Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Monday 24 December 2007 10:30:57 Dovid B wrote: While this encourages me to use 1.4 at the same time it makes me wonder why Digium waited that long... Because IT has other things to do than upgrade the PBX? Which makes for a good answer to Olle's original question. :) Merry Christmas, Philipp Kempgen -- amooma GmbH - Bachstr. 126 - 56566 Neuwied - http://www.amooma.de Let's use IT to solve problems and not to create new ones. Asterisk? - http://www.das-asterisk-buch.de Geschäftsführer: Stefan Wintermeyer Handelsregister: Neuwied B 14998 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Axel Thimm wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 10:40:32PM +0100, Benny Amorsen wrote: Olle E Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But on the other hand, if people rely on third-party distributions we might want to set up some kind of peer pressure on the maintainers - and possibly identify them so we can support them and speed up their process. Third-party distributions are very important, and Asterisk has for various reasons done relatively badly there. Fedora still doesn't have Asterisk, but does have CallWeaver. Asterisk isn't even available in the most popular extra repositories, but only in ATrpms, my least favourite of the larger repositories. It happens to be my favourite thrid party repo though, ;) and indeed there is quite some asterisk support happening there. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users Asterisk is fairly easy to build, I don't see why it needs to be in a repo. IMO ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Anthony Francis wrote: Axel Thimm wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 10:40:32PM +0100, Benny Amorsen wrote: Olle E Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But on the other hand, if people rely on third-party distributions we might want to set up some kind of peer pressure on the maintainers - and possibly identify them so we can support them and speed up their process. Third-party distributions are very important, and Asterisk has for various reasons done relatively badly there. Fedora still doesn't have Asterisk, but does have CallWeaver. Asterisk isn't even available in the most popular extra repositories, but only in ATrpms, my least favourite of the larger repositories. It happens to be my favourite thrid party repo though, ;) and indeed there is quite some asterisk support happening there. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users Asterisk is fairly easy to build, I don't see why it needs to be in a repo. IMO There are several benefits to have it in a repo. One is that it is a security issue, you don't want to have dev tools on a exposed server. Another is, if you have hundreds of similar machines, why compile Asterisk 100 times when you need to compile it once and then just copy the binaries to the other 99 machines. So as you see it is an advantage with repo's. Merry Christmas Mats ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Mon, Dec 24, 2007 at 04:11:30AM -0700, Anthony Francis wrote: Asterisk is fairly easy to build, I don't see why it needs to be in a repo. IMO Why does it need to be in a tarball? Isn't it simpler to just grab from an SVN tag? There are many benefits to a reproducable build. Also consider that Asterisk is often part if a bigger product. Asterisk is essentially not a PBX, but rather a PBX building toolkit. It is very customizable and can do many things. And therefore can be integrated in many products. One of those products is a binary distribution by Digium: AsteriskNow. So it seems that some others do see the need. I suggest not to start YAHW on that subject :-) -- Tzafrir Cohen icq#16849755 jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +972-50-7952406 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.xorcom.com iax:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/tzafrir ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Mon, 2007-12-24 at 04:11 -0700, Anthony Francis wrote: Axel Thimm wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 10:40:32PM +0100, Benny Amorsen wrote: Olle E Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But on the other hand, if people rely on third-party distributions we might want to set up some kind of peer pressure on the maintainers - and possibly identify them so we can support them and speed up their process. Third-party distributions are very important, and Asterisk has for various reasons done relatively badly there. Fedora still doesn't have Asterisk, but does have CallWeaver. Asterisk isn't even available in the most popular extra repositories, but only in ATrpms, my least favourite of the larger repositories. It happens to be my favourite thrid party repo though, ;) and indeed there is quite some asterisk support happening there. [snip] Asterisk is fairly easy to build, I don't see why it needs to be in a repo. IMO For example because you don't have a build environment (gcc, autoconf etc.) on a production box. A repo allows you to build on one box and deploy the RPMs via the repo on the other boxes. Regards, Patrick ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Mon, 2007-12-24 at 04:11 -0700, Anthony Francis wrote: Axel Thimm wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 10:40:32PM +0100, Benny Amorsen wrote: Olle E Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But on the other hand, if people rely on third-party distributions we might want to set up some kind of peer pressure on the maintainers - and possibly identify them so we can support them and speed up their process. Third-party distributions are very important, and Asterisk has for various reasons done relatively badly there. Fedora still doesn't have Asterisk, but does have CallWeaver. Asterisk isn't even available in the most popular extra repositories, but only in ATrpms, my least favourite of the larger repositories. It happens to be my favourite thrid party repo though, ;) and indeed there is quite some asterisk support happening there. Asterisk is fairly easy to build, I don't see why it needs to be in a repo. IMO ___ Such as: http://ftp5.gwdg.de/pub/opensuse/repositories/network:/telephony/openSUSE_10.3/ ... ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
- Original Message - From: Tilghman Lesher [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Sent: Friday, December 21, 2007 9:56 PM Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! On Friday 21 December 2007 13:16:17 Matt wrote: It may be a year old.. but until Digium is drinking their own dog food.. I won't be using it. I beg your pardon. The Digium IVR has been on 1.4 since about April or so. While this encourages me to use 1.4 at the same time it makes me wonder why Digium waited that long... ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Monday 24 December 2007 10:30:57 Dovid B wrote: Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Friday 21 December 2007 13:16:17 Matt wrote: It may be a year old.. but until Digium is drinking their own dog food.. I won't be using it. I beg your pardon. The Digium IVR has been on 1.4 since about April or so. While this encourages me to use 1.4 at the same time it makes me wonder why Digium waited that long... Because IT has other things to do than upgrade the PBX? -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 10:40:32PM +0100, Benny Amorsen wrote: Olle E Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But on the other hand, if people rely on third-party distributions we might want to set up some kind of peer pressure on the maintainers - and possibly identify them so we can support them and speed up their process. Third-party distributions are very important, and Asterisk has for various reasons done relatively badly there. Fedora still doesn't have Asterisk, but does have CallWeaver. Asterisk isn't even available in the most popular extra repositories, but only in ATrpms, my least favourite of the larger repositories. It happens to be my favourite thrid party repo though, ;) and indeed there is quite some asterisk support happening there. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net pgpxYdtxsy9Yh.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. Just tried an in-place upgrade on my home box : make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/asterisk-addons-1.4.5' for x in app_addon_sql_mysql.so app_saycountpl.so cdr_addon_mysql.so res_config_mysql.so; do /usr/bin/install -c -m 755 $x /usr/lib/asterisk/modules ; done /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `app_addon_sql_mysql.so': No such file or directory /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `cdr_addon_mysql.so': No such file or directory /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `res_config_mysql.so': No such file or directory make: *** [install] Error 1 And the asterisk console is flooded with these errors : [Dec 21 10:10:58] WARNING[22897]: chan_sip.c:6707 determine_firstline_parts: Bad request protocol Packet [Dec 21 10:10:58] WARNING[22897]: chan_sip.c:6707 determine_firstline_parts: Bad request protocol Packet So for the next time to come i'll turn back to 1.2 :) ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
remco, I just had the same problem/error on my CLI when I added a polycom shoretel IP-100 phone to my network and enabled mgcp... couldn't figure out how to get that working yet... I don't think it is related to 1.4 as I have been running 1.4 has been running for over a year now without that error... I would look somewhere else... daveC [Dec 21 08:51:32] WARNING[16742]: chan_sip.c:6620 determine_firstline_parts: Bad request protocol [EMAIL PROTECTED]] MGCP 1.0 Remco Barendse wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. Just tried an in-place upgrade on my home box : make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/asterisk-addons-1.4.5' for x in app_addon_sql_mysql.so app_saycountpl.so cdr_addon_mysql.so res_config_mysql.so; do /usr/bin/install -c -m 755 $x /usr/lib/asterisk/modules ; done /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `app_addon_sql_mysql.so': No such file or directory /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `cdr_addon_mysql.so': No such file or directory /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `res_config_mysql.so': No such file or directory make: *** [install] Error 1 And the asterisk console is flooded with these errors : [Dec 21 10:10:58] WARNING[22897]: chan_sip.c:6707 determine_firstline_parts: Bad request protocol Packet [Dec 21 10:10:58] WARNING[22897]: chan_sip.c:6707 determine_firstline_parts: Bad request protocol Packet So for the next time to come i'll turn back to 1.2 :) ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- My wife's sister is in California. I should buy her a Videophone2008! Truly, The Next Best Thing to Being There! -- WorldWideVideoPhones.com 856.380.0894 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
It may be a year old.. but until Digium is drinking their own dog food.. I won't be using it. On Dec 21, 2007 9:26 AM, dave cantera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: remco, I just had the same problem/error on my CLI when I added a polycom shoretel IP-100 phone to my network and enabled mgcp... couldn't figure out how to get that working yet... I don't think it is related to 1.4 as I have been running 1.4 has been running for over a year now without that error... I would look somewhere else... daveC [Dec 21 08:51:32] WARNING[16742]: chan_sip.c:6620 determine_firstline_parts: Bad request protocol [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]] MGCP 1.0 Remco Barendse wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. Just tried an in-place upgrade on my home box : make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/asterisk-addons-1.4.5' for x in app_addon_sql_mysql.so app_saycountpl.so cdr_addon_mysql.so res_config_mysql.so; do /usr/bin/install -c -m 755 $x /usr/lib/asterisk/modules ; done /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `app_addon_sql_mysql.so': No such file or directory /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `cdr_addon_mysql.so': No such file or directory /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `res_config_mysql.so': No such file or directory make: *** [install] Error 1 And the asterisk console is flooded with these errors : [Dec 21 10:10:58] WARNING[22897]: chan_sip.c:6707 determine_firstline_parts: Bad request protocol Packet [Dec 21 10:10:58] WARNING[22897]: chan_sip.c:6707 determine_firstline_parts: Bad request protocol Packet So for the next time to come i'll turn back to 1.2 :) ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- My wife's sister is in California. I should buy her a Videophone2008! Truly, The Next Best Thing to Being There! -- WorldWideVideoPhones.com856.380.0894 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Friday 21 December 2007 13:16:17 Matt wrote: It may be a year old.. but until Digium is drinking their own dog food.. I won't be using it. I beg your pardon. The Digium IVR has been on 1.4 since about April or so. -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
21 dec 2007 kl. 10.12 skrev Remco Barendse: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. Just tried an in-place upgrade on my home box : make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/asterisk-addons-1.4.5' for x in app_addon_sql_mysql.so app_saycountpl.so cdr_addon_mysql.so res_config_mysql.so; do /usr/bin/install -c -m 755 $x /usr/lib/asterisk/modules ; done /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `app_addon_sql_mysql.so': No such file or directory /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `cdr_addon_mysql.so': No such file or directory /usr/bin/install: cannot stat `res_config_mysql.so': No such file or directory make: *** [install] Error 1 For some reason, the mysql modules wasn't compiled. Did you check the requirements for mysql and read the compile errors? It's not shown here. And the asterisk console is flooded with these errors : [Dec 21 10:10:58] WARNING[22897]: chan_sip.c:6707 determine_firstline_parts: Bad request protocol Packet [Dec 21 10:10:58] WARNING[22897]: chan_sip.c:6707 determine_firstline_parts: Bad request protocol Packet So for the next time to come i'll turn back to 1.2 :) The chan_sip messages was only warnings, nothing serious. Propably strange NAT Keepalives, like those I've seen from cirpak devices. Communication should work as expected. If you give up for these errors, you might consider buying Asterisk Business Edition where everything is precompiled and easy-to-install, and you have support. Thanks for the feedback! Best regards, /Olle ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Dave, I agree with you. I think it would be smarter to go to a new format how ever one issues that a lot of people seem to have is when the syntax is changed. This is why I suggested both. Maybe there can be a month (or maybe even two) long discussion between the users and dev list for A) Current formatting B) formatting for the future and we can have both say for the next two major releases (as opposed to 1 now) and then move over. Wouldn't this make more people happy ? - Original Message - From: dave cantera [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 6:33 AM Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! dovid... while this seems like a good idea to have both sip show channels and show channels sip having two, three or even four ways to do the same thing would confuse/cripple the learning curve... * would turn into a microsoft mentality where there are dozens of ways to configure/reconfigure some of their products... word, for example, can be configured with or without the tool bars and then you can configure hot-keys... in fact, you can configure some products so that someone who learns it with a hacked config, could not possibly use the original stock config... sorry to go on about this but it is one of my hot buttons... daveC Dovid B wrote: - Original Message - From: Steve Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 5:43 AM Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! On Sat, 15 Dec 2007, Johansson Olle E wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. How about the change from a bad command line interface to a really bad command line interface? I mean, Seriously? (in a Grey's Anatomy kind of way...) The old syntax was inconsistent -- show manager command vs sip show channels and just plain bad -- for example sip reload should have been reload sip. The new syntax continues down the noun-verb path instead of correcting itself and using verb-noun like most other applications (MySQL, GDB, Oracle, etc.) Then, just to make it worse, now I have to learn which commands somebody (arbitrarily) decided are core and which are not -- for what benefit? Certainly doesn't make MY job easier! Approach the command line like a noob. I want Asterisk to show me something so I'll start the command line with show. I'm not quite sure what I'm doing, so I'll press TAB to see what I can show. Oh, channel looks like what I want. Hmm, too much. Maybe I should have qualified what kind of channel I'm looking for BEFORE the word channel. Here's a suggestion -- stop thinking like a parser and start thinking like a person :) Which makes more sense (at least in English)? 1) show black dogs -- show sip channels 2) black show dogs -- sip show channels 3) dogs black show -- channels sip show 4) show dogs black -- show channels sip 5) black dogs show -- sip channels show 6) dogs show black -- channels show sip Is it too late to fix this for 1.6? Thanks in advance, I think as many people have pointed out they are used to a lot of commands out there so changing it yet again would make more people unhappy. But maybe asterisk can have both. Why not sip show channels for the old timers and show channels sip or show sip channels for the n00b's. Why shouldn't asterisk have both options ? ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- My wife's sister is in California. I should buy her a Videophone2008! Truly, The Next Best Thing to Being There! -- WorldWideVideoPhones.com 856.380.0894 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Hi
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 12:19:08AM -0500, dave cantera wrote:
ok, here is my $0.02... I created a script since I had to
install/update so often and for various reasons...
