On Sat, Jul 08, 2006 at 04:10:54PM +0200, Robert Michel wrote: > Salve Tzafrir! > > On Sat, 08 Jul 2006, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > > > Right. Don't use safe_asterisk . asterisk daemonises just fine on its > > own. asterisk -r gives you a nice console. If you want a complete trace, > > you have the logs at your disposal: take a visit at logger.conf. > > AFAIK will safe_asterik restart automaticaly asteriks when asterik will crash. > Wrong? > > > You've just added quite a few more points of failure to Asterisk and > > complicated thinhgs even further. > > Well, I must agree - that's the wrong way. > When I and other test that patch and it is working, > will it become part of standard asterisk?
Are colors that important to you? It shouldn't be complicated to get it working. I'll have a look. > > > Why bother using safe_sterisk? > > Has been safe_asterik sinificant reason for trouble? > (Sorry when I'm new and missed discussion about it) Extra layer of complication. And a non-optimal handling of errors. It can just too easily get asterisk into a loop where it remains non-functional but impossible to kill with standard scripts. -- Tzafrir Cohen sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] icq#16849755 iax:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +972-50-7952406 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.xorcom.com _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
