohn at freenet.de Sun Dec 2 11:04:28 2007 From: gary.jennejohn at freenet.de (Gary Jennejohn) Date: Sun Dec 2 11:04:31 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <20071202115320.P81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> <200712011820.09373.hselasky@c2i.net> <47529779.3070901@ovb.ch> <20071202115320.P81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> Message-ID: <20071202200423.503a184d@peedub.jennejohn.org> On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 11:59:45 +0000 (UTC) "Bjoern A. Zeeb" wrote: > On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Oliver von Bueren wrote: > > view. Integrating it into the main tree would perhaps attract some more > > developers and it would be possible to have it on all builds, amd64 included, > > as a working stack, if enough interest is around. > > If there would be enough interest, more people would have stood up and > - helped with the current code > - helped hps with his code to get it in > - ... > > No, there is great demand but only few hands. > I really shouldn't be commenting on this stuff at all, since I 1) haven't looked at i4b in years and 2) don't even have a src-commit bit any more I was thinking about this a little yesterday. It seems like one approach would be for someone to sponsor HPS for a src-commit bit and he could then import his stuff under /usr/src/contrib and keep it up-to-date. That could be a good fit since there are already lots of things in there which are maintained by external developers or by a single developer. The problem is finding a committer who is interested enough in i4b to step forward and invest time in this. I lost interest years ago after DSL became affordable here in Germany. Another option, as I wrote in my previous mail, would be to have HPS' stuff in a port. This IMO would be the path of least resistance. -- Gary Jennejohn From maillist at ovb.ch Sun Dec 2 12:18:55 2007 From: maillist at ovb.ch (Oliver von Bueren) Date: Sun Dec 2 12:18:58 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <20071202200423.503a184d@peedub.jennejohn.org> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> <200712011820.09373.hselasky@c2i.net> <47529779.3070901@ovb.ch> <20071202115320.P81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <20071202200423.503a184d@peedub.jennejohn.org> Message-ID: <4753132E.1060800@ovb.ch> Gary Jennejohn wrote: >> If there would be enough interest, more people would have stood up and >> - helped with the current code >> - helped hps with his code to get it in >> - ... >> >> No, there is great demand but only few hands > > I really shouldn't be commenting on this stuff at all, since I > 1) haven't looked at i4b in years and > 2) don't even have a src-commit bit any more > > I was thinking about this a little yesterday. It seems like one approach > would be for someone to sponsor HPS for a src-commit bit and he could > then import his stuff under /usr/src/contrib and keep it up-to-date. > > That could be a good fit since there are already lots of things in > there which are maintained by external developers or by a single > developer. > > The problem is finding a committer who is interested enough in i4b to > step forward and invest time in this. I lost interest years ago after > DSL became affordable here in Germany. > > Another option, as I wrote in my previous mail, would be to have HPS' > stuff in a port. This IMO would be the path of least resistance. > > Hi Gary The thing with the DSL making ISDN kind of obsolete counted for me for some time as well. I've used i4b with the IP over HDLC for my first ISDN internet dialup access able to route a 3bit subnet. These times are long gone, but now the ISDN is back for me in a very different way, as a bridge between VoIP and the public telephone network. ISDN is a thing not common to the American continent , making it much harder to have proper support for it. From my point of view it would be better to have it in the tree and not as a port. The main reason for this thinking is that the current (and only) way for HPS to have it integrate into the system is by patching quite a lot of files. This has to break from time to time as the base system moves on. Every time it does, a new effort is needed to "fix" or better re-integrate it. If it would be integrated into the base/contrib in a way that avoids the installation by patching method, this could possibly be avoided as well and the resources/time used for more productive work than doing the same task over and over again. I understand the problem with finding someone able and willing to lend HPS a hand in getting it in in the first place. My other question is, does HPS like the idea of having it in the tree and maintaining it there? Hans Petter, what's your point of view on this? Cheers, Oliver From bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net Sun Dec 2 15:45:08 2007 From: bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net (Bjoern A. Zeeb) Date: Sun Dec 2 15:45:13 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <20071130084253.R53707@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <200711291751.25402.