you can choose to compile automatically or manually...
modify the current release numbers, your repository, and source root...
all else is automated..
which is unloading zap driver, stopping a running asterisk, getting the
current release, untar'ng it and compiling it...
enjoy,
daveC
You can find my take on the subject at
http://updates.xorcom.com/astribank/bristuff/1.4/bristuff-current/
I improved the existing scripts from bristuff to be more potent, as
explained in
http://updates.xorcom.com/astribank/bristuff/1.4/INSTALL.html
The bristuff scripts have a little wrapper install.sh that calls
download.sh (downloads and patches. Kind of like rpmbuild -bp) and
compile.sh (builds and installs).
That separation can reduce some of the need for user interaction in your
script.
If you want to use them, I figure you should just remove the patching
commands and then you should be able to use those scripts mostly
unchanged.
#!/bin/sh
#
#get_latest_rel.sh
#
# Dave Cantera: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#
#get the current asterisk release components, put them in our REPOSITORY
#and unpack them in SRC_ROOT
--- Change to suite between these lines --
VER_AST=1.4.16
VER_ZAPTEL=1.4.7.1
VER_LIBPRI=1.4.3
VER_ADDONS=1.4.5
REPOSITORY=/root/tarballs
SRC_ROOT=/usr/local/src
--- Change to suite between these lines --
HTTP_SITE=http://downloads.digium.com;
PUB_DIR=/pub
TARBALL_AST=/asterisk/releases/asterisk-${VER_AST}.tar.gz
TARBALL_LIBPRI=/libpri/releases/libpri-${VER_LIBPRI}.tar.gz
TARBALL_ZAPTEL=/zaptel/releases/zaptel-${VER_ZAPTEL}.tar.gz
TARBALL_ADDONS=/asterisk/releases/asterisk-addons-${VER_ADDONS}.tar.gz
COMPONENTS=${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_AST}
${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_ZAPTEL}
${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_LIBPRI}
${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_ADDONS}
echo
echo
echo we are prepared to get the complete current release
echo of asterisk, libpri, zaptel, and addons
echo the tarballs will be placed in our REPOSITORY and
echo then extracted to our SRC_ROOT
echo
echo --- Activity Recap
echo
echo TARBALL REPOSITORY: ${REPOSITORY}
echoSRC_ROOT: ${SRC_ROOT}
echoasterisk tarball: ${TARBALL_AST}
echo libpri tarball: ${TARBALL_LIBPRI}
echo zaptel tarball: ${TARBALL_ZAPTEL}
echo addons tarball: ${TARBALL_ADDONS}
echo
echo -n Are You Ready? Y to procced:
read ANSWER
if [ null${ANSWER} == nullY ]
# a matter of style:
case $ANSWER in Y* | y*) :;;
*) echo Aborted by user ;;
exit 0
esac
# and good bye to unneeded nesting.
then
echo
echo -
echo stopping asterisk
echo
echo choose your poison:
echo a) /usr/bin/asterisk -xr stop now
echo b) /etc/init.d/asterisk stop
echo
echo -n which one?
read STOPCMD
if [ null${STOPCMD} == nulla ]
then
/usr/bin/asterisk -r -x 'stop now'
fi
if [ null${STOPCMD} == nullb ]
then
/etc/init.d/asterisk stop
fi
echo
echo -
echo get the current asterisk component releases and put them in
our repository ${REPOSITORY}
# lets go to the repository directory
cd ${REPOSITORY}
for TARBALL in `echo ${COMPONENTS}`
do
echo getting component: ${TARBALL}
#wget ${TARBALL}
Err... one needs to uncomment that line, I guess.
I tend to like using 'wget -c' . Otherwise strange things may happen if
I press ctrl-C in the middle of the download.
Sadly, the current downloads.digium.com will make you re-download the
tarballs
done
TARFILES=
asterisk-${VER_AST}.tar.gz
libpri-${VER_LIBPRI}.tar.gz
zaptel-${VER_ZAPTEL}.tar.gz
asterisk-addons-${VER_ADDONS}.tar.gz
echo
echo -
echo unpack the current asterisk component tarballs into our
source root ${SRC_ROOT}
# lets go to the source root directory
cd ${SRC_ROOT}
for TARBALL in `echo ${TARFILES}`
do
echo untar'ng component: ${TARBALL}
#tar xzf ${TARBALL}
done
echo
echo -
echo unloading Zap drivers
# unload the zaptel drivers
ZAP_MODULES=`lsmod | grep zap | awk '{printf(%s,,$4)}' | sed 's/,/
/g'`
for MODULE in `echo ${ZAP_MODULES}`
do
echo unloading zap module: ${MODULE}
#modprobe -r ${MODULE}
done
echo
echo now you are ready to compile at ${SRC_ROOT}
echo
echo -n Shall I continue with the compile? Y?
read COMPILE
if [ null${COMPILE} == nullY ]
then
echo Compiling Zaptel
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
tzafrir,
thanks for the note. btw, Great docs!
asciidocs looks cool too!
thanks!
daveC
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
Hi
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 12:19:08AM -0500, dave cantera wrote:
ok, here is my $0.02... I created a script since I had to
install/update so often and for various reasons...
you can choose to compile automatically or manually...
modify the current release numbers, your repository, and source root...
all else is automated..
which is unloading zap driver, stopping a running asterisk, getting the
current release, untar'ng it and compiling it...
enjoy,
daveC
You can find my take on the subject at
http://updates.xorcom.com/astribank/bristuff/1.4/bristuff-current/
I improved the existing scripts from bristuff to be more potent, as
explained in
http://updates.xorcom.com/astribank/bristuff/1.4/INSTALL.html
The bristuff scripts have a little wrapper install.sh that calls
download.sh (downloads and patches. Kind of like rpmbuild -bp) and
compile.sh (builds and installs).
That separation can reduce some of the need for user interaction in your
script.
If you want to use them, I figure you should just remove the patching
commands and then you should be able to use those scripts mostly
unchanged.
#!/bin/sh
#
#get_latest_rel.sh
#
# Dave Cantera: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#
#get the current asterisk release components, put them in our REPOSITORY
#and unpack them in SRC_ROOT
--- Change to suite between these lines --
VER_AST="1.4.16"
VER_ZAPTEL="1.4.7.1"
VER_LIBPRI="1.4.3"
VER_ADDONS="1.4.5"
REPOSITORY="/root/tarballs"
SRC_ROOT="/usr/local/src"
--- Change to suite between these lines --
HTTP_SITE="http://downloads.digium.com"
PUB_DIR="/pub"
TARBALL_AST="/asterisk/releases/asterisk-${VER_AST}.tar.gz"
TARBALL_LIBPRI="/libpri/releases/libpri-${VER_LIBPRI}.tar.gz"
TARBALL_ZAPTEL="/zaptel/releases/zaptel-${VER_ZAPTEL}.tar.gz"
TARBALL_ADDONS="/asterisk/releases/asterisk-addons-${VER_ADDONS}.tar.gz"
COMPONENTS="${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_AST}
${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_ZAPTEL}
${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_LIBPRI}
${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_ADDONS} "
echo
echo
echo " we are prepared to get the complete current release "
echo " of asterisk, libpri, zaptel, and addons "
echo " the tarballs will be placed in our REPOSITORY and "
echo " then extracted to our SRC_ROOT "
echo
echo "--- Activity Recap "
echo
echo " TARBALL REPOSITORY: ${REPOSITORY}"
echo " SRC_ROOT: ${SRC_ROOT}"
echo " asterisk tarball: ${TARBALL_AST}"
echo " libpri tarball: ${TARBALL_LIBPRI}"
echo " zaptel tarball: ${TARBALL_ZAPTEL}"
echo " addons tarball: ${TARBALL_ADDONS}"
echo
echo -n " Are You Ready? Y to procced: "
read ANSWER
if [ "null${ANSWER}" == "nullY" ]
# a matter of style:
case "$ANSWER" in Y* | y*) :;;
*) echo " Aborted by user ";;
exit 0
esac
# and good bye to unneeded nesting.
then
echo
echo "-"
echo " stopping asterisk "
echo
echo " choose your poison: "
echo " a) /usr/bin/asterisk -xr stop now"
echo " b) /etc/init.d/asterisk stop "
echo
echo -n " which one? "
read STOPCMD
if [ "null${STOPCMD}" == "nulla" ]
then
/usr/bin/asterisk -r -x 'stop now'
fi
if [ "null${STOPCMD}" == "nullb" ]
then
/etc/init.d/asterisk stop
fi
echo
echo "-"
echo " get the current asterisk component releases and put them in
our repository ${REPOSITORY}"
# lets go to the repository directory
cd ${REPOSITORY}
for TARBALL in `echo ${COMPONENTS}`
do
echo "getting component: ${TARBALL} "
#wget ${TARBALL}
Err... one needs to uncomment that line, I guess.
I tend to like using 'wget -c' . Otherwise strange things may happen if
I press ctrl-C in the middle of the download.
