Re-inventing the FreeSWITCH port

Gergely Czuczy gergely.czuczy at
Sat Feb 22 10:30:06 UTC 2014


Personally I think one port with lots of OPTIONS might be the best, like 
how apache or nginx does it.

Just my tuppence.


On 2014.02.10. 14:01, Kozlov Sergey wrote:
> Hi everyone.
> I'm working on re-inventing the FreeSWITCH port. The previous FreeSWITCH
> port was deleted not so long ago and the current -devel variant is outdated.
> I've already ported and patched some relatively simple ports, but
> FreeSWITCH is completely different case.
> The software consists of the core (which is pretty useless alone) and
> 151 modules which add functionality to the core, 45 of which are
> considered the default packaging.
> The main questions are:
> 1. What architecture is the best for this kind of port?
> The options are:
>      a. Create one freeswitch-core port, 151 freeswitch-mod_foobar ports
> and a freeswitch metaport which will bring in the core and all the
> modules from the default packaging?
>      b. Create one freeswitch port with 151+ options and default
> packaging modules declared as default options
>      c. Option (b) with the freeswitch-full MASTERDIR port which installs
> all the modules
>      d. Your option
> 2. When should I post the first version of the port?
> The thing is that every module needs it's own distfiles, dependencies,
> patches, plist entries and so on. Every module needs as much effort as a
> small port, and thoughts that i need to properly write options, patches,
> plist entries and everything else for 151 modules drive me crazy. Now
> I've managed to correctly build the default packaging. If I used option
> (b) from the first question then I could create the freeswitch port
> without options, a static plist and post it right away, making all the
> changes afterwards. This will create a freeswitch binary package which
> will be ready to use and won't change much later.
> 3. Testing the port.
> The complexity of this port makes me think it will be full of build
> errors, which will produce suboptimal or broken binaries. How to ask to
> consider this port experimental? Should I only write the warning message
> in pkg-message or maybe something else?
> Any help is greatly appreciated.
> Best regards,
> Kozlov Sergey.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports at mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at"

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list