New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.
Starred by 9 users
Status: Assigned
Owner:
Last visit > 30 days ago
Cc:
Components:
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Enhancement

Blocked on:
issue 5716



Sign in to add a comment
Data channel build target
Reported by julian.b...@gmail.com, Oct 3 2014 Back to list
This is a follow-up to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8401957

It would be useful to have a build target that builds the WebRTC data channel API without the media components (voice, video, etc). A use case for this would be a game server that wants to use WebRTC data channels for messaging.
 
Project Member Comment 1 by braveyao@webrtc.org, Oct 6 2014
Cc: juberti@webrtc.org braveyao@webrtc.org
Owner: pthatcher@webrtc.org
Status: Assigned
Triage to pthatcher@
Project Member Comment 2 by juberti@webrtc.org, Oct 7 2014
Should be possible (with some munging, perhaps) using HAVE_WEBRTC_VOICE=0 and HAVE_WEBRTC_VIDEO=0.
Comment 3 by vrk@webrtc.org, Oct 14 2014
Labels: Area-Build
Comment 4 by sa...@exaeone.com, Apr 9 2015
Any hints for how to achieve this in the meantime while we wait for a proper target? I removed HAVE_WEBRTC_VOICE and HAVE_WEBRTC_VIDEO from common.gypi, but the build system still tries to build some video-related-looking objects before finally failing at libjingle_media.webrtcvideocapturerfactory.o

Comment 5 by fer...@gmail.com, May 19 2015
There's been some excellent discussion about the need for a standalone WebRTC data channel library here:

https://github.com/jbenet/random-ideas/issues/13
https://github.com/webrtcftw/goals/issues/1

I didn't know this was on the team's radar. Great news!

Comment 6 by fer...@gmail.com, Jul 29 2015
Any updates? This would be enormously useful for WebTorrent.
Comment 7 by geg...@gmail.com, Apr 5 2016
Huge +1 on this one for me! Please do it!

Thanks!
Project Member Comment 8 by juberti@webrtc.org, Jan 30 2017
Cc: solenberg@webrtc.org kbrandt@google.com stansu@google.com
Labels: -Type-Bug Type-Enhancement
Fredrik, will the SlimWebRTC work address this use case?
Project Member Comment 9 by solenberg@webrtc.org, Jan 31 2017
I've been unaware of this specific need so the priorities for SlimWebRTC have focused first on making the code which depends on external libs pluggable (first codecs, then the network stack). Besides the dependency issue, that will also substantially reduce binary size.

With SlimWebRTC we're restructuring the code so there won't be a need to create specific build targets and set up compiler flags in order to include/exclude certain functionality. Instead the set of build targets will be a more fine grained toolbox from which individual pieces can be picked and plugged together.

See: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/webrtc/issues/detail?id=5716

Project Member Comment 10 by solenberg@webrtc.org, Jan 31 2017
Blockedon: 5716
Sign in to add a comment