Sadly, the current downloads.digium.com will make you re-download the
tarballs
done
TARFILES="
asterisk-${VER_AST}.tar.gz
libpri-${VER_LIBPRI}.tar.gz
zaptel-${VER_ZAPTEL}.tar.gz
asterisk-addons-${VER_ADDONS}.tar.gz "
echo
echo "-"
echo " unpack the current asterisk component tarballs into our
source root ${SRC_ROOT}"
# lets go to the source root directory
cd ${SRC_ROOT}
for TARBALL in `echo ${TARFILES}`
do
echo "untar'ng component: ${TARBALL} "
#tar xzf ${TARBALL}
done
echo
echo "-"
echo " unloading Zap drivers"
# unload the zaptel drivers
ZAP_MODULES=`lsmod | grep zap | awk '{printf("%s,",$4)}' | sed 's/,/
/g'`
for MODULE in `echo ${ZAP_MODULES}`
do
echo "unloading zap module: ${MODULE}"
#modprobe -r ${MODULE}
done
echo
echo " now you are ready to compile at ${SRC_ROOT} "
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Hi Steve, On Tue, 2007-12-18 at 19:43 -0800, Steve Edwards wrote: The old syntax was inconsistent -- show manager command vs sip show channels and just plain bad -- for example sip reload should have been reload sip. I agree. Reload sip would be the logical thing. [snip] Approach the command line like a noob. I want Asterisk to show me something so I'll start the command line with show. I'm not quite sure what I'm doing, so I'll press TAB to see what I can show. Oh, channel looks like what I want. Hmm, too much. Maybe I should have qualified what kind of channel I'm looking for BEFORE the word channel. That makes sense to me. It's also what I'm used to from working with other equipment. Here's a suggestion -- stop thinking like a parser and start thinking like a person :) Which makes more sense (at least in English)? 1) show black dogs -- show sip channels 2) black show dogs -- sip show channels 3) dogs black show -- channels sip show 4) show dogs black -- show channels sip 5) black dogs show -- sip channels show 6) dogs show black -- channels show sip Excellent example. I'll put my 0.2 cents on #1 :) Is it too late to fix this for 1.6? I sincerely hope not. Your example shows that the CLI could use some TLC. Let's hope the powers that be agree. +1 Regards, Patrick ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Hi Olle, On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 08:20 +0100, Johansson Olle E wrote: [snip] The old way was a mess. We had two different systems, one like your old show and one syntax starting with the module name. We had to move forward with only one syntax and decided to go for modulename verb which is not human language-like, but we haven't really clamed that the CLI is a human language parser. Maybe we should go for an avatar approach... I have not followed this discussion but the decision is quite puzzling to me. Why would you make the human interface to Asterisk not human language-like? That's just not logical. Were the devs expecting that the majority of users would be HAL2000 clones instead of humans? :) [snip] I do understand the pain with changing the CLI though, I hate to switch from Asterisk 1.0 to 1.2 to 1.4 and trunk and have different commands. This is only an issue for developers and existing users who have (a combination of) 1.0, 1.2 and 1.4 boxes and upgrade to a version with an improved CLI. New users who get the latest major version of Asterisk (assuming that version has the improved human language-like CLI) don't have that issue. I don't mind the CLI differences because at some point I move all my boxes to the new major release so only have to deal with one version of the CLI at any time. Change usually means one needs to adopt and an improved CLI seems worth it to me. Regards, Patrick ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
I think it should be core dogs show black. Seriously though, I think you make a good point. -Mensaje original- De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] nombre de Steve Edwards Enviado el: miercoles, 19 de diciembre de 2007 4:43 Para: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Asunto: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! On Sat, 15 Dec 2007, Johansson Olle E wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. How about the change from a bad command line interface to a really bad command line interface? I mean, Seriously? (in a Grey's Anatomy kind of way...) The old syntax was inconsistent -- show manager command vs sip show channels and just plain bad -- for example sip reload should have been reload sip. The new syntax continues down the noun-verb path instead of correcting itself and using verb-noun like most other applications (MySQL, GDB, Oracle, etc.) Then, just to make it worse, now I have to learn which commands somebody (arbitrarily) decided are core and which are not -- for what benefit? Certainly doesn't make MY job easier! Approach the command line like a noob. I want Asterisk to show me something so I'll start the command line with show. I'm not quite sure what I'm doing, so I'll press TAB to see what I can show. Oh, channel looks like what I want. Hmm, too much. Maybe I should have qualified what kind of channel I'm looking for BEFORE the word channel. Here's a suggestion -- stop thinking like a parser and start thinking like a person :) Which makes more sense (at least in English)? 1) show black dogs -- show sip channels 2) black show dogs -- sip show channels 3) dogs black show -- channels sip show 4) show dogs black -- show channels sip 5) black dogs show -- sip channels show 6) dogs show black -- channels show sip Is it too late to fix this for 1.6? Thanks in advance, Steve Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: +1-760-468-3867 PST Newline Fax: +1-760-731-3000 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 02:40:21PM +0100, James Collier wrote: I think it should be core dogs show black. You should use color instead of black to make the comparison more valid. show dog color Doesn't sound right (Here's a colour for you, doggy. Fetch!). -- Tzafrir Cohen icq#16849755 jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +972-50-7952406 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.xorcom.com iax:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/tzafrir ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Wednesday 19 December 2007 07:40:21 James Collier wrote: I think it should be core dogs show black. No, that violates the pattern. dogs is not a verb. core show black dogs or dogs show black would be the correct form. -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Wednesday 19 December 2007 07:40:21 James Collier wrote: I think it should be core dogs show black. No, that violates the pattern. dogs is not a verb. core show black dogs or dogs show black would be the correct form. Could this CLI syntax move over to the dev list, since it's mobing further away from the original question! /M ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 08:33 -0600, Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Wednesday 19 December 2007 07:40:21 James Collier wrote: I think it should be core dogs show black. No, that violates the pattern. dogs is not a verb. core show black dogs or dogs show black would be the correct form. Sorry but I'm not a native English speaker and I don't get it. Why is dogs show black the correct form as opposed to the imho more correct (in spoken language) show black dogs? Regards, Patrick ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Patrick wrote: On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 08:33 -0600, Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Wednesday 19 December 2007 07:40:21 James Collier wrote: I think it should be core dogs show black. No, that violates the pattern. dogs is not a verb. core show black dogs or dogs show black would be the correct form. Sorry but I'm not a native English speaker and I don't get it. Why is dogs show black the correct form as opposed to the imho more correct (in spoken language) show black dogs? It's not. I think it was a humorous reply to a humorous reply. The core bit should die, die, die. Thanks in advance, Steve Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: +1-760-468-3867 PST Newline Fax: +1-760-731-3000 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Wednesday 19 December 2007 09:31:02 Patrick wrote: On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 08:33 -0600, Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Wednesday 19 December 2007 07:40:21 James Collier wrote: I think it should be core dogs show black. No, that violates the pattern. dogs is not a verb. core show black dogs or dogs show black would be the correct form. Sorry but I'm not a native English speaker and I don't get it. Why is dogs show black the correct form as opposed to the imho more correct (in spoken language) show black dogs? Because the form is always section verb arguments, so dogs is the section, show is the verb, and black is the argument. I may not have come up with the convention, but I have faithfully enforced the convention, mainly for consistency. -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, MatsK wrote: Steve Edwards wrote: On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Patrick wrote: On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 08:33 -0600, Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Wednesday 19 December 2007 07:40:21 James Collier wrote: I think it should be core dogs show black. No, that violates the pattern. dogs is not a verb. core show black dogs or dogs show black would be the correct form. Sorry but I'm not a native English speaker and I don't get it. Why is dogs show black the correct form as opposed to the imho more correct (in spoken language) show black dogs? It's not. I think it was a humorous reply to a humorous reply. Please move this discussion away from this thread. Read Olles reply, that that has been discussed in the dev list so take it over there I disagree. The discussion has moved off-topic from O's question, so a new thread is appropriate, but I do think discussing what the user interface should look like belongs on the user list. We're not discussing code or the inner workings of Asterisk or even changing the functionality of Asterisk, just what the proper order of the words should be. Most of us users are people, not parsers. The developers? Well, that's why they're developers :) Thanks in advance, Steve Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: +1-760-468-3867 PST Newline Fax: +1-760-731-3000 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Steve Edwards wrote: On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Patrick wrote: On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 08:33 -0600, Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Wednesday 19 December 2007 07:40:21 James Collier wrote: I think it should be core dogs show black. No, that violates the pattern. dogs is not a verb. core show black dogs or dogs show black would be the correct form. Sorry but I'm not a native English speaker and I don't get it. Why is dogs show black the correct form as opposed to the imho more correct (in spoken language) show black dogs? It's not. I think it was a humorous reply to a humorous reply. The core bit should die, die, die. Thanks in advance, Steve Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: +1-760-468-3867 PST Newline Fax: +1-760-731-3000 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users Please move this discussion away from this thread. Read Olles reply, that that has been discussed in the dev list so take it over there ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
We're not discussing code or the inner workings of Asterisk or even changing the functionality of Asterisk, just what the proper order of the words should be. Most of us users are people, not parsers. The developers? Well, that's why they're developers :) Thanks in advance, We are discussing the inner workings of Asterisk as this is an Asterisk thread. With that in mind, we are also discussing the order that a program works best in parsing code. The real reason that programmers use languages (like C or perl) is that machines are less intelligent than humans. If we used English to program computers, the computer would have to read the slight nuances that exist in English and just like this thread, we would be asking mathematical machines to make assumptions about what each say. Who is to say what variant of the English language is to be used, because people may still not understand the syntax of language we use. That being said, ordering in a command structure should make sense to the application (less intelligent entity), not to the programmer (hopefully more intelligent). Anyone who has configured most applications would agree that they are more of a programming language than a conversational language. The Asterisk core program doesn't know what verbs each module, channel, res, or function contains. It must ask the code(noun), for a given verb (function) and then pass that function the options (adjectives). So if I use show black dogs, with dogs being the module, show being the verb, and black being the option, here is what would happen: Look for module show - doesn't exist Look for module black - doesn't exist Look for module dogs - Found, get reference Ask module dogs, for function show - found, get reference Send option black (remaining words from the parser) to function show in module black. In my opinion that makes Asterisk slow and introduces bugs if some programmer creates a new app_black which causes a video screen to go black, then we have a problem. In this example, we are left with fixing the position of the module as position 3 in the command stack. That also means that additional parameters (options) must limited to one (which doesn't work) or messes with the command structure by placing adjectives after the noun like: show black dogs dachshund That doesn't make any sense for humans again. So then for the computer, we are left with the following syntax that works: Module Function Option1, Option2, The module is fixed, position 1. The function is fixed, position 2. The options are everything that follows. In our example, that would be: dogs show black Is it English? No but it isn't Spanish, Italian, and whatever language I have left out. It is Asterisk and computers. It also means profitable employment for people willing to learn this language. We could fix the verbs that are used, but that means that every module would have to have the same core verbs and we could have no exceptions. That means that ZAP, SIP, and MeetMe could have no functions that adhere outside the standards OR that most modules would have huge amounts of unnecessary functions which do nothing but take up space and cause bugs. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Since we're WAY OT anyway Tony Plack wrote: That being said, ordering in a command structure should make sense to the application (less intelligent entity), not to the programmer (hopefully more intelligent). If that were true then we really should be writing our dialplans in binary machine code, that is what that dumb computers REALLY understand. Fortunately, it's not true. We can take advantage of a GOOD programmer's skill to have the computer do the grunt work of converting something real people understand into machine code. We call the product of this process a High-Level Programming Language. A well-written application should attempt to minimize the amount of 'conversion' the user/programmer has to do. Therefore the command structure SHOULD be in a form that is natural for the user/programmer, NOT to the machine. Personally, I would vote for show dogs colour black but maybe I've spent too much time with Cisco's IOS! :-) regards, Drew PS. There does seem to be an assumption that programmers are intelligent, I'm not sure that this is a defensible position. ;-) -- Drew Gibson Systems Administrator OANDA Corporation www.oanda.com ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
- Original Message - From: Steve Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 5:43 AM Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! On Sat, 15 Dec 2007, Johansson Olle E wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. How about the change from a bad command line interface to a really bad command line interface? I mean, Seriously? (in a Grey's Anatomy kind of way...) The old syntax was inconsistent -- show manager command vs sip show channels and just plain bad -- for example sip reload should have been reload sip. The new syntax continues down the noun-verb path instead of correcting itself and using verb-noun like most other applications (MySQL, GDB, Oracle, etc.) Then, just to make it worse, now I have to learn which commands somebody (arbitrarily) decided are core and which are not -- for what benefit? Certainly doesn't make MY job easier! Approach the command line like a noob. I want Asterisk to show me something so I'll start the command line with show. I'm not quite sure what I'm doing, so I'll press TAB to see what I can show. Oh, channel looks like what I want. Hmm, too much. Maybe I should have qualified what kind of channel I'm looking for BEFORE the word channel. Here's a suggestion -- stop thinking like a parser and start thinking like a person :) Which makes more sense (at least in English)? 1) show black dogs -- show sip channels 2) black show dogs -- sip show channels 3) dogs black show -- channels sip show 4) show dogs black -- show channels sip 5) black dogs show -- sip channels show 6) dogs show black -- channels show sip Is it too late to fix this for 1.6? Thanks in advance, I think as many people have pointed out they are used to a lot of commands out there so changing it yet again would make more people unhappy. But maybe asterisk can have both. Why not sip show channels for the old timers and show channels sip or show sip channels for the n00b's. Why shouldn't asterisk have both options ? ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
