| 01:43.27 | *** join/#asterisk-dev sruffell (~Adium@asterisk/the-kernel-guy/sruffell) |
| 01:43.28 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o sruffell] by ChanServ |
| 02:10.38 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kpfleming (~kpfleming@asterisk/digium-director-of-software-tech/kpfleming) |
| 02:10.39 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o kpfleming] by ChanServ |
| 02:34.29 | *** join/#asterisk-dev leifmadsen (~Leif@asterisk/documenteur-extraordinaire/blitzrage) |
| 02:34.30 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o leifmadsen] by ChanServ |
| 06:59.51 | *** join/#asterisk-dev oej (~olle@87.96.134.129) |
| 06:59.51 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o oej] by ChanServ |
| 07:10.27 | *** join/#asterisk-dev schmidts (~schmidts@Lo20-rt01.lm33.sil.at) |
| 07:10.28 | schmidts | good morning |
| 07:12.31 | *** join/#asterisk-dev snuff-work (~snuffy@210.9.82.197) |
| 07:12.32 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o snuff-work] by ChanServ |
| 07:39.47 | *** join/#asterisk-dev oej (~olle@87.96.134.129) |
| 07:39.47 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o oej] by ChanServ |
| 07:43.05 | *** join/#asterisk-dev oej (~olle@87.96.134.129) |
| 07:43.05 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o oej] by ChanServ |
| 07:46.12 | *** join/#asterisk-dev oej (~olle@87.96.134.129) |
| 07:46.12 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o oej] by ChanServ |
| 07:48.51 | schmidts | good morning oej |
| 07:55.26 | oej | morning |
| 07:55.43 | oej | can't that patch be part of channel()? Is a question you will get. |
| 07:57.27 | schmidts | oej hmmm i think it would be possible but i dont know if faxdetect is implemented on other channels too? |
| 07:58.07 | schmidts | ahh ok dahdi and misdn has it also |
| 07:58.21 | schmidts | ok then i will rewrite this to the channel function |
| 07:58.26 | schmidts | good point olle , thank you ;) |
| 07:58.43 | oej | you're welcome |
| 07:59.33 | schmidts | ok it should work just the same on dahdi then it would be easy ;) |
| 08:04.33 | schmidts | ok dahdi will not be so easy as i thought cause the dsp structure is also used to check for dtmf tones but i will try to do it ;) |
| 08:07.02 | schmidts | oej maybe you know this, afaik dahdi does fax detection byself even on the dahdi side even before the calls comes into asterisk or does this happens later? |
| 08:20.40 | *** join/#asterisk-dev lftsy (~lftsy@194.38.160.113) |
| 08:36.12 | oej | I know that there's an dsp in Asterisk. I don't know where it's used other than in dialplan fax detection - moving to the fax extension |
| 08:51.14 | *** join/#asterisk-dev hehol (~hehol@buero-gw.dortmund.loca.net) |
| 09:19.26 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Netgeeks (~chris@173.11.68.156) |
| 09:28.43 | *** join/#asterisk-dev _ys (~Miranda@HS3-192-221.xG.SPb.SkyLink.RU) |
| 09:37.24 | *** join/#asterisk-dev _ys (~Miranda@HS3-193-50.xG.SPb.SkyLink.RU) |
| 10:10.32 | *** join/#asterisk-dev pnlarsson (~niklas@fw1.gml.g.icnet.infracom.se) |
| 10:12.54 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Cadey (5a980315@gateway/web/freenode/ip.90.152.3.21) |
| 10:13.04 | Cadey | Hi guys, any devs here form the UK ? |
| 10:25.00 | *** join/#asterisk-dev tzafrir (~tzafrir@local.xorcom.com) |
| 10:25.01 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o tzafrir] by ChanServ |
| 11:17.24 | *** join/#asterisk-dev oej (~olle@87.96.134.129) |
| 11:17.24 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o oej] by ChanServ |
| 12:00.53 | *** join/#asterisk-dev oej (~olle@87.96.134.129) |
| 12:00.53 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o oej] by ChanServ |
| 12:11.39 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kpfleming (~kpfleming@asterisk/digium-director-of-software-tech/kpfleming) |
