Stuart Henderson said: >> Maybe I should make a separate port for bnlib and make this port, as >> well as security/pgp5, depend on it? > > seems like it's probably overkill at the moment, though if these started > providing shared libraries that might be a good idea.
Apparently it is the same library, so both ports may benefit from bug fixes (if any). Also, it is easier to maintain one port of this library instead of two separate ports. That said, libzrtp's build infrastructure does allow using system bnlib, and I guess pgp (which comes from the same author) does neither. FWIW the fork of libzrtp this port is using most likely would happily accept patches that would allow using system bnlib. > Here's a version with a few more tweaks; > > - regen distinfo for the 0.xx PKGNAME change > > - add "telephony" to categories so it can be imported there; that > category seems relevant to this port and isn't as busy as security/ > > - patch configure.in to avoid forced optimizer / debug CFLAGS Thanks! > I do get a failure with 'make test', do you see that too? (not a show-stopper, > but if it's easy to fix then maybe worth it). I did not bother runing 'make test' because Ingo Feinerer (whom I constantly CCing in this thread) successfully tested ZRTP in baresip. I'll look into fixing tests. -- Dmitrij D. Czarkoff