I think it should stay here. Otherwise us users only (non devs) would have no input. I am personally not on the dev list. From the few times that I have posted questions on IRC I have been just taunted for my lack of knowledge on development issues. (This is a reason why I stay off the dev list). If I am just a laughing joke I don't feel like my opinion matters. (/action sniffles in corner) - Original Message - From: MatsK To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 4:59 PM Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Wednesday 19 December 2007 07:40:21 James Collier wrote: I think it should be core dogs show black. No, that violates the pattern. dogs is not a verb. core show black dogs or dogs show black would be the correct form. Could this CLI syntax move over to the dev list, since it's mobing further away from the original question! /M -- ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Wednesday 19 December 2007 07:22:18 Patrick wrote: On Tue, 2007-12-18 at 19:43 -0800, Steve Edwards wrote: The old syntax was inconsistent -- show manager command vs sip show channels and just plain bad -- for example sip reload should have been reload sip. I agree. Reload sip would be the logical thing. [snip] Approach the command line like a noob. I want Asterisk to show me something so I'll start the command line with show. I'm not quite sure what I'm doing, so I'll press TAB to see what I can show. Oh, channel looks like what I want. Hmm, too much. Maybe I should have qualified what kind of channel I'm looking for BEFORE the word channel. That makes sense to me. It's also what I'm used to from working with other equipment. Here's a suggestion -- stop thinking like a parser and start thinking like a person :) Which makes more sense (at least in English)? 1) show black dogs -- show sip channels 2) black show dogs -- sip show channels 3) dogs black show -- channels sip show 4) show dogs black -- show channels sip 5) black dogs show -- sip channels show 6) dogs show black -- channels show sip Excellent example. I'll put my 0.2 cents on #1 :) Is it too late to fix this for 1.6? I sincerely hope not. Your example shows that the CLI could use some TLC. Let's hope the powers that be agree. http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=11605 For everything that matches category verb arguments, this translation will work fine. For things which don't, well, they needed to be fixed anyway. -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
dovid... while this seems like a good idea to have both sip show channels and show channels sip having two, three or even four ways to do the same thing would confuse/cripple the learning curve... * would turn into a microsoft mentality where there are dozens of ways to configure/reconfigure some of their products... word, for example, can be configured with or without the tool bars and then you can configure hot-keys... in fact, you can configure some products so that someone who learns it with a hacked config, could not possibly use the original stock config... sorry to go on about this but it is one of my hot buttons... daveC Dovid B wrote: - Original Message - From: Steve Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion asterisk-users@lists.digium.com Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 5:43 AM Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! On Sat, 15 Dec 2007, Johansson Olle E wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. How about the change from a bad command line interface to a really bad command line interface? I mean, Seriously? (in a Grey's Anatomy kind of way...) The old syntax was inconsistent -- show manager command vs sip show channels and just plain bad -- for example sip reload should have been reload sip. The new syntax continues down the noun-verb path instead of correcting itself and using verb-noun like most other applications (MySQL, GDB, Oracle, etc.) Then, just to make it worse, now I have to learn which commands somebody (arbitrarily) decided are core and which are not -- for what benefit? Certainly doesn't make MY job easier! Approach the command line like a noob. I want Asterisk to show me something so I'll start the command line with show. I'm not quite sure what I'm doing, so I'll press TAB to see what I can show. Oh, channel looks like what I want. Hmm, too much. Maybe I should have qualified what kind of channel I'm looking for BEFORE the word channel. Here's a suggestion -- stop thinking like a parser and start thinking like a person :) Which makes more sense (at least in English)? 1) show black dogs -- show sip channels 2) black show dogs -- sip show channels 3) dogs black show -- channels sip show 4) show dogs black -- show channels sip 5) black dogs show -- sip channels show 6) dogs show black -- channels show sip Is it too late to fix this for 1.6? Thanks in advance, I think as many people have pointed out they are used to a lot of commands out there so changing it yet again would make more people unhappy. But maybe asterisk can have both. Why not sip show channels for the old timers and show channels sip or show sip channels for the n00b's. Why shouldn't asterisk have both options ? ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- My wife's sister is in California. I should buy her a Videophone2008! Truly, The Next Best Thing to Being There! -- WorldWideVideoPhones.com 856.380.0894 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Maybe some of the developers could work on stability and reliability while others work on a smooth upgrade process and yet others work on usability. Still others might look at enhancements, rather than considering a PBX as an appliance like a toaster: works fine for bread, but when bagels come along, scrap it and plug in the new model. In today's environment, I think any technology needs to be considered inadequate to begin with. We can't always anticipate all of next-year's requirements, and don't want every enhancement to require what was known in the PBX world as a forklift upgrade. --Don Don Kelly PCF Corp Real Support for your Virtual Office 651 842-1000 888 Don Kell(y) 651 842-1001 fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of shadowym Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 1:51 PM To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion' Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! I would rather the Developers spend their precious time improving the stablilty and reliability than creating a smooth upgrade process. Not that I don't think it is at least as reliable and stable as 1.2 right now. It seems to be for me in a low call volume environment. A PBX should be looked at as more of an appliance than an application server IMHO. You shouldn't have to upgrade it unless it was inadequate to begin with. If that is the case you should be doing an install of 1.4 from scratch anyways. Just my opinion. -Original Message- From: Phil Knighton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:27 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! Hello As a person who is somewhat a newbie to Asterisk, I have been given the task of preparing our 1.2 installation for upgrade. The thing that has slowed me down is some of the gaps in information on the upgrade process. What's on the Wiki might make complete sense to both experienced Linux users, and Asterisk users but as someone who is feeling there way through - it's a bit daunting! Considering how important a phone system is to a business, I'm loathed to rush the upgrade through and have instead opted to install 1.4 on a different box, and port our existing setup over to it. This is a time consuming process and has taken quite a low priority. As Olle says - 1.2 works just fine. Personally speaking, the upgrade process has to be even easier if people are going to jump for it. Phil -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Johansson Olle E Sent: 15 December 2007 10:57 To: Asterisk Non-Commercial Discussion Users Mailing List - Subject: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When responding, remember that we don't add new features to 1.4 after release, so I'm not looking for a wishlist - that's for the coming release. We need to make a released product stable, not add new features and potential scary bugs. Success stories with 1.4 are also welcome. Upgrading to 1.4 doubled our revenues in a month and gave us 200% more quality in the voice channels or Asterisk 1.4 gave us more reliable pizza deliveries and also fixed the bad taste of the coffee in our vending machine. Anything. Also, I would like input on what you consider the most important new feature in 1.4. I will try to make a list based on the feedback. Feel free to send feedback to the list or in a private e-mail to me directly. Let's make 1.4 the choice for everyone's PBX - from small home systems to large scale carrier platforms! /Olle --- * Olle E. Johansson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Asterisk Training http://edvina.net/training/ ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Monday 17 December 2007 19:30:46 Don Kelly wrote: Maybe some of the developers could work on stability and reliability while others work on a smooth upgrade process and yet others work on usability. Still others might look at enhancements, rather than considering a PBX as an appliance like a toaster: works fine for bread, but when bagels come along, scrap it and plug in the new model. Actually, all of the developers have their own pet projects and enhancements. We'd go stark raving loony if we all had to only fix bugs all day. Instead, we share the load. -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
At 10:33 AM 12/17/2007, you wrote: At 02:55 AM 12/17/2007, you wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. Because of your message I tried upgrading to 1.4 again Saturday. That was the third or fourth time I've tried and the first time it's lasted more than a few hours before segfaulting and causing me to step back to 1.2. It seems like I might be staying with 1.4 this time as 2 days later it's still working. I did find one last deprecated function in the startup logs and fixed that so I should now be good for the 1.6 upgrade. Well, I spoke too soon. This morning I'll be going back to 1.2 as 1.4.15 just segfaulted. It always happens when something is going on with a Zap call, this time it was hanging up a call. I've no idea what might be the problem or how to even begin to troubleshoot. And it's my business so I can only play on Saturdays, gives me 2 days to fix it if there's a problem, sadly this time, it took 2 days to break Ira ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007, Johansson Olle E wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. How about the change from a bad command line interface to a really bad command line interface? I mean, Seriously? (in a Grey's Anatomy kind of way...) The old syntax was inconsistent -- show manager command vs sip show channels and just plain bad -- for example sip reload should have been reload sip. The new syntax continues down the noun-verb path instead of correcting itself and using verb-noun like most other applications (MySQL, GDB, Oracle, etc.) Then, just to make it worse, now I have to learn which commands somebody (arbitrarily) decided are core and which are not -- for what benefit? Certainly doesn't make MY job easier! Approach the command line like a noob. I want Asterisk to show me something so I'll start the command line with show. I'm not quite sure what I'm doing, so I'll press TAB to see what I can show. Oh, channel looks like what I want. Hmm, too much. Maybe I should have qualified what kind of channel I'm looking for BEFORE the word channel. Here's a suggestion -- stop thinking like a parser and start thinking like a person :) Which makes more sense (at least in English)? 1) show black dogs -- show sip channels 2) black show dogs -- sip show channels 3) dogs black show -- channels sip show 4) show dogs black -- show channels sip 5) black dogs show -- sip channels show 6) dogs show black -- channels show sip Is it too late to fix this for 1.6? Thanks in advance, Steve Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: +1-760-468-3867 PST Newline Fax: +1-760-731-3000 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Steve Edwards wrote: On Sat, 15 Dec 2007, Johansson Olle E wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. How about the change from a bad command line interface to a really bad command line interface? I mean, Seriously? (in a Grey's Anatomy kind of way...) The old syntax was inconsistent -- show manager command vs sip show channels and just plain bad -- for example sip reload should have been reload sip. The new syntax continues down the noun-verb path instead of correcting itself and using verb-noun like most other applications (MySQL, GDB, Oracle, etc.) Then, just to make it worse, now I have to learn which commands somebody (arbitrarily) decided are core and which are not -- for what benefit? Certainly doesn't make MY job easier! Approach the command line like a noob. I want Asterisk to show me something so I'll start the command line with show. I'm not quite sure what I'm doing, so I'll press TAB to see what I can show. Oh, channel looks like what I want. Hmm, too much. Maybe I should have qualified what kind of channel I'm looking for BEFORE the word channel. Here's a suggestion -- stop thinking like a parser and start thinking like a person :) Which makes more sense (at least in English)? 1) show black dogs -- show sip channels 2) black show dogs -- sip show channels 3) dogs black show -- channels sip show 4) show dogs black -- show channels sip 5) black dogs show -- sip channels show 6) dogs show black -- channels show sip Is it too late to fix this for 1.6? Are there going to be Black Dogs in 1.6?? WOOF -- Dog is my co-pilot ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
ok, here is my $0.02... I created a script since I had to
install/update so often and for various reasons...
you can choose to compile automatically or manually...
modify the current release numbers, your repository, and source root...
all else is automated..
which is unloading zap driver, stopping a running asterisk, getting the
current release, untar'ng it and compiling it...
enjoy,
daveC
#!/bin/sh
#
#get_latest_rel.sh
#
# Dave Cantera: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#
#get the current asterisk release components, put them in our REPOSITORY
#and unpack them in SRC_ROOT
--- Change to suite between these lines --
VER_AST=1.4.16
VER_ZAPTEL=1.4.7.1
VER_LIBPRI=1.4.3
VER_ADDONS=1.4.5
REPOSITORY=/root/tarballs
SRC_ROOT=/usr/local/src
--- Change to suite between these lines --
HTTP_SITE=http://downloads.digium.com;
PUB_DIR=/pub
TARBALL_AST=/asterisk/releases/asterisk-${VER_AST}.tar.gz
TARBALL_LIBPRI=/libpri/releases/libpri-${VER_LIBPRI}.tar.gz
TARBALL_ZAPTEL=/zaptel/releases/zaptel-${VER_ZAPTEL}.tar.gz
TARBALL_ADDONS=/asterisk/releases/asterisk-addons-${VER_ADDONS}.tar.gz
COMPONENTS=${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_AST}
${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_ZAPTEL}
${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_LIBPRI}
${HTTP_SITE}${PUB_DIR}${TARBALL_ADDONS}
echo
echo
echo we are prepared to get the complete current release
echo of asterisk, libpri, zaptel, and addons
echo the tarballs will be placed in our REPOSITORY and
echo then extracted to our SRC_ROOT
echo
echo --- Activity Recap
echo
echo TARBALL REPOSITORY: ${REPOSITORY}
echoSRC_ROOT: ${SRC_ROOT}
echoasterisk tarball: ${TARBALL_AST}
echo libpri tarball: ${TARBALL_LIBPRI}
echo zaptel tarball: ${TARBALL_ZAPTEL}
echo addons tarball: ${TARBALL_ADDONS}
echo
echo -n Are You Ready? Y to procced:
read ANSWER
if [ null${ANSWER} == nullY ]
then
echo
echo -
echo stopping asterisk
echo
echo choose your poison:
echo a) /usr/bin/asterisk -xr stop now
echo b) /etc/init.d/asterisk stop
echo
echo -n which one?
read STOPCMD
if [ null${STOPCMD} == nulla ]
then
/usr/bin/asterisk -r -x 'stop now'
fi
if [ null${STOPCMD} == nullb ]
then
/etc/init.d/asterisk stop
fi
echo
echo -
echo get the current asterisk component releases and put them in
our repository ${REPOSITORY}
# lets go to the repository directory
cd ${REPOSITORY}
for TARBALL in `echo ${COMPONENTS}`
do
echo getting component: ${TARBALL}
#wget ${TARBALL}
done
TARFILES=
asterisk-${VER_AST}.tar.gz
libpri-${VER_LIBPRI}.tar.gz
zaptel-${VER_ZAPTEL}.tar.gz
asterisk-addons-${VER_ADDONS}.tar.gz
echo
echo -
echo unpack the current asterisk component tarballs into our
source root ${SRC_ROOT}
# lets go to the source root directory
cd ${SRC_ROOT}
for TARBALL in `echo ${TARFILES}`
do
echo untar'ng component: ${TARBALL}
#tar xzf ${TARBALL}
done
echo
echo -
echo unloading Zap drivers
# unload the zaptel drivers
ZAP_MODULES=`lsmod | grep zap | awk '{printf(%s,,$4)}' | sed 's/,/
/g'`
for MODULE in `echo ${ZAP_MODULES}`
do
echo unloading zap module: ${MODULE}
#modprobe -r ${MODULE}
done
echo
echo now you are ready to compile at ${SRC_ROOT}
echo
echo -n Shall I continue with the compile? Y?
read COMPILE
if [ null${COMPILE} == nullY ]
then
echo Compiling Zaptel version ${VER_ZAPTEL}
cd ${SRC_ROOT}/zaptel-${VER_ZAPTEL}
make;make; make install
echo Compiling libpri version ${VER_LIBPRI}
cd ${SRC_ROOT}/libpri-${VER_LIBPRI}
make; make install
echo Compiling Asterisk version ${VER_AST}
cd ${SRC_ROOT}/asterisk-${VER_AST}
make; ./configure; make; make install
echo Compiling Asterisk Addons version ${VER_ADDONS}
cd ${SRC_ROOT}/asterisk-addons-${VER_AST}
echo make disabled...