| 12:11.39 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o kpfleming] by ChanServ |
| 12:47.14 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Netgeeks (~chris@173.11.68.156) |
| 12:52.44 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kenhunt (~kenhunt@nat/digium/x-idqdekuewigouupp) |
| 13:00.06 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kenhunt (~kenhunt@nat/digium/x-idqdekuewigouupp) |
| 13:10.21 | schmidts | hi kpfleming |
| 13:10.38 | schmidts | btw i also asked leif about this ;) |
| 13:13.31 | schmidts | so anything i need now is a backport of this function to 1.8 ;) |
| 14:05.14 | *** join/#asterisk-dev serafie (~erin@nat/digium/x-mzejcsytzncaqcom) |
| 14:20.47 | *** join/#asterisk-dev mjordan (~mjordan@nat/digium/x-kgepcrkuvraiffxk) |
| 14:20.48 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o mjordan] by ChanServ |
| 14:37.54 | *** join/#asterisk-dev mnicholson (~mnicholso@nat/digium/x-sjrbbsyibluldjjs) |
| 14:37.54 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o mnicholson] by ChanServ |
| 14:45.41 | *** join/#asterisk-dev merbanan (~benjamin@h217-27-188-82.cust.tyfon.se) |
| 14:52.55 | merbanan | can asterisk generate a dialtone for me ? |
| 14:56.33 | kpfleming | merbanan: this belongs on #asterisk. the simple answer is 'yes', but the more complicated answer is that it depends on the channel type, how the dialplan is constructed, etc. please ask in #asterisk. |
| 14:56.40 | WIMPy | merbanan: You should ask that in #asterisk and be more specific. |
| 14:57.19 | merbanan | this is for my own channel |
| 14:57.57 | kpfleming | yes. look at what the DISA() dialplan application does for an example. |
| 14:58.10 | merbanan | k thanks |
| 14:58.32 | merbanan | right now I'm using an ulaw buffer |
| 14:59.18 | merbanan | need it configurable |
| 14:59.30 | leifmadsen | points at #asterisk again |
| 15:03.22 | *** join/#asterisk-dev jeffg (~jeffg@pdpc/supporter/professional/jeffg) |
| 15:05.19 | kpfleming | leifmadsen: this is an appropriate question for this channel |
| 15:05.41 | leifmadsen | then I misunderstood what he was asking |
| 15:06.04 | kpfleming | i think so, yeah |
| 15:06.32 | leifmadsen | I think you think so too |
| 15:06.51 | leifmadsen | I can't believe it's 10am... so exhausted after danielle was up coughing all night |
| 15:07.11 | kpfleming | welcome to married life |
| 15:07.13 | leifmadsen | I think she might have bronchitus or some sort of chest infection |
| 15:10.58 | *** join/#asterisk-dev putnopvut (~putnopvut@asterisk/master-of-queues/mmichelson) |
| 15:10.58 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o putnopvut] by ChanServ |
| 15:24.50 | *** join/#asterisk-dev otherwiseguy (~otherwise@69.76.221.79) |
| 15:28.48 | *** join/#asterisk-dev sruffell (~Adium@asterisk/the-kernel-guy/sruffell) |
| 15:28.49 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o sruffell] by ChanServ |
| 15:41.12 | *** join/#asterisk-dev zerohalo (~zerohalo@74-94-141-204-ma.hfc.comcastbusiness.net) |
| 15:46.28 | *** join/#asterisk-dev The_Boy_Wonder (~vossel@asterisk/batman-developer/dvossel) |
| 15:46.28 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o The_Boy_Wonder] by ChanServ |
| 15:52.33 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Qwell (~north@pdpc/sponsor/digium/Qwell) |
| 15:52.33 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o Qwell] by ChanServ |
| 15:54.45 | *** join/#asterisk-dev otherwiseguy (~otherwise@cpe-69-76-221-79.kc.res.rr.com) |
| 16:25.37 | *** join/#asterisk-dev oej (~olle@87.96.134.129) |
| 16:25.37 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o oej] by ChanServ |
| 16:31.07 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kpfleming (~kpfleming@asterisk/digium-director-of-software-tech/kpfleming) |
| 16:31.08 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o kpfleming] by ChanServ |
| 16:44.01 | *** join/#asterisk-dev anthm (~anthm@freeswitch/developer/anthm) |