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <20071130084253.R53707@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> Message-ID: <20071202232816.D81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: Hi, > or: > > - amd64 + C4B + a bit of unsupported patches i can give you This is a compile time tested version only. With this C4B-1.1.1 compiles again HEAD (and I hope it would work as well). I had C4B-1.1.1 running on RELENG5/amd64 and RELENG6/amd64 with older version of that patch. http://sources.zabbadoz.net/freebsd/i4b/c4b-20071202-01.diff [In case Thomas reads this, do not include that patch as is, in your C4B tree. Send me private mail and we'll do the PRIV parts the right way.] The above patch enables i4bcapimgr for amd64 as well. For that to work you need I4B support on amd64. I have used (an older version of the following patch) to make I4B simply compile on amd64 and it worked well enough so that I could use isdnd as a call monitor along with a C4B supported card installed on amd64. I only tested with <4GB om RAM and no I4B supported card in the machine. http://sources.zabbadoz.net/freebsd/i4b/i4b-head-amd64-20071201-03.diff This is a gross hack! Nothing more. If you want to try it at your own risk, feel free. If anything breaks or crashes your system - you have been warned. You may report problems on freebsd-isdn but don't expect a fix or answer any time soon. -- Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT Software is harder than hardware so better get it right the first time. From bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net Sun Dec 2 15:55:07 2007 From: bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net (Bjoern A. Zeeb) Date: Sun Dec 2 15:55:10 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <4753132E.1060800@ovb.ch> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <47514B53.9000409@ovb.ch> <20071201153523.15682288@peedub.jennejohn.org> <200712011820.09373.hselasky@c2i.net> <47529779.3070901@ovb.ch> <20071202115320.P81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> <20071202200423.503a184d@peedub.jennejohn.org> <4753132E.1060800@ovb.ch> Message-ID: <20071202234230.M81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Oliver von Bueren wrote: Hi, > From my point of view it would be better to have it in the tree and not as a > port. The main reason for this thinking is that the current (and only) way > for HPS to have it integrate into the system is by patching quite a lot of > files. This has to break from time to time as the base system moves on. Every > time it does, a new effort is needed to "fix" or better re-integrate it. If That effort is needed if it's in the tree or outside as the tree moves on one way or the other. I just kind of did that for C4B outside the tree. > it would be integrated into the base/contrib in a way that avoids the > installation by patching method, this could possibly be avoided as well and > the resources/time used for more productive work than doing the same task > over and over again. Thomas has done a great job with the last C4B releases making sure that they can just be compiled outside the tree. Make life a lot easier than in the earlier where I patched my local tree again and again. Imho there were two few lines commits needed to make this happen. I am not really saying that this is the way to go, but it is an option. /bz -- Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT Software is harder than hardware so better get it right the first time. From hm at kts.org Sun Dec 2 16:05:12 2007 From: hm at kts.org (Hellmuth Michaelis) Date: Sun Dec 2 16:05:16 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <4753132E.1060800@ovb.ch> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <20071202200423.503a184d@peedub.jennejohn.org> <4753132E.1060800@ovb.ch> Message-ID: <200712030046.19953.hm@kts.org> On Sunday 02 December 2007 21:18:54 Oliver von Bueren wrote: > I understand the problem with finding someone able and willing to lend > HPS a hand in getting it in in the first place. This is not the problem. Hans Petter has been offered several roads to walk for years to get his code in one way or the other into the tree but he refused to walk any and all of them and this is the reason why the code in question is not in the tree. This subject has been discussed to death in private and in public, please see the isdn list archives for the public part of the discussion. hellmuth -- Hellmuth Michaelis HM1-RIPE mobil +49 (0)160 / 96 45 56 96 From hselasky at c2i.net Sun Dec 2 17:03:33 2007 From: hselasky at c2i.net (Hans Petter Selasky) Date: Sun Dec 2 17:03:45 2007 Subject: Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64 In-Reply-To: <200712030046.19953.hm@kts.org> References: <474EE92C.3000406@merlin-home.dtdns.net> <4753132E.1060800@ovb.ch> <200712030046.19953.hm@kts.org> Message-ID: <200712030203.49741.hselasky@c2i.net> On Monday 03 December 2007, Hellmuth Michaelis wrote: > On Sunday 02 December 2007 21:18:54 Oliver von Bueren wrote: > > I understand the problem with finding someone able and willing to lend > > HPS a hand in getting it in in the first place. > > This is not the problem. Hans Petter has been offered several roads to > walk for years to get his code in one way or the other into the tree > but he refused to walk any and all of them and this is the reason why > the code in question is not in the tree. > > This subject has been discussed to death in private and in public, please > see the isdn list archives for the public part of the discussion. > > hellmuth Hi, The only way offered so far is the incremental patch way. The problem is that I don't have time to turn all of my changes into an incremental approach. It is too time consuming. Anyway there will be several hundred incremental patches, and I doubt that Hellmuth does ever have time to review that. Regarding the subject of ISDN: The hardware interface that ISDN uses might be old-fashioned and slow, but the theory of setting up and tearing down calls is not oldfashioned. I would say that not knowing ISDN in the phone business is like going to church