#make; make install
else
echo Ok, compile it yourself!
fi
else
echo Aborted by user
fi
exit
--
Ira wrote:
At 10:33 AM 12/17/2007, you wrote:
At 02:55 AM 12/17/2007, you wrote:
I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading.
Because of your message I tried upgrading to 1.4 again Saturday. That
was the third or fourth time I've tried and the first time it's
lasted more than a few hours before segfaulting and causing me to
step back to 1.2. It seems like I might be staying with 1.4 this time
as 2 days later it's still working. I did find one last deprecated
function in the startup logs and fixed that so I should now be good
for
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
19 dec 2007 kl. 04.43 skrev Steve Edwards: On Sat, 15 Dec 2007, Johansson Olle E wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. How about the change from a bad command line interface to a really bad command line interface? Steve, While I don't believe the CLI syntax stops you from upgrading, you are joining a very old discussion. Please discuss this on asterisk-dev if you want to re-open it. There's also an open bug in the bug tracker that you can help resolving. The old way was a mess. We had two different systems, one like your old show and one syntax starting with the module name. We had to move forward with only one syntax and decided to go for modulename verb which is not human language-like, but we haven't really clamed that the CLI is a human language parser. Maybe we should go for an avatar approach... -Hello, I'm your Asterisk assistant. What do you want to do today? -Why do you want to reload SIP? Having a bad day, are you? - Are you really sure you want to load the IAX2 module? Don't you prefer meeting your shrink instead? I can schedule a meeting? - Please don't hurt my calls that way, don't stop Asterisk now! I can hear the Allison voices coming out of my system... I do understand the pain with changing the CLI though, I hate to switch from Asterisk 1.0 to 1.2 to 1.4 and trunk and have different commands. Old men have a problem learning they say to me... :-) Thanks for your feedback! /O ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Dec 15, 2007 11:57 AM, Johansson Olle E [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 SNIP - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 Hi Olle, It's very simple in my case. I did the install very recently on our company pbx. When asterisk runs, I get a segfault I was not able to debug. It doesnt seem to happen in the same place in the startup each time. If it was after a line that loaded some module, sure, but this didn't seem to be the case. I have no time or knowledge to chase issues like this, so I immediately went back to the latest 1.2. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Hi. The only problem i have is with sending and recieving Faxes. Right now i'm using spandsp an app_rtxfax. This works fine. But there seem to be no spandsp and app_rtx packages in my gentoo. ciao t. -- knowledgeTools® ... managing complexity. -- knowledgeTools International GmbH Wallstraße 15 / 15 a 10179 Berlin Fon: +49 30 726 169 20 Fax: +49 30 726 169 249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.knowledgetools.de Sitz Berlin, AG Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 86378 Geschäftsführer: Oliver Seyboldt, Reinhard Kunz -- This eMail communication (and any attachment/s) may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended only for the individual(s) or entity named above and to others who have been specifically authorized to receive it. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose the contents of this communication to others. Please notify the sender that you have received this e-mail in error by reply e-mail, and delete the e-mail subsequently. Thank you. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. My reasons for not moving to 1.4 : - fear of possible instability problems, my 1.2 servers are rock solid - fear of goofing up with the new way you have to configure asterisk at install time (tell it which modules to build or not build) - no real new functionality i really, REALLY need One feature that would immediately draw attention and would greatly enhance upgrade enthusiasm for a new release would be better fax support. chan_mobile looks nice, would be nifty to be able to use gsm phones, i will probably look into that Just my $0.02 :) ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
My reasons for not yet upgrading to 1.4: - I have a lot of customisations to app_meetme, which I will need to port to 1.4. I have procrastinated about doing so because of all the SLA stuff that got grafted into app_meetme during the early 1.4 versions. If I had developed the SLA code, I would have made a separate app_sla or res_sla with copies of only those parts of app_meetme that were actually needed (e.g. leaving out DTMF menus, participant announcements, etc.), and left app_meetme to do only real conferencing. - Scare stories about IAX-related lockups in 1.4, due to the new multi-threaded implementation. It looks like the latest versions should have got this sorted, especially with the use of astobj2, but I haven't had time to try it out yet. - So far, 1.2 is doing everything we need, and has been rock solid. Another problem is, when I do move to 1.4, any customisations or new features I do create would still need to be ported to trunk before they would have any chance of making it into Asterisk. This takes time, which is always in short supply, and means that some cool features remain mine only :-( Cheers Tony -- Tony Mountifield Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://tony.mountifield.org ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Hello As a person who is somewhat a newbie to Asterisk, I have been given the task of preparing our 1.2 installation for upgrade. The thing that has slowed me down is some of the gaps in information on the upgrade process. What's on the Wiki might make complete sense to both experienced Linux users, and Asterisk users but as someone who is feeling there way through - it's a bit daunting! Considering how important a phone system is to a business, I'm loathed to rush the upgrade through and have instead opted to install 1.4 on a different box, and port our existing setup over to it. This is a time consuming process and has taken quite a low priority. As Olle says - 1.2 works just fine. Personally speaking, the upgrade process has to be even easier if people are going to jump for it. Phil -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Johansson Olle E Sent: 15 December 2007 10:57 To: Asterisk Non-Commercial Discussion Users Mailing List - Subject: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When responding, remember that we don't add new features to 1.4 after release, so I'm not looking for a wishlist - that's for the coming release. We need to make a released product stable, not add new features and potential scary bugs. Success stories with 1.4 are also welcome. Upgrading to 1.4 doubled our revenues in a month and gave us 200% more quality in the voice channels or Asterisk 1.4 gave us more reliable pizza deliveries and also fixed the bad taste of the coffee in our vending machine. Anything. Also, I would like input on what you consider the most important new feature in 1.4. I will try to make a list based on the feedback. Feel free to send feedback to the list or in a private e-mail to me directly. Let's make 1.4 the choice for everyone's PBX - from small home systems to large scale carrier platforms! /Olle --- * Olle E. Johansson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Asterisk Training http://edvina.net/training/ ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Monday 17 December 2007 04:17:32 Thomas Stein wrote: The only problem i have is with sending and recieving Faxes. Right now i'm using spandsp an app_rtxfax. This works fine. But there seem to be no spandsp and app_rtx packages in my gentoo. That sounds more like an issue in Gentoo than in Asterisk. -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
17 dec 2007 kl. 10.45 skrev randulo: On Dec 15, 2007 11:57 AM, Johansson Olle E [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 SNIP - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 Hi Olle, It's very simple in my case. I did the install very recently on our company pbx. When asterisk runs, I get a segfault I was not able to debug. It doesnt seem to happen in the same place in the startup each time. If it was after a line that loaded some module, sure, but this didn't seem to be the case. I have no time or knowledge to chase issues like this, so I immediately went back to the latest 1.2. I do understand you :-) I hope that after some time, you will try 1.4 again. When you have time, please report the bugs and crashes in the bug tracker. We do read all bug reports and the sum of all reports help us. Sometimes we can't solve the issue based on one bug report, but after a while we see a pattern and can solve the issue based on many - so keep reporting bugs like crashes, please! Thanks for the feedback! /O ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Tony, Thanks for the feedback! 17 dec 2007 kl. 12.40 skrev Tony Mountifield: - I have a lot of customisations to app_meetme, which I will need to port How about sharing them so we can maintain them in the open source base? :-) - Scare stories about IAX-related lockups in 1.4, due to the new multi-threaded implementation. It looks like the latest versions should have got this sorted, especially with the use of astobj2, but I haven't had time to try it out yet. I hope you get time soon. As always, your input is appreciated. - So far, 1.2 is doing everything we need, and has been rock solid. Great! Another problem is, when I do move to 1.4, any customisations or new features I do create would still need to be ported to trunk before they would have any chance of making it into Asterisk. This takes time, which is always in short supply, and means that some cool features remain mine only :-( Even if you haven't got the time, if you contribute them in 1.4 versions and they're interesting enough we can publish them and ask if there are contributors willing to port them to trunk. Cheers, /O ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
17 dec 2007 kl. 14.11 skrev Tilghman Lesher: On Monday 17 December 2007 04:17:32 Thomas Stein wrote: The only problem i have is with sending and recieving Faxes. Right now i'm using spandsp an app_rtxfax. This works fine. But there seem to be no spandsp and app_rtx packages in my gentoo. That sounds more like an issue in Gentoo than in Asterisk. But on the other hand, if people rely on third-party distributions we might want to set up some kind of peer pressure on the maintainers - and possibly identify them so we can support them and speed up their process. /O ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Monday 17 December 2007, Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Monday 17 December 2007 04:17:32 Thomas Stein wrote: The only problem i have is with sending and recieving Faxes. Right now i'm using spandsp an app_rtxfax. This works fine. But there seem to be no spandsp and app_rtx packages for 1.4 in my gentoo. That sounds more like an issue in Gentoo than in Asterisk. You're right. But you know t. -- knowledgeTools® ... managing complexity. -- knowledgeTools International GmbH Wallstraße 15 / 15 a 10179 Berlin Fon: +49 30 726 169 20 Fax: +49 30 726 169 249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.knowledgetools.de Sitz Berlin, AG Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 86378 Geschäftsführer: Oliver Seyboldt, Reinhard Kunz -- This eMail communication (and any attachment/s) may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended only for the individual(s) or entity named above and to others who have been specifically authorized to receive it. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose the contents of this communication to others. Please notify the sender that you have received this e-mail in error by reply e-mail, and delete the e-mail subsequently. Thank you. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Johansson Olle E wrote: Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. For Asterisk users in countries that use the MFC/R2 protocol on E1 channels, it took a couple of months so we could start testing/using 1.4 because the lack of official support for MFC/R2. But thanks to some users/developers the UniCall channel driver was ported to 1.4 and there are many using it now with Digium cards. Today, there are E1 cards available that have native MFC/R2 support from some companies like DigiVoice (http://www.digivoice.com.br/english.php) , so many users are simply avoiding Digium cards/UniCall and buying this cards. We hope that when 1.6 comes up the company that make the card and maintains the channel driver update it quickly so their users can upgrade faster. So, it's not a problem with 1.4 at all, sometimes the reason is that users just depend on external code. Leonardo ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Remco Barendse wrote: - fear of goofing up with the new way you have to configure asterisk at install time (tell it which modules to build or not build) This step is completely optional. If you don't do anything, it will build the same way that Asterisk 1.2 did (i.e. it will build every module that is capable of being built on your system). -- Kevin P. Fleming Director of Software Technologies Digium, Inc. - The Genuine Asterisk Experience (TM) ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
- Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 Funny, but my results have been different. I was running on 1.2.17 (and on to 22) for a year and had all sorts of lockups. For me, when I switched to 1.4.5 these things went away. I did find some bugs and switched to branch/1.4 in SVN. While some have considered this bleeding edge, I figure since there is no NEW code development, these are all bug fixes. So far, I have yet to find something that broke since I polled SVN every week. I do review the changes and implement as needed. I have yet to have a major problem with the server that was not caused because of my config. Our site might be small in number of connections in real time, but it is much more stable since 1.4 I think if you polled the 1.2 community, not everyone is running 1.2.25. I think that the bugs you know are the bugs you love. I don't know if it is just 1.4 but I think that anything past version 1.2.X is considered dangerous. I also wonder if because 1.2 had such success, that there are many who use this code who are not programmers and have trouble diagnosing Open Source bugs. Not that they need to be, but if that were me, it would change my opinion of the code and the support given if I didn't know how to debug a C program. Just some thoughts. Thanks to the team for their hard work on 1.4. My experience with 1.4 makes me hunger for 1.6 a short time after release. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
