Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

baresip: Use UCI for basic service configuration #889

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 7, 2025

Conversation

dddaniel
Copy link

The baresip init script is changed to use UCI instead of the debian style /etc/default basic service configuration.

A uci-defaults script is added to create a basic UCI config: --
config baresip main
option enable 0
option options ''

With this change an issues is also resolved, on which the baresip service doesn't start due to the baresip user not being the owner of the /etc/baresip configuration directory.

Additionally a reload_config trigger is added for baresip.

Run tested on X86.

@jslachta jslachta self-requested a review November 18, 2024 15:16
@dddaniel
Copy link
Author

dddaniel commented Jan 6, 2025

Hi @jslachta, are any issues with the PR ? I am running those for about 2 months now on my systems just fine.

@jslachta
Copy link
Contributor

jslachta commented Jan 6, 2025

Hi @dddaniel,

I am sorry for the delay. Only one objection - please, bump PKG_RELEASE variable, since it changes package checksum. Otherwise it looks good.

Thank you.

The baresip init script is changed to use UCI instead of the debian
style /etc/default basic service configuration.

A uci-defaults script is added to create a basic UCI config:
--
config baresip main
 option enable 0
 option options ''
--

With this change an issues is also resolved, on which the baresip
service doesn't start due to the baresip user not being the owner of
the /etc/baresip configuration directory.

Additionally a reload_config trigger is added for baresip.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Danzberger <[email protected]>
@jslachta jslachta merged commit c8a8d62 into openwrt:master Jan 7, 2025
12 checks passed
@jslachta
Copy link
Contributor

jslachta commented Jan 7, 2025

Thank you, @dddaniel .

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants