| 16:20.46 | *** join/#asterisk-dev infobot (~infobot@rikers.org) |
| 16:20.46 | *** topic/#asterisk-dev is Asterisk Development Discussion -=- http://www.asterisk.org/developers -=- Tier 2 and 3.14159265 support is in #asterisk -=- Tier 4 support is in #2,000 |
| 16:31.12 | *** join/#asterisk-dev malcolmd_ (~malcolmd@pdpc/sponsor/digium/malcolmd) |
| 16:31.12 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o malcolmd_] by ChanServ |
| 16:34.12 | *** join/#asterisk-dev otherwiseguy (~otherwise@rrcs-173-197-0-67.west.biz.rr.com) |
| 16:38.45 | *** join/#asterisk-dev rgagnon (~rgagnon@rrcs-71-42-183-54.sw.biz.rr.com) |
| 16:38.49 | *** part/#asterisk-dev rgagnon (~rgagnon@rrcs-71-42-183-54.sw.biz.rr.com) |
| 16:43.09 | *** join/#asterisk-dev rgagnon (~rgagnon@rrcs-71-42-183-54.sw.biz.rr.com) |
| 16:43.18 | *** part/#asterisk-dev rgagnon (~rgagnon@rrcs-71-42-183-54.sw.biz.rr.com) |
| 17:00.54 | *** join/#asterisk-dev anthm (~anthm@freeswitch/developer/anthm) |
| 17:31.42 | *** join/#asterisk-dev sgimeno (~sgimeno@163.117.206.10) |
| 17:57.29 | *** join/#asterisk-dev ccesario (~ccesario@189.29.54.144) |
| 18:37.50 | *** join/#asterisk-dev elred_ (~elred_@unaffiliated/elred-/x-5010831) |
| 19:35.30 | tzafrir_laptop | pabelanger, is sruffel around? |
| 19:36.55 | pabelanger | not sure |
| 20:01.58 | tzafrir_laptop | my mistake: rtkit does depend on policykit, as expected |
| 20:34.18 | wdoekes2 | otherwiseguy: I don't have time to review it right now, but +1 for the work on the dnsmgr :) |
| 20:34.42 | otherwiseguy | wdoekes2: thanks! |
| 20:35.12 | *** join/#asterisk-dev hehol (~Adium@2a01:198:71d:0:21f:d0ff:fea1:568e) |
| 20:35.20 | otherwiseguy | It is also my way of sneakily preparing things that support dnsmgr for an eventual switch to asyncdns :-p |
| 20:35.29 | otherwiseguy | If that can ever be made to happen. |
| 20:36.06 | otherwiseguy | (one can dream) |
| 20:51.18 | *** join/#asterisk-dev wedhorn (~wedhorn@123-243-209-34.static.tpgi.com.au) |
| 21:13.08 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kpfleming (~kpfleming@asterisk/digium-director-of-software-tech/kpfleming) |
| 21:13.08 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o kpfleming] by ChanServ |
| 22:20.23 | WIMPy | Is there some information somewhere about the ongoing channel opaquification? |
| 22:20.35 | russellb | otherwiseguy: ^ |
| 22:21.39 | otherwiseguy | WIMPy: I keep meaning to write up a big Wiki page on the issue. For some reason, I have trouble motivating myself to do that in my free time, though. :-) This next month, I expect Digium will set aside some time for me to do that during normal business hours. |
| 22:22.36 | WIMPy | So there is nothing at the moment? |
| 22:23.06 | otherwiseguy | WIMPy: correct. If you have any specific questions, I could probably answer them, though. |
| 22:23.59 | WIMPy | I's like to find out what functions already exist and what is going to be removed. |
| 22:27.00 | Kobaz | anyone think there would be any problems with adding an allowloop setting in chan_sip, where it wouldn't return SIP_REQ_LOOP_DETECTED in match_req_to_dialog() |
| 22:28.51 | otherwiseguy | WIMPy: Basically direct access to chan->${anything} will be removed and changed to ast_channel_${anything} and ast_channel_${anything}_set(). What has already been done can be found at the bottom of channel.h. |
| 22:29.17 | otherwiseguy | They are implemented in main/channel_internal_api.c |
| 22:29.30 | mjordan | Kobaz: why would you want to ignore a detected loop? |
| 22:29.42 | WIMPy | Ok. I'll take a look there. |
| 22:30.30 | kpfleming | but what has been proposed would not take away any useful functionality that exists today... just change the syntax. |
| 22:30.38 | kpfleming | at least for Asterisk 11 |
| 22:31.48 | Kobaz | mjordan: because i want to place a local sip call |
| 22:34.12 | Kobaz | iax2 allows local loops |
| 22:42.54 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Lipsum (~lipsum@77.40.154.242) |
| 22:43.34 | Lipsum | <PROTECTED> |
| 22:43.45 | Lipsum | wops. |
| 22:44.59 | Lipsum | This might be a question for the support channel, but not sure. It looks like two of my threads are waiting for line 5021 (http://pastebin.com/XVNvGREf), but I cannot see which thread is locking 5021? Am I missing something? |
| 22:45.17 | Lipsum | asterisk 1.4.42 |
| 22:46.22 | Lipsum | the core locks are http://pastebin.com/aGpwFxCT |
| 22:48.08 | mjordan | Lipsum: do_monitor has iflock, while waiting on p->lock. That is in turn locked by ast_hangup, which is waiting on the iflock held by do_monitor. So yes, its a deadlock. Unfortunately, 1.4.42 is no longer supported. |
| 22:49.05 | Lipsum | planning to upgrade to 1.8 during summer, but need to fix this meanwhile :/ |
| 22:49.29 | mjordan | and yes, that's probably a support question. But like I said, that's not a supported Asterisk version, and chan_sip's locking behavior has been reworked significantly since then. |
| 22:52.52 | *** join/#asterisk-dev Lipsum (~lipsum@77.40.154.242) |
| 22:53.00 | Lipsum | ok, thanks for giving me feedback eventhough it was 1.4. :) ill look into the code. |
| 23:58.42 | *** join/#asterisk-dev ChanServ (ChanServ@services.) |
| 23:58.42 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o ChanServ] by pratchett.freenode.net |
| 23:59.44 | *** join/#asterisk-dev otherwiseguy (~otherwise@rrcs-173-197-0-67.west.biz.rr.com) |