All I can say is with 1.6, if a change is made that causes something that worked in 1.4 not to work in 1.6, please think twice, three times or four times before making the change, or making the change in such a way that it won't break dialplan stuff from 1.4. Our policy is to never remove any functionality between two versions. We replace the functionality with new functionality and print out warnings whenever you use the deprecated functions. We also add this to the documenation in the software and the UPGRADE.TXT file. So the functionality that you lost in 1.4 was old 1.0 functions that was marked as deprecated in 1.2 and removed in 1.4. Just a thought for 1.6 (and maybe a backport to 1.4 and should have been in 1.2) What if the warning messages about deprecated functions were able to be tracked in a separate file. I can see on some busy machines that these warning messages get lost. I thought I had all of them handled on our dial plan, but learn 4 new locations I was using old functions just last month. This way, when the users look to upgrade, they change the reporting location for these commands, and then check them in a month to see what they need to fix in the dial plan. Just a thought. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Tony Plack wrote: All I can say is with 1.6, if a change is made that causes something that worked in 1.4 not to work in 1.6, please think twice, three times or four times before making the change, or making the change in such a way that it won't break dialplan stuff from 1.4. Our policy is to never remove any functionality between two versions. We replace the functionality with new functionality and print out warnings whenever you use the deprecated functions. We also add this to the documenation in the software and the UPGRADE.TXT file. So the functionality that you lost in 1.4 was old 1.0 functions that was marked as deprecated in 1.2 and removed in 1.4. Just a thought for 1.6 (and maybe a backport to 1.4 and should have been in 1.2) What if the warning messages about deprecated functions were able to be tracked in a separate file. I can see on some busy machines that these warning messages get lost. I thought I had all of them handled on our dial plan, but learn 4 new locations I was using old functions just last month. This way, when the users look to upgrade, they change the reporting location for these commands, and then check them in a month to see what they need to fix in the dial plan. In logger.conf: warning = warning,error Maybe it's worth to add it in logger.conf.sample and enable by default? Regards, Atis ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
phil, I think you are on to it... the best path is to load a new system up with 1.4.x and port your existing dialplan over, test it out, lock it down and then roll it out... I've worked as a UNIX system integrator for 20+ years, worked with open source and custom developed C/C++ code, Ada, and a slew of developers (150 developers at two gov't projects).on new projects, developers don't usually provide enough info in the first releases to even install the product. you always have a gotcha. upgrades are better by far but still lack those things that developers take for granted. developers conceived the idea and they have been talking about them for months... to the integrators, the release is new and that is when the difficulty arises. as an integrator, we are charged with making the product stable in the target environment whereas developers are charged with making the product stable in their development environment... it is two different scenarios. when an integrator sets up a test/QA environment, things that the developers never invisioned come to light. then it is a find, fix, retest cycle until all is well. it is time consuming but well worth the effort as your support/help desk calls are greatly reduced... so now that I am talking about this, perhaps I should offer a migration/integration/test lab service :)... since I've been through it a hundred times... daveC Phil Knighton wrote: Hello As a person who is somewhat a newbie to Asterisk, I have been given the task of preparing our 1.2 installation for upgrade. The thing that has slowed me down is some of the gaps in information on the upgrade process. What's on the Wiki might make complete sense to both experienced Linux users, and Asterisk users but as someone who is feeling there way through - it's a bit daunting! Considering how important a phone system is to a business, I'm loathed to rush the upgrade through and have instead opted to install 1.4 on a different box, and port our existing setup over to it. This is a time consuming process and has taken quite a low priority. As Olle says - 1.2 works just fine. Personally speaking, the upgrade process has to be even easier if people are going to jump for it. Phil -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Johansson Olle E Sent: 15 December 2007 10:57 To: Asterisk Non-Commercial Discussion Users Mailing List - Subject: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When responding, remember that we don't add new features to 1.4 after release, so I'm not looking for a wishlist - that's for the coming release. We need to make a released product stable, not add new features and potential scary bugs. Success stories with 1.4 are also welcome. Upgrading to 1.4 doubled our revenues in a month and gave us 200% more quality in the voice channels or Asterisk 1.4 gave us more reliable pizza deliveries and also fixed the bad taste of the coffee in our vending machine. Anything. Also, I would like input on what you consider the most important new feature in 1.4. I will try to make a list based on the feedback. Feel free to send feedback to the list or in a private e-mail to me directly. Let's make 1.4 the choice for everyone's PBX - from small home systems to large scale carrier platforms! /Olle --- * Olle E. Johansson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Asterisk Training http://edvina.net/training/ ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- My wife's sister is in California. I should buy her a Videophone2008! Truly, The Next Best Thing to Being There! -- WorldWideVideoPhones.com
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On 12/15/07, Johansson Olle E [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When responding, remember that we don't add new features to 1.4 after release, so I'm not looking for a wishlist - that's for the coming release. We need to make a released product stable, not add new features and potential scary bugs. Success stories with 1.4 are also welcome. Upgrading to 1.4 doubled our revenues in a month and gave us 200% more quality in the voice channels or Asterisk 1.4 gave us more reliable pizza deliveries and also fixed the bad taste of the coffee in our vending machine. Anything. Also, I would like input on what you consider the most important new feature in 1.4. I will try to make a list based on the feedback. Feel free to send feedback to the list or in a private e-mail to me directly. Let's make 1.4 the choice for everyone's PBX - from small home systems to large scale carrier platforms! We have switched to 1.4 some half year ago, and main motivation was some stability issues with 1.2 (and few new features), so having 1.4 for us means - we're actually having support - we can post bugs to Mantis, and got them solved. Our migration is not yet completely over, last step is getting rid of AgentCallbackLogin, that we plan to do in beginning of next year. However 1.4 since release have had some serious changes that blocked our planned upgrades - for example some memory corruption that raised between 1.4.10 and 1.4.12 that was very hard to track down. This shows that having 1.4 in bugfix-only state is not actually working that good - we have to test each new release very carefully. In total 1.4 have helped us to get rid of twice-per-week crashes we experienced on 1.2, so i would call it more stable than 1.2. Regards, Atis -- Atis Lezdins VoIP Developer, IQ Labs Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: atis.lezdins Cell Phone: +371 28806004 Work phone: +1 800 7502835 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Phil Knighton wrote: Hello As a person who is somewhat a newbie to Asterisk, I have been given the task of preparing our 1.2 installation for upgrade. The thing that has slowed me down is some of the gaps in information on the upgrade process. What's on the Wiki might make complete sense to both experienced Linux users, and Asterisk users but as someone who is feeling there way through - it's a bit daunting! Considering how important a phone system is to a business, I'm loathed to rush the upgrade through and have instead opted to install 1.4 on a different box, and port our existing setup over to it. This is a time consuming process and has taken quite a low priority. As Olle says - 1.2 works just fine. Personally speaking, the upgrade process has to be even easier if people are going to jump for it. Phil Agreed. Given that our group has many 1.2 versions working well on CentOS 3.x boxes, and that 1.4 requires either 4 or 5, your option of starting all over is about all that will work. Also, given that the few in the group that HAVE migrated, have now uncovered a new issue that I am sure isn't unique, where changes made from 1.4.13 to 1.4.15 cause a macro related to ENUM to fail. Smarter heads than I have so far been unable to uncover the cause. Even for those who don't place our business in the hands of the whims of Asterisk, there are few reasons to make the change simply to have the latest and greatest? John Novack -- Dog is my co-pilot ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
17 dec 2007 kl. 15.26 skrev Tony Plack: - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 Funny, but my results have been different. I was running on 1.2.17 (and on to 22) for a year and had all sorts of lockups. For me, when I switched to 1.4.5 these things went away. I did find some bugs and switched to branch/1.4 in SVN. While some have considered this bleeding edge, I figure since there is no NEW code development, these are all bug fixes. So far, I have yet to find something that broke since I polled SVN every week. I do review the changes and implement as needed. I have yet to have a major problem with the server that was not caused because of my config. Our site might be small in number of connections in real time, but it is much more stable since 1.4 I think if you polled the 1.2 community, not everyone is running 1.2.25. I think that the bugs you know are the bugs you love. I don't know if it is just 1.4 but I think that anything past version 1.2.X is considered dangerous. I also wonder if because 1.2 had such success, that there are many who use this code who are not programmers and have trouble diagnosing Open Source bugs. Not that they need to be, but if that were me, it would change my opinion of the code and the support given if I didn't know how to debug a C program. Just some thoughts. Thanks to the team for their hard work on 1.4. My experience with 1.4 makes me hunger for 1.6 a short time after release. Please observer that this man was not bribed by the Asterisk Developer Team :-) Thanks a lot! More postive and negative feedback is appreciated. /O ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
17 dec 2007 kl. 15.42 skrev Tony Plack: All I can say is with 1.6, if a change is made that causes something that worked in 1.4 not to work in 1.6, please think twice, three times or four times before making the change, or making the change in such a way that it won't break dialplan stuff from 1.4. Our policy is to never remove any functionality between two versions. We replace the functionality with new functionality and print out warnings whenever you use the deprecated functions. We also add this to the documenation in the software and the UPGRADE.TXT file. So the functionality that you lost in 1.4 was old 1.0 functions that was marked as deprecated in 1.2 and removed in 1.4. Just a thought for 1.6 (and maybe a backport to 1.4 and should have been in 1.2) What if the warning messages about deprecated functions were able to be tracked in a separate file. I can see on some busy machines that these warning messages get lost. I thought I had all of them handled on our dial plan, but learn 4 new locations I was using old functions just last month. This way, when the users look to upgrade, they change the reporting location for these commands, and then check them in a month to see what they need to fix in the dial plan. Just a thought. We could certainly consider adding a new logger channel for this. Thanks for the feedback and the suggestion! /O ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
However 1.4 since release have had some serious changes that blocked our planned upgrades - for example some memory corruption that raised between 1.4.10 and 1.4.12 that was very hard to track down. This shows that having 1.4 in bugfix-only state is not actually working that good - we have to test each new release very carefully. Hmm. That's important feedback. Release testing has been a topic for discussion for a long time and it's very hard to get done in an open source community. We have to come back to that later on and see what to do. In total 1.4 have helped us to get rid of twice-per-week crashes we experienced on 1.2, so i would call it more stable than 1.2. That's important news. Thanks for the feedback! /O ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Agreed. Given that our group has many 1.2 versions working well on CentOS 3.x boxes, and that 1.4 requires either 4 or 5, your option of starting all over is about all that will work. I would like to know a bit more on why Asteirsk 1.4 means that you have to upgrade Centos? (obviously not a Centos user here :-) ) Also, given that the few in the group that HAVE migrated, have now uncovered a new issue that I am sure isn't unique, where changes made from 1.4.13 to 1.4.15 cause a macro related to ENUM to fail. Smarter heads than I have so far been unable to uncover the cause. ...but has of course reported it to the bug tracker, right? :-) Even for those who don't place our business in the hands of the whims of Asterisk, there are few reasons to make the change simply to have the latest and greatest? Agreed. There's no need for us revenue-wise to push the user base forward, since the revenue for Open Source licensing is zero. But there's always a need to understand the user base and see what we can do to help them. On the wishlist are maintainers of old versions and a test team, but that's not very sexy roles for Open Source contributors, it requires special souls who love maintaining a code base and working with the community, or just get their kicks out of testing. People that get no thrills out of being coding wizards, famous specialists focusing on adding new buggy code... :-) Thanks for your feedback! /O ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Hi, To summurize, it seems that one thing preventing people from upgrading is the lack of an upgrading tool : somehow, it should be possible and easy to : - install 2 different versions of Asterisk on the same hardware, - interactively translate config files from one version to another - load balance between them. The lack of incentive to move is another problem that should be kept apart from ease of upgrading. And a third type of issue is that some features are missing in 1.4 version. Regards ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
At 02:55 AM 12/17/2007, you wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. Because of your message I tried upgrading to 1.4 again Saturday. That was the third or fourth time I've tried and the first time it's lasted more than a few hours before segfaulting and causing me to step back to 1.2. It seems like I might be staying with 1.4 this time as 2 days later it's still working. I did find one last deprecated function in the startup logs and fixed that so I should now be good for the 1.6 upgrade. Ira ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
17 dec 2007 kl. 18.57 skrev Olivier: Hi, To summurize, it seems that one thing preventing people from upgrading is the lack of an upgrading tool : somehow, it should be possible and easy to : - install 2 different versions of Asterisk on the same hardware, - interactively translate config files from one version to another - load balance between them. Ok, I see what you mean. The lack of incentive to move is another problem that should be kept apart from ease of upgrading. Absolutely. And a third type of issue is that some features are missing in 1.4 version. That's something I would like to know a bit more about. Thanks! /Olle ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