| 16:56.29 | *** join/#asterisk-dev otherwiseguy_ (~otherwise@cpe-69-76-221-79.kc.res.rr.com) |
| 17:23.06 | *** join/#asterisk-dev jmls (~Julian@host217-36-208-155.in-addr.btopenworld.com) |
| 17:33.26 | kpfleming | leifmadsen: so the commit i made yesterday to fix the sip.conf.sample in 1.6.2 might necessitate a new tarball release from that branch...because the sample file has the wrong default for the 'nat' setting documented |
| 17:33.44 | leifmadsen | sure thing, I can do that right now if you wish |
| 17:33.52 | leifmadsen | I'm back from lunch now |
| 17:33.53 | kpfleming | well, i just brought it up for discussion |
| 17:34.11 | leifmadsen | gotcha -- I'm happy to create a new release today if we feel that isnecessary |
| 17:34.16 | kpfleming | it's also that way in 1.8 and 10, but those will have more releases made with the correction included automatically |
| 17:37.40 | leifmadsen | for sure -- didn't that change go to 1.4 as well? |
| 17:37.59 | kpfleming | yes, but the sample file docs weren't wrong in 1.4, i think terry fixed them |
| 17:38.24 | leifmadsen | oooh I see |
| 17:48.35 | kpfleming | well, seeing the complete lack of dissenting opinions here, i say go ahead and make another 1.6.2 release with the only change being the documentation fix |
| 18:01.31 | leifmadsen | kpfleming: heh sounds good -- I'll do that as soon as I finish this round of bug triage |
| 18:02.40 | *** join/#asterisk-dev micols (~ident@rlogin.dk) |
| 18:10.32 | *** join/#asterisk-dev jimbo_uk (~IceChat77@84.12.253.146) |
| 18:10.46 | jimbo_uk | UK - anybody out there? |
| 18:11.02 | Qwell | the whole "be specific" thing applies here too... |
| 18:11.18 | jimbo_uk | Hi QWell, |
| 18:11.50 | jimbo_uk | I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong. I'm not being disruptive, or abusive. It's a specific question, is there anyone from the UK on here? |
| 18:11.54 | jimbo_uk | I guess I could add more. |
| 18:12.11 | Qwell | It's just that your question is useless without any more information. |
| 18:12.15 | jimbo_uk | .. is there anyone from the UK on here,I'd love to hear from you, we have a major project ongoing. |
| 18:12.29 | jimbo_uk | we could use the resource. |
| 18:12.47 | jimbo_uk | ok, i guess this isn't IM. |
| 18:14.57 | WIMPy | jimbo_uk: Maybe you should try too look at it from other peoples perspective: If you read a question such as yours, would you feel like replying? |
| 18:15.29 | Qwell | yes, exactly. It isn't that you're being disruptive or anything, like you pointed out. It's just that nobody cares to respond to such a question. |
| 18:16.09 | kpfleming | and your post on the asterisk-biz mailing list is far more likely to elicit useful responses |
| 18:16.41 | jimbo_uk | sure, i posted on the list, thanks for the tip. |
| 18:17.55 | *** join/#asterisk-dev otherwiseguy (~otherwise@rrcs-173-197-0-67.west.biz.rr.com) |
| 18:37.15 | *** join/#asterisk-dev snuff-home (~snuffy@203-219-29-182.tpgi.com.au) |
| 18:37.16 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o snuff-home] by ChanServ |
| 19:03.39 | *** join/#asterisk-dev leifmadsen (~Leif@asterisk/documenteur-extraordinaire/blitzrage) |
| 19:03.39 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o leifmadsen] by ChanServ |
| 19:39.41 | *** join/#asterisk-dev citywok (~citywok@67-134-194-33.dia.static.qwest.net) |
| 19:47.00 | *** join/#asterisk-dev alecdavis (~alec@202.36.76.21) |
| 20:27.51 | leifmadsen | mjordan: always |
| 20:28.01 | leifmadsen | mjordan: however rmudgett is not |
| 20:28.04 | mjordan | leifmadsen: weird, you weren't alphabetically where I was looking |
| 20:28.14 | kpfleming | he's an op, so he's near the top of the list |
| 20:28.19 | kpfleming | someone should op mjordan |
| 20:28.22 | mjordan | which is obvious |
| 20:28.26 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o mjordan] by leifmadsen |