without having read the Bible. The current status of my ISDN project is that the code is stable and many people use it. Outstanding issues so far: - Improve the Echo Canceller which now uses integer FFT. - Get rid of some macros. - Style the code. I suspect this will be finished some time after Christmas, because I'm very busy with my USB project at the moment. It would be nice to have my ISDN code in the FreeBSD tree, but I think that must wait until I have finished my USB stuff. Maybe we should continue this discussion after Christmas? --HPS From bugmaster at FreeBSD.org Mon Dec 3 03:07:03 2007 From: bugmaster at FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD bugmaster) Date: Mon Dec 3 03:07:12 2007 Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <200712031107.lB3B720w005621@freefall.freebsd.org> Current FreeBSD problem reports Critical problems Serious problems Non-critical problems S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- s kern/79117 isdn [iavc] iavc(4) for AVM B1 PCI does not attach 1 problem total. From bugmaster at FreeBSD.org Mon Dec 10 03:07:07 2007 From: bugmaster at FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD bugmaster) Date: Mon Dec 10 03:07:13 2007 Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <200712101107.lBAB76G0073389@freefall.freebsd.org> Current FreeBSD problem reports Critical problems Serious problems Non-critical problems S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- s kern/79117 isdn [iavc] iavc(4) for AVM B1 PCI does not attach 1 problem total. From fb-isdn at psconsult.nl Tue Dec 11 05:48:17 2007 From: fb-isdn at psconsult.nl (Paul Schenkeveld) Date: Tue Dec 11 05:48:21 2007 Subject: cross-compiling HPS i4b Message-ID: <20071211133741.GA75529@psconsult.nl> Hi, I've been happily using Hans Petters i4b on FreeBSD for about a year now and decided to replace my asterisk machine by a Soekris net5501. Usually I prepare images for Soekris hardware on a fast development server which holds source trees for many target systems. Following the instructions to obtain i4b and chan_capi sources and patches through svn and bring them into the tree appears to be a real challenge as the Makefiles expect sources to live under /usr/src and also touch files under /boot/kernel. I tried to set up a chroot tree and work in there but then I would need svn and gmake (for chan_capi) and a /boot/kernel within the chroot tree too. Is there a simple and clean way to bring HPS i4b into a source tree which is not in /usr/src and on a different machine than the target machine? Thanks in advance and HPS thank you for making this i4b and chan_capi available! Regards, Paul Schenkeveld From hselasky at c2i.net Wed Dec 12 11:15:06 2007 From: hselasky at c2i.net (Hans Petter Selasky) Date: Wed Dec 12 11:15:10 2007 Subject: cross-compiling HPS i4b In-Reply-To: <20071211133741.GA75529@psconsult.nl> References: <20071211133741.GA75529@psconsult.nl> Message-ID: <200712122015.40320.hselasky@c2i.net> On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Paul Schenkeveld wrote: > Hi, > > I've been happily using Hans Petters i4b on FreeBSD for about a year now > and decided to replace my asterisk machine by a Soekris net5501. > > Usually I prepare images for Soekris hardware on a fast development > server which holds source trees for many target systems. > > Following the instructions to obtain i4b and chan_capi sources and > patches through svn and bring them into the tree appears to be a real > challenge as the Makefiles expect sources to live under /usr/src and > also touch files under /boot/kernel. I tried to set up a chroot tree > and work in there but then I would need svn and gmake (for chan_capi) > and a /boot/kernel within the chroot tree too. > > Is there a simple and clean way to bring HPS i4b into a source tree > which is not in /usr/src and on a different machine than the target > machine? > > Thanks in advance and HPS thank you for making this i4b and chan_capi > available! Hi Paul, What kind of processor/instruction set does your sokris board have ? --HPS From bugmaster at FreeBSD.org Mon Dec 17 03:07:00 2007 From: bugmaster at FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD bugmaster) Date: Mon Dec 17 03:07:06 2007 Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <200712171106.lBHB6x1w088258@freefall.freebsd.org> Current FreeBSD problem reports Critical problems Serious problems Non-critical problems S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- s kern/79117 isdn [iavc] iavc(4) for AVM B1 PCI does not attach 1 problem total. From bugmaster at FreeBSD.org Mon Dec 24 03:07:09 2007 From: bugmaster at FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD bugmaster) Date: Mon Dec 24 03:07:31 2007 Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <200712241107.lBOB7042031971@freefall.freebsd.org> Current FreeBSD problem reports Critical problems Serious problems Non-critical problems S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- s kern/79117 isdn [iavc] iavc(4) for AVM B1 PCI does not attach 1 problem total. From bugmaster at FreeBSD.org Mon Dec 31 03:07:00 2007 From: bugmaster at FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD bugmaster) Date: Mon Dec 31 03:07:04 2007 Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-isdn@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <200712311106.lBVB6xW4037377@freefall.freebsd.org> Current FreeBSD problem reports Critical problems Serious problems Non-critical problems S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- s kern/79117 isdn [iavc] iavc(4) for AVM B1 PCI does not attach 1 problem total.