17 dec 2007 kl. 19.33 skrev Ira: At 02:55 AM 12/17/2007, you wrote: I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. Because of your message I tried upgrading to 1.4 again Saturday. That was the third or fourth time I've tried and the first time it's lasted more than a few hours before segfaulting and causing me to step back to 1.2. It seems like I might be staying with 1.4 this time as 2 days later it's still working. I did find one last deprecated function in the startup logs and fixed that so I should now be good for the 1.6 upgrade. That makes me very happy to hear! And you're proving that one can run 1.2 and 1.4 with the same configuraiton files. But not the config files written with 1.0 syntax. Thanks! /Olle ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Olle E Johansson wrote: *snipped But on the other hand, if people rely on third-party distributions we might want to set up some kind of peer pressure on the maintainers - and possibly identify them so we can support them and speed up their process. /O that is a very important, 'so we can support them' part. all i have experienced so far is the 'peer pressure' part, and frankly it tends to leave a bad taste in my mouth. just my -0.02, as i am less than broke. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Saturday 15 December 2007 08:42, Steve Totaro wrote: Johansson Olle E wrote: I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. When Digium starts using 1.4 in ABE then I would consider using it in a production environment. All I ever hear is soon, and I have heard that for months if not the whole year. Until Digium itself is comfortable selling and supporting this version, then neither am I. There is exactly one feature left that is still in testing, relating to the automatic detection of hardware in the GUI. Other than that one issue, ABE version C.1.0 is ready to go. Also, note that for existing users of Business Edition, builds of C have been available in the software portal since August. Version C has also been shipped in the Asterisk Appliance. So yes, while Digium isn't selling ABE C as a standalone product yet, it is supporting it in a commercial environment. I hope to hear of your successful conversion to 1.4 now. :-) -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
I would rather the Developers spend their precious time improving the stablilty and reliability than creating a smooth upgrade process. Not that I don't think it is at least as reliable and stable as 1.2 right now. It seems to be for me in a low call volume environment. A PBX should be looked at as more of an appliance than an application server IMHO. You shouldn't have to upgrade it unless it was inadequate to begin with. If that is the case you should be doing an install of 1.4 from scratch anyways. Just my opinion. -Original Message- From: Phil Knighton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:27 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! Hello As a person who is somewhat a newbie to Asterisk, I have been given the task of preparing our 1.2 installation for upgrade. The thing that has slowed me down is some of the gaps in information on the upgrade process. What's on the Wiki might make complete sense to both experienced Linux users, and Asterisk users but as someone who is feeling there way through - it's a bit daunting! Considering how important a phone system is to a business, I'm loathed to rush the upgrade through and have instead opted to install 1.4 on a different box, and port our existing setup over to it. This is a time consuming process and has taken quite a low priority. As Olle says - 1.2 works just fine. Personally speaking, the upgrade process has to be even easier if people are going to jump for it. Phil -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Johansson Olle E Sent: 15 December 2007 10:57 To: Asterisk Non-Commercial Discussion Users Mailing List - Subject: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When responding, remember that we don't add new features to 1.4 after release, so I'm not looking for a wishlist - that's for the coming release. We need to make a released product stable, not add new features and potential scary bugs. Success stories with 1.4 are also welcome. Upgrading to 1.4 doubled our revenues in a month and gave us 200% more quality in the voice channels or Asterisk 1.4 gave us more reliable pizza deliveries and also fixed the bad taste of the coffee in our vending machine. Anything. Also, I would like input on what you consider the most important new feature in 1.4. I will try to make a list based on the feedback. Feel free to send feedback to the list or in a private e-mail to me directly. Let's make 1.4 the choice for everyone's PBX - from small home systems to large scale carrier platforms! /Olle --- * Olle E. Johansson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Asterisk Training http://edvina.net/training/ ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
I do wish Digium or whoever tests this stuff had a more reliable way of testing software releases rather than relying on feedback from the community. Fonality, for example use what they call a hammer which sounds to me like a bunch of servers running various stress tests on the software to try break it. -Original Message- From: Atis Lezdins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 6:59 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! On 12/15/07, Johansson Olle E [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When responding, remember that we don't add new features to 1.4 after release, so I'm not looking for a wishlist - that's for the coming release. We need to make a released product stable, not add new features and potential scary bugs. Success stories with 1.4 are also welcome. Upgrading to 1.4 doubled our revenues in a month and gave us 200% more quality in the voice channels or Asterisk 1.4 gave us more reliable pizza deliveries and also fixed the bad taste of the coffee in our vending machine. Anything. Also, I would like input on what you consider the most important new feature in 1.4. I will try to make a list based on the feedback. Feel free to send feedback to the list or in a private e-mail to me directly. Let's make 1.4 the choice for everyone's PBX - from small home systems to large scale carrier platforms! We have switched to 1.4 some half year ago, and main motivation was some stability issues with 1.2 (and few new features), so having 1.4 for us means - we're actually having support - we can post bugs to Mantis, and got them solved. Our migration is not yet completely over, last step is getting rid of AgentCallbackLogin, that we plan to do in beginning of next year. However 1.4 since release have had some serious changes that blocked our planned upgrades - for example some memory corruption that raised between 1.4.10 and 1.4.12 that was very hard to track down. This shows that having 1.4 in bugfix-only state is not actually working that good - we have to test each new release very carefully. In total 1.4 have helped us to get rid of twice-per-week crashes we experienced on 1.2, so i would call it more stable than 1.2. Regards, Atis -- Atis Lezdins VoIP Developer, IQ Labs Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: atis.lezdins Cell Phone: +371 28806004 Work phone: +1 800 7502835 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
shadowym wrote: I do wish Digium or whoever tests this stuff had a more reliable way of testing software releases rather than relying on feedback from the community. Fonality, for example use what they call a hammer which sounds to me like a bunch of servers running various stress tests on the software to try break it. Digium uses an Empirix Hammer (which is an actual product, not just a codename) to test Asterisk Business Edition and verify that it will handle the call loads and scenarios we sell it for. -- Kevin P. Fleming Director of Software Technologies Digium, Inc. - The Genuine Asterisk Experience (TM) ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 12:00 -0800, shadowym wrote: I do wish Digium or whoever tests this stuff had a more reliable way of testing software releases rather than relying on feedback from the community. Fonality, for example use what they call a hammer which sounds to me like a bunch of servers running various stress tests on the software to try break it. This hammer of which you speak is a commercial program from Empririx, part of their Hammer line of VoIP testing products.[1] Just to be fair and honest, Digium has a copy of the Empirix Hammer software and uses it to test Asterisk. They also spend countless hours testing Asterisk in other ways as well. Part of the problem of testing comes from high number of combinations of different components that must be tested. Just testing calls between the three most common channel drivers (SIP, IAX2, and Zap) involves nine tests at a minimum: SIP-SIP SIP-Zap SIP-IAX2 IAX2-IAX2 IAX2-SIP IAX2-Zap Zap-Zap Zap-SIP Zap-IAX2 Obviously, within each of those tests, there are lots of different options that could be tested as well (such as methods for sending DTMF). I've offered to start pulling together a community-driven set of tests that we can automate and run against Asterisk on a regular basis, but so far nobody has offered up any help in this regard, and I've been busy with other things (like teaching Asterisk training classes) that I haven't had any time to devote to it myself. I'm hoping to be able to start working on a testing framework sometime in January, as long as I don't get too many other things put on my plate between now and then. [1] http://www.empirix.com/products-services/voip_and_ims.asp --- Jared Smith Community Relations Manager Digium, Inc. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Olle E Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But on the other hand, if people rely on third-party distributions we might want to set up some kind of peer pressure on the maintainers - and possibly identify them so we can support them and speed up their process. Third-party distributions are very important, and Asterisk has for various reasons done relatively badly there. Fedora still doesn't have Asterisk, but does have CallWeaver. Asterisk isn't even available in the most popular extra repositories, but only in ATrpms, my least favourite of the larger repositories. Hey, I just discovered https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/asterisk Brilliant! I hope it gets in soon! It has a proper init script too, and it's split in subpackages, and, and... Thanks a lot! /Benny ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
At 03:54 PM 12/15/2007, you wrote: I'm curious to hear how you would have approached the problem of retrieving multiple columns out of a database and setting each column to its own variable. That is precisely what ARRAY() is designed to accomplish, and it CANNOT be done by letting Set have multiple key/value pairs. Whatever, but don't call it array(). I was so excited when I saw there was a new function called array because some part of my dial plan would be so much cleaner with arrays. Ira ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
We build and maintain 7 Asterisk boxes for our customers, I have recently moved 3 to 1.4. I also use iaxmodem and on the last one 1.4.14 I was getting iax thread errors - which was reported as a bug in much earlier versions but apparently fixed. When 1.4.15 came out (two days later) it solved this problem, for me at least. I didn't dig any further but it did moderate my confidence somewhat. We run everything on ubuntu server 6.06 LTS and also use freepbx as the interface with some minor customisations. It works very well and we are now shifting some others to 1.4 but the issue is if anything goes wrong its too costly to fix, as part of maintenance we keep them uptodate. The main blocker for 1.4 was freepbx but now it supports 1.4 and seems to manage the transition really well. However being a small self employed group of two the main reason to stick with what works is the risk of cost. We don't generally do major upgrades without charging but there isn't any seriously missing functionality yet, and the effort involved to be sure it will be hassle free is significant. The clients have to see value in the upgrade. We also work with people still on version 1.0, because the risk of change to a working system is too high This seems to be the same issue already mentioned but my take on it is most people can't cope with any risk on production machines unless there is some significant gain. Its been a year now, generally I would think that means its probably starting to become stable but a year isn't very long really. Give it another year and the new installs will mostly be 1.4 and the migration process will be a lot more trusted. I don't think a year is really long enough to expect much more than where you are at. The debian stable, unstable, and testing model would be useful here, debian stable is so reliable it just rocks, if there was a version like that it would be fantastic (of course you trade access to the latest features for it) . We find ubuntu server a great balance between debian stability and getting the latest options. Is there a performance analysis of 1.2 vs 1.4 around or a clear business analysis of the distinctions in value for each? Cheers Duncan Lyle Giese wrote: Olle E Johansson wrote: All I can say is with 1.6, if a change is made that causes something that worked in 1.4 not to work in 1.6, please think twice, three times or four times before making the change, or making the change in such a way that it won't break dialplan stuff from 1.4. Our policy is to never remove any functionality between two versions. We replace the functionality with new functionality and print out warnings whenever you use the deprecated functions. We also add this to the documenation in the software and the UPGRADE.TXT file. So the functionality that you lost in 1.4 was old 1.0 functions that was marked as deprecated in 1.2 and removed in 1.4. We might want to be more informative about those changes. We need to make a clear list of things you need to start changing as a user of 1.4 to prepare for lost functionality in 1.6. This information already exist, but should maybe be a bit more public. In some cases we do have to change in a dramatic way and can't preserve the old functionality to solve a bug in the software. This requires thorough discussion in the developer group and is something we really want to avoid at all costs. If this happens, it's clearly documented in the software. Thank you for your feedback, it's important to us. /O Along that this same line, I ran 1.0.something for a long time and it was working just fine for my SOHO. I had a channel bank to interface pots lines from the local Telco and feed the analog phones in the house. Over time, I replaced most of those analog phones with SIP phones. An unfortunate incident caused us to lose that server and several sip phones. When I recovered enough to rebuild *, I tried 1.4 and it would not compile completely and zaptel did not load properly. I download 1.2 and it worked with the same configs as 1.0, but the quality was poor. That was due to hardware issues. I purchased a new motherboard and rebuilt using a newer Asterisk 1.4 with the then current libpri and zaptel and the call quality came back. But I had a hard time with syntax changes. Basically I was jumping from 1.0.x to 1.4.x in one leap. My biggest gripe is that everything loaded and seemed to work. A day later we found this did not work and discovered a syntax change. A day later something else did not work, an other syntax change. Why isn't there some pre-processor to check the syntax of the config files? Would have saved me a whole bunch of time I didn't have to spare and still don't. Lyle As it is syntax problems or changes are not noticed or logged until Asterisk tries to execute them. If there is a chunk of code that is only hit once a week??? It almost