| 20:28.47 | mjordan | kpfleming: I actually am, I'm just apparently blind when there's a star before someone's name |
| 20:29.10 | mjordan | anywho, yeah, Asterisk is going to attempt to populate the 'from' field when it processes a MessageSend request in chan_sip |
| 20:29.36 | leifmadsen | mjordan: as it should I would think |
| 20:29.47 | mjordan | it may do a poor job of it, depending on what info it can figure out about the channel that originated the MessageSend |
| 20:30.02 | leifmadsen | kpfleming: you should run: /msg chanserv flags #asterisk-dev mjordan +oO |
| 20:30.05 | mjordan | which is why you can override what its behavior is using the 'from' field |
| 20:30.33 | leifmadsen | mjordan: makes sense, which is why I don't understand what the reporters issue is :) |
| 20:30.44 | mjordan | so... yeah. I don't think its much of anything (ASTERISK-19058) other then some confusion as to what MessageSend does in relation to chan_sip |
| 20:30.59 | leifmadsen | aye |
| 20:31.58 | mjordan | I think we had another issue where using the MESSAGE function to set the from / to fields caused interesting behavior if you then also set those fields in the MessageSend app - do you remember if that was the same issue reporter? |
| 20:32.52 | *** join/#asterisk-dev tzafrir (~tzafrir@bzq-218-155-170.cablep.bezeqint.net) |
| 20:32.52 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o tzafrir] by ChanServ |
| 20:34.14 | leifmadsen | actually mjordan already has the values setup to make him auto-op on join, so not sure why he wasn't op'd |
| 20:34.36 | leifmadsen | mjordan: dont' think it was the same person |
| 20:34.42 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Ta^3 (~tacvbo@fixed-203-152-144.iusacell.net) |
| 20:34.49 | leifmadsen | mjordan: that issue for that was duplicate ports or something in the SIP msg right? |
| 20:36.45 | mjordan | yeah, I found the issues. We have a few regarding SIP MESSAGE that need to be fixed |
| 20:37.52 | leifmadsen | mjordan: aye -- I went through and created a new Channels/chan_sip/Messaging component as well and assigned issues to it |
| 20:38.04 | mjordan | cool. |
| 20:40.46 | p3nguin | The jabber_patch_ammends.patch that I was given to fix the jabber component problem doesn't work against 1.8.8.0. Was the problem addressed so I can discard the patch, or does a new patch need to be made? I didn't see anything in the changelog about fixing it, but I also don't really know exactly what to look for. |
| 20:41.13 | mjordan | p3nguin: what file are the conflicts in? |
| 20:44.23 | p3nguin | res_jabber.c, since that is what the patch addresses. |
| 20:44.33 | p3nguin | I can show you the reject from the patch. |
| 20:45.17 | kpfleming | how was this patch given to you? |
| 20:45.25 | p3nguin | reject http://pastebin.com/ApKaDKTe |
| 20:46.07 | p3nguin | I think it was given via jira, but that's not the issue -- I used the patch on 1.8.7.0 and 1.8.7.1 successfully. |
| 20:46.39 | kpfleming | yes, it is the issue. if it was given to you as a fix for an open jira issue, you need to comment on that issue that the patch no longer applies and ask the person who gave it to you what you should do. |
| 20:47.33 | p3nguin | jrose_atdigium: ^^ |
| 20:47.59 | p3nguin | I'll see if the issue is still open on jira so I can comment on it. |
| 20:48.05 | jrose_atDigium | hello there |
| 20:48.13 | mjordan | p3nguin: even if its not, what is the issue in JIRA? |
| 20:48.14 | kpfleming | if it's not open, then that would indicate that the problem is solved |
| 20:48.29 | kpfleming | and the issue would indicate that the patch had been committed into the various branches |
| 20:49.35 | p3nguin | ASTERISK-18626 (closed) |
| 20:49.57 | p3nguin | With it being closed, that should mean I can discard the patch because the problem has been solved in 1.8.8.0, correct? |
