Support of ISDN Subsystem under Freebsd 6.x/7.x - amd64

[Bjoern A. Zeeb]

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.