hadn't seen it. yes, different build dir should work.
thanks ..ede
On 19.03.2012 15:05, Peter Wagner wrote:
> both packaes are build in a sepreate folders
> so yes - you can select both packages.
>
> But you can also building both and testing it ;)
>
> /Peter
> On Monday 19 March 2012 13:24:24
Hello,
My own two cents.
I tried to implement it the VARIANT way, and I ended with (basically)
repeating everything twice in the Makefile. See attached for details.
If someone knows a better way, or if I messed up this patch,
I'm ready to listen to criticism.
Another way I tried (and I already
both packaes are build in a sepreate folders
so yes - you can select both packages.
But you can also building both and testing it ;)
/Peter
On Monday 19 March 2012 13:24:24 edgar.sol...@web.de wrote:
> had a look at irssi. does this actually work when both packages are
> selected? don't you end u
had a look at irssi. does this actually work when both packages are selected?
don't you end up with two packages both containing whatever was build first?
..ede
On 19.03.2012 13:18, Peter Wagner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> look at the ctorrent or irssi Makefile. There you can see how to implement
> the
Hi,
look at the ctorrent or irssi Makefile. There you can see how to implement the
nossl stuff in one Makefile.
Regards,
Peter
On Monday 19 March 2012 12:05:31 Christiane Ruetten wrote:
> Hi Edgar,
>
> just to be explicit: the idea is to have lighttpd-nossl in the
> official repo so I can get
Maybe you are lucky and someone steps up. You are probably better of finding
the maintainer (if there's one) directly by looking at the revision log or
asking in the openwrt irc channel. The mailing list is often slow in this
regard. If it all does not happen in time frame you planned in then yo
Hi Edgar,
just to be explicit: the idea is to have lighttpd-nossl in the
official repo so I can get away with distributing a single
platform-independent opkg. So I was hoping that the current
maintainer could simply add a -nossl build instead of me having
to reproduce the complete build effort.
On 19.03.2012 10:52, Christiane Ruetten wrote:
> Hi,
>
> would you be able to easily add a variant of the lighttpd
> package without the massive libopenssl dependency? It is almost
> completely filling up the flash in 4 MByte routers, leaving
> almost no headroom for further functionality, and ht
Hi,
would you be able to easily add a variant of the lighttpd
package without the massive libopenssl dependency? It is almost
completely filling up the flash in 4 MByte routers, leaving
almost no headroom for further functionality, and https is not
always required.
I am currently in the process