| 20:50.14 | *** join/#asterisk-dev otherwiseguy (~otherwise@rrcs-173-197-0-67.west.biz.rr.com) |
| 20:50.27 | kpfleming | have you looked at the resolution of the issue? have you looked to see whether commits were made on the 'Subversion' tab of the issue? |
| 20:50.54 | kpfleming | is the issue number listed in the changelog for the 1.8.8.0 release? all of these are pieces of information you need to find to get the answer to your question. |
| 20:51.26 | jrose_atDigium | For ASTERISK-18626 we reverted the patch in 18078 because it was causing a regression of some sort and we couldn't find a particularly simple way around it. I'm pretty sure the original issue in 18078 is unresolved as a result. |
| 20:51.48 | mjordan | it is |
| 20:52.05 | jrose_atDigium | I was taking a look at it on one personal project day a couple months ago, but I was still unable to find a satisfactory means of fixing it. |
| 20:52.16 | p3nguin | I don't see any subversion tabs on the jira page. |
| 20:52.26 | kpfleming | so this patch that p3nguin was given was the 'reversion' patch? |
| 20:52.52 | kpfleming | p3nguin: 'Subversion Commits' |
| 20:53.24 | pabelanger | Here is the commit in 1.8.8.0: 2011-10-04 19:33 +0000 [r339297-339352] Jonathan Rose <jrose@digium.com> |
| 20:53.33 | pabelanger | it is in the ChangeLog |
| 20:53.40 | kpfleming | well, there you go then |
| 20:53.46 | jrose_atDigium | kpfleming: The patch p3nguin just posted is the one that causes the reversion. |
| 20:53.54 | jrose_atDigium | *regression |
| 20:54.24 | p3nguin | It is all very confusing to me. |
| 20:55.05 | jrose_atDigium | Basically the patch you and I worked on to resolve the first issue ended up causing other stuff to break which had been working on. We couldn't find a fix that made everything play in harmony, so we had to revert it. |
| 20:55.10 | pabelanger | p3nguin: consult the ChangeLog, it is all documented there |
| 20:55.13 | jrose_atDigium | *which had been working |
| 20:55.14 | p3nguin | I guess the best thing for me to do is build one without the patch and see if it breaks my jabber component again. |
| 20:55.47 | jrose_atDigium | I'm sad to say that the answer to that is yes, it probably will break your jabber component again. |
| 20:56.01 | p3nguin | pabelanger: It's not clear to me. We patched a patch because of a patch that needed patching, then reverted the patch which broke the original patch. |
| 20:56.27 | p3nguin | jrose_atdigium: Great. So now we're back to: I need a patch to fix the component issue. |
| 20:56.37 | p3nguin | The last one does not work on 1.8.8.0. |
| 20:56.38 | kpfleming | and nobody has one at this point |
| 20:57.34 | mjordan | p3nguin: is ASTERISK-18078 the actual issue you wanted solved, and that your patch used to resolve? |
| 20:57.36 | jrose_atDigium | Well, if the patch no longer applies specifically in 1.8.8, that means there has probably been some change to the surrounding code. |
| 20:57.45 | jrose_atDigium | mjordan: yes |
| 20:57.54 | mjordan | comment there that it no longer works in 1.8.8. |
| 20:57.58 | mjordan | that issue is still open. |
| 20:58.28 | jrose_atDigium | I reopened it shortly after I reverted the patch that fixed it. |
| 20:58.48 | jrose_atDigium | Not entirely sure if that was the right approach in retrospect. |
| 20:58.50 | p3nguin | My only problem was that when I upgraded to 1.8.7.0, my jabber component broke. I didn't know until we started discussing it that the broken component was a result of another problem being fixed. |
| 20:58.59 | pabelanger | Okay, now I am getting confused. o.0 |
| 20:59.01 | mjordan | jrose_atDigium: no problems :-) |
| 20:59.17 | pabelanger | Is ASTERISK-18078 the original issue? |
| 20:59.38 | pabelanger | p3nguin: upgraded from what |
| 20:59.46 | p3nguin | the previous release |
| 20:59.51 | pabelanger | 1.8.6.0? |
| 20:59.52 | jrose_atDigium | It's the one that was fixed, but the fix caused a regression and had to be undone. |
| 20:59.58 | p3nguin | I'll check my upgrade log to tell you for sure. One moment. |
| 21:00.55 | p3nguin | Yes, 1.8.6.0 to 1.8.7.0 appears to be where it broke, because I immediately rolled back to 1.8.6.0. |
| 21:01.21 | jrose_atDigium | I actually had a hackish way of fixing it safely, but it basically relied on copying a structure definition from lib_iksemel which contained the connection status, so it was in incredibly bad form. |
| 21:01.42 | p3nguin | As mentioned, I didn't know that the broken jabber component was a result of another problem being fixed until after we began discussion of fixing the jabber component. |
| 21:03.05 | pabelanger | p3nguin: where is the JIRA issue you created for the regression between 1.8.6.0 and 1.8.7.0? |
| 21:03.42 | pabelanger | is it ASTERISK-18626? |
| 21:03.44 | p3nguin | ASTERISK-18626 is the one I filed when the component broke. |
| 21:04.43 | pabelanger | okay, so ASTERISK-18626 was committed into 1.8.8.0 (reverting ASTERISK-18078) but you are staying it is still broken? |
| 21:05.24 | p3nguin | I was asking, and jrose_atdigium suggests that because the whole thing was reverted, it will be broken. |
| 21:07.42 | jrose_atDigium | 18626 should be fine now. |
| 21:07.56 | jrose_atDigium | But yes, 18078 is pretty much definitely still a problem. |
| 21:08.03 | pabelanger | as far as I can tell, r333265 was reverted (which you opened ASTERISK-18626 for. The code was removed in 1.8.8.0, so res_jabber should be back to the same as 1.8.6.0 |
| 21:09.40 | jrose_atDigium | That sounds about right, but keep in mind that there have probably been other issues against res_jabber that have been worked on in the meantime. |
| 21:09.49 | mjordan | only one |
| 21:10.00 | p3nguin | Okay, that gives me hope. I'll try 1.8.8.0 without trying to patch it and if the jabber component breaks again, I guess I'll file a new issue. |
| 21:10.12 | pabelanger | I'm diffing 1.8.6.0 and 1.8.8.0 jabber right now |
| 21:10.40 | pabelanger | and the result: http://pastebin.com/ZrsdwvwT |
| 21:11.13 | pabelanger | p3nguin: any reason you didn't try asterisk 1.8.8.0-rc1,2,3,4? |
| 21:11.56 | p3nguin | I never really considered it. |
| 21:12.28 | elguero | I was helping work on that issue... p3nguin should be all set to use plain 1.8.8.0... jrose reverted the changes that caused his problems... |
| 21:12.41 | p3nguin | I'm not a developer, so there isn't a lot I can contribute to fixing things before a release. |
| 21:13.25 | kpfleming | you can tell us whether the release solves your problems or not |
| 21:13.43 | pabelanger | Well, for future reference, if you test an RC and find a regression from the previous release, we tend to make those issues priority and fix them before we do a release. So people do run into the problem like you did |
| 21:14.15 | jrose_atDigium | Oh yeah, it was actually component registration that was fixed in favor of the presence segfault. |
| 21:14.18 | pabelanger | s/do/don't |
| 21:14.19 | p3nguin | Once I had the patch that fixed the problem on 1.8.7, I never gave it another look. |
| 21:14.45 | pabelanger | until you need to upgrade |
| 21:14.49 | p3nguin | exactly |
| 21:14.54 | p3nguin | That's why I'm here today. |
| 21:15.32 | alecdavis | @mjordan: svn access :) |
| 21:15.48 | Qwell | alecdavis: What distro are you using? |
| 21:15.55 | Qwell | I think I'm going to need to remake your cert |
| 21:15.59 | pabelanger | Right, that's why we want / need people to test RCs. So we don't have these problems |
| 21:16.26 | alecdavis | @qwell: without an expiry date?? |
| 21:16.42 | Qwell | alecdavis: without the issue you were having - unless that got resolved? |
| 21:18.07 | alecdavis | the issue I'm having is that the cert had an expiry date of dec 9th 2011. |
| 21:18.38 | Qwell | alecdavis: mjordan forwarded me another email after that - did you get a new cert in the meantime? Sorry, I've been out and don't know what's been done. |
| 21:19.14 | Qwell | something about a socket write error |
| 21:19.46 | alecdavis | I didn't, and that's how mjordans email read. |
| 21:22.46 | alecdavis | @qwell: svn: OPTIONS of 'https://origsvn.digium.com/svn/asterisk': SSL handshake failed: SSL alert received: CA is unknown (https://origsvn.digium.com) |
| 21:22.57 | Qwell | okay. I'll get you a new cert then. |
| 21:23.07 | alecdavis | thanks. |
| 21:27.00 | Qwell | alecdavis: you should have something from me shortly |
| 21:33.04 | tzafrir | I guess this is not a good time now to mention that I think that the warning due to AST-2011-013 is too much? |
| 21:33.44 | tzafrir | I rephrased it into one line in the Debian packages (stable and oldstable, where I had to backport a patch anyway) |
| 21:34.12 | tzafrir | When you have 4 lines per peer, it's really not clear what this is about. |
| 21:34.25 | tzafrir | I generally wrote something along the lines of: |
| 21:35.47 | tzafrir | sip.conf: Different 'nat' settings between [general] and section [%s]. See /usr/share/doc/asterisk/README.Debian.gz (global='%s' peer/user='%s') |
| 21:36.07 | alecdavis | don't forget http://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/telephony/asterisk/ChangeLog-1.6.2.22 |
| 21:36.21 | tzafrir | This does assume (wrongly) sip.conf (or even a config file) |
| 21:36.55 | tzafrir | alecdavis, it only has space for one reference |
| 21:37.17 | tzafrir | I was thinking originally to give a short-url that would point to the advisory |
| 21:37.42 | alecdavis | tzafrir: that wasn't directed at you sorry, it was to make sure the link was active, it's dead right now. |
| 21:51.18 | alecdavis | @qwell: working again, thanks. |
| 22:01.31 | tzafrir | meetme is disabled by default in 10? |
| 22:01.57 | tzafrir | How compatible is the new ConfBridge to MeetMe? |
| 22:03.37 | mjordan | tzafrir: they are two different applications, so compatibility is a bit of a loaded question |
| 22:04.03 | tzafrir | Right. But meetme is disabled by default. |
| 22:04.16 | tzafrir | I wonder if it's OK for me to ship a package with meetme disabled |
| 22:04.52 | tzafrir | Or should I keep it enabled for a cycle |
| 22:05.16 | tzafrir | This is a binary package. I can't just let the sysadmin decide |
| 22:05.25 | mjordan | https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/ConfBridge+10 |
| 22:05.55 | mjordan | obviously, people won't be able to go to 10 + ConfBridge without first determining what they need in terms of conferencing |
| 22:06.56 | tzafrir | OK. So if one had a working meetme.conf , this upgrade will completely break it |
| 22:07.00 | mjordan | that wiki article explains more of what ConfBridge provides over MeetMe, and why MeetMe was moved into the "deprecated" category. |
| 22:07.23 | mjordan | tzafrir: their MeetMe application would not be loaded, so yes, that would not work. |
| 22:07.23 | tzafrir | I figure I must include it then for an extra cycle |
| 22:08.25 | tzafrir | For the record, I think it's a mistake to disable meetme in the 10 cycle: for this exact reason |
| 22:09.03 | tzafrir | ConfBridge should be working properly for at least one cycle |
| 22:09.19 | tzafrir | But that's just my (H) opinion |
| 23:02.54 | *** join/#asterisk-dev snuff-work (~snuff-wor@210.9.82.197) |
| 23:02.54 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o snuff-work] by ChanServ |
| 23:10.47 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Tim_Toady (~fuzzy@188.4.57.16.dsl.dyn.forthnet.gr) |
| 23:17.30 | *** part/#asterisk-dev mjordan (~mjordan@nat/digium/x-kgepcrkuvraiffxk) |
| 23:29.10 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kpfleming (~kpfleming@asterisk/digium-director-of-software-tech/kpfleming) |
| 23:29.10 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o kpfleming] by ChanServ |