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Ira [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well, I'd be happy if they came up with an elegant language with functions, parameters and proper variable scoping while getting rid of line numbers and all the rest of the baggage that shouldn't have been there in the first place. AEL is an attempt to solve some of that, but as it's just a precompiler to the underlying language it has limitations that shouldn't be there. I could not agree more strongly. The big question is what such a language should look like. The SIP Express Router language is not the solution either, it is way too low level and tied to SIP. Then there is Freeswitch, which seems a bit better -- unfortunately the XML makes it hard to read. Perhaps the best idea would be to use an existing programming language. I just have a hard time imagining how it could be made easy to read. /Benny ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Olle E Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: asterisk -c starts Asterisk in the foreground and outputs all messages to the console, things that you may not catch otherwise when you start Asterisk in the background. You can do that, but not while Asterisk is running. So it isn't really an option for production environments, where you need it the most. /Benny ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 10:51 -0600, Tilghman Lesher wrote: If anything broke from the transition from 1.2 to 1.4, it is because you were using something that was deprecated in 1.2. What we had attempted to do in deprecation modes was to print the warning ONCE for each deprecated operation, per Asterisk startup. I think that this was much too conservative. It is very easy to miss that deprecation warning, since it occurs so few times. Of course, the opposite side is that we don't want deprecation warnings to fill up your logs, so there's a balancing act here. But we could probably do with making the deprecation warnings a bit more prominent and print them multiple times (for example, every 10th usage). That should make it more clear that there's something to change. How about an asterisk-lint kind of program, That analyses all of the config files, and gves an error with file-name line number of the offendig config (perhaps with a suggestion of what it MIGHT be... Would be worthwhile for everybody writing configfiles manually, Not only for migrating purposes... Hans ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
We run everything on ubuntu server 6.06 LTS and also use freepbx as the interface with some minor customisations. It works very well and we are now shifting some others to 1.4 but the issue is if anything goes wrong its too costly to fix, as part of maintenance we keep them uptodate. The main blocker for 1.4 was freepbx but now it supports 1.4 and seems to manage the transition really well. I missed that fact. Yes, FreePBX support is an important piece of the puzzle. However being a small self employed group of two the main reason to stick with what works is the risk of cost. We don't generally do major upgrades without charging but there isn't any seriously missing functionality yet, and the effort involved to be sure it will be hassle free is significant. The clients have to see value in the upgrade. Absolutely. And we don't want to force upgrades, as an Open Source project there's no value in that. But at some point we want to quit supporting these old installations from the project side and move on. We also work with people still on version 1.0, because the risk of change to a working system is too high ...and if it works, why change? This seems to be the same issue already mentioned but my take on it is most people can't cope with any risk on production machines unless there is some significant gain. Its been a year now, generally I would think that means its probably starting to become stable but a year isn't very long really. Give it another year and the new installs will mostly be 1.4 and the migration process will be a lot more trusted. I don't think a year is really long enough to expect much more than where you are at. Guess we're learning that for a PBX, we have to look into a longer upgrade path, but a quicker uptake on new installations. That's really what we look for. In the case that something else changes and the customer needs to upgrade, we want it to be as smooth as possible. Is there a performance analysis of 1.2 vs 1.4 around or a clear business analysis of the distinctions in value for each? I haven't seen that. Anyone else? Again, thanks for valuable feedback! I am learning a lot from this discussion. /O ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
The only reason I am not upgrading to 1.4 is because out-of-the-tar it just won't build on my Fedora Core 4 machine. http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=9643 Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Johansson Olle E Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 05:57 To: Asterisk Non-Commercial Discussion Users Mailing List - Subject: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When responding, remember that we don't add new features to 1.4 after release, so I'm not looking for a wishlist - that's for the coming release. We need to make a released product stable, not add new features and potential scary bugs. Success stories with 1.4 are also welcome. Upgrading to 1.4 doubled our revenues in a month and gave us 200% more quality in the voice channels or Asterisk 1.4 gave us more reliable pizza deliveries and also fixed the bad taste of the coffee in our vending machine. Anything. Also, I would like input on what you consider the most important new feature in 1.4. I will try to make a list based on the feedback. Feel free to send feedback to the list or in a private e-mail to me directly. Let's make 1.4 the choice for everyone's PBX - from small home systems to large scale carrier platforms! /Olle --- * Olle E. Johansson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Asterisk Training http://edvina.net/training/ ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Saturday 15 December 2007 12:14:29 David Boyd wrote: On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 10:51 -0600, Tilghman Lesher wrote: Of course, all of these deprecations should be covered in UPGRADE.txt, so please read that file every time you upgrade to a new version. It will contain everything that has changed in a possibly incompatible way. And if you find something that broke that wasn't in this file, please let us know, so we can revise that file. We may not have gotten everything, but we do try. So if I read you correctly, all of the pain of the upgrade is due to lack of effort on the participants part! I wouldn't say all of it, but it would be a lot easier if people paid attention to the deprecation notices and resolved them. The whole point of deprecating methods is to allow people a transitional period in which they stop using said method and move to its replacement. This seems a whole lot like the attitude of proprietary vendors when they don't want to support a feature that is outside the scope of what they want to maintain. I thought this was an open source project that would allow participants to have a voice in what is or isn't included in a new release. Even an non developing end user provides valuable benefit to the project in QA and bug information to improve the project as a whole. Most (With exceptions) projects have a bit more interest in what the user community wants or needs in a package. The attitude of this project seems to be If you want it code it yourself, however if it something that doesn't map to the ideas of what Digium wants then it will never make it into the official release. Digium is a company; it does not want anything. The developers of the project, of which Digium has sponsored a great many, most of whom were developers prior to being employed by Digium, get to make those types of calls. Do you see the distinction? One of the nice things about working for Digium is that I maintain my individual perspective as a developer; we do not engage in groupthink. I don't understand why so much community support is placed into the project considering that the typical end user is treated like a second class citizen. I can't think of a single software project where the typical end user is anything but. Every open source project is not a democracy; they are meritocracies. That is, the degree to which your opinion matters is the degree to which you are able to contribute. And this isn't just code writers, either. People who put forth the effort to document the code also get a kudos and karma, as do people who report bugs, suggest fixes, and give feedback on candidate patches. To a lesser extent, knowledgable users who help on the various forums and business leaders who sponsor developers to work on Asterisk also have a greater voice than the typical end user. And that's true for closed source, as well. When was the last time that an end user asked for and received a new feature from Microsoft? So Digium, (I address the company since Tilghman now works for you) do you have any plans to query the user community and determine what a typical end user of the product needs? With the knowledge and skill that exists in your organization it would seem trivial to put something in place to allow user feedback not only developer feedback for release direction. It is extremely insulting for you to try to address my employer, when we're discussing code practice. For one thing, the company (though legally a person) does not generally respond on these lists. And secondly, as I mentioned before, all developers maintain their individual perspective, so when I make points on here, I do so as an individual contributor. If you have an issue with the way that I have approached something, then please talk to me. Trying to go over my head is rude and unlikely to produce better results. As far as user feedback, there are multiple forums that exist that will influence individual developers, to a certain extent, which are the -dev list (please discuss code or policy, NOT user-level assistance; that's what this list is for), the #asterisk-dev channel on Freenode (same condition applies; use #asterisk for user-level questions), and the bugtracker (which is for reporting bugs, inconsistencies, and other things that relate to execution, not policy, which should be discussed on the mailing lists). Of course, if you want your voice heard more loudly, then contribute some of your efforts towards furthering the project. Complaints are always heard more critically when they come from somebody who has made the effort to give back in some way. -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Mike wrote: The only reason I am not upgrading to 1.4 is because out-of-the-tar it just won't build on my Fedora Core 4 machine. http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=9643 Umm... forgive me for jumping in here, but that bug is for a (now unsupported) H.323 channel driver in asterisk-addons, with a very simple Makefile fix (for those users where the channel driver does work), and isn't actually part of Asterisk 1.4 at all. In fact, the in-tree H.323 channel driver in Asterisk 1.4 is vastly improved over the one in Asterisk 1.2 and most users are happy with it and aren't using chan_ooh323c any longer. -- Kevin P. Fleming Director of Software Technologies Digium, Inc. - The Genuine Asterisk Experience (TM) ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Sun, 2007-12-16 at 12:12 -0500, Mike wrote: The only reason I am not upgrading to 1.4 is because out-of-the-tar it just won't build on my Fedora Core 4 machine. http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=9643 Seen that one on and off. Don't know why this error keeps popping up. Would be nice if the responsible developer would check if chan_h323 installs after making changes Iirc the fix For FC7, F8 and CentOS 5 is: change libchan_h323.so.1.0.1 to libchan_h323.1.0.1 in the Makefile(s) in asterisk-ooh323c (remove the .so part) Regards, Patrick ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
I have not made the switch from 1.2 to 1.4 yet due to operating a ITSP Asterisk Cluster. I cannot upgrade any one machine without upgrading all. Basically I need to build a duplicate cluster with 1.4, debug it then roll traffic to it. This is a pretty gargantuan effort that I'm currently planning and will hopefully accomplish within Jan-Feb 08. I'm looking forward to the upgrade and having some of the new features 1.4 has like multi threading IAX2. JR -- JR Richardson Engineering for the Masses ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Sunday 16 December 2007 02:19:16 Ira wrote: At 03:54 PM 12/15/2007, you wrote: I'm curious to hear how you would have approached the problem of retrieving multiple columns out of a database and setting each column to its own variable. That is precisely what ARRAY() is designed to accomplish, and it CANNOT be done by letting Set have multiple key/value pairs. Whatever, but don't call it array(). I was so excited when I saw there was a new function called array because some part of my dial plan would be so much cleaner with arrays. I'm open to suggestions for another name. -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Sunday 16 December 2007 02:19:16 Ira wrote: At 03:54 PM 12/15/2007, you wrote: I'm curious to hear how you would have approached the problem of retrieving multiple columns out of a database and setting each column to its own variable. That is precisely what ARRAY() is designed to accomplish, and it CANNOT be done by letting Set have multiple key/value pairs. Whatever, but don't call it array(). I was so excited when I saw there was a new function called array because some part of my dial plan would be so much cleaner with arrays. I'm open to suggestions for another name. VARS() ROW() ? Regards, Philipp Kempgen -- amooma GmbH - Bachstr. 126 - 56566 Neuwied - http://www.amooma.de Let's use IT to solve problems and not to create new ones. Asterisk? - http://www.das-asterisk-buch.de Geschäftsführer: Stefan Wintermeyer Handelsregister: Neuwied B 14998 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Thanks for your thoughtful response. Dave On Sun, 2007-12-16 at 10:43 -0600, Tilghman Lesher wrote: On Saturday 15 December 2007 12:14:29 David Boyd wrote: On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 10:51 -0600, Tilghman Lesher wrote: Of course, all of these deprecations should be covered in UPGRADE.txt, so please read that file every time you upgrade to a new version. It will contain everything that has changed in a possibly incompatible way. And if you find something that broke that wasn't in this file, please let us know, so we can revise that file. We may not have gotten everything, but we do try. So if I read you correctly, all of the pain of the upgrade is due to lack of effort on the participants part! I wouldn't say all of it, but it would be a lot easier if people paid attention to the deprecation notices and resolved them. The whole point of deprecating methods is to allow people a transitional period in which they stop using said method and move to its replacement. This seems a whole lot like the attitude of proprietary vendors when they don't want to support a feature that is outside the scope of what they want to maintain. I thought this was an open source project that would allow participants to have a voice in what is or isn't included in a new release. Even an non developing end user provides valuable benefit to the project in QA and bug information to improve the project as a whole. Most (With exceptions) projects have a bit more interest in what the user community wants or needs in a package. The attitude of this project seems to be If you want it code it yourself, however if it something that doesn't map to the ideas of what Digium wants then it will never make it into the official release. Digium is a company; it does not want anything. The developers of the project, of which Digium has sponsored a great many, most of whom were developers prior to being employed by Digium, get to make those types of calls. Do you see the distinction? One of the nice things about working for Digium is that I maintain my individual perspective as a developer; we do not engage in groupthink. I don't understand why so much community support is placed into the project considering that the typical end user is treated like a second class citizen. I can't think of a single software project where the typical end user is anything but. Every open source project is not a democracy; they are meritocracies. That is, the degree to which your opinion matters is the degree to which you are able to contribute. And this isn't just code writers, either. People who put forth the effort to document the code also get a kudos and karma, as do people who report bugs, suggest fixes, and give feedback on candidate patches. To a lesser extent, knowledgable users who help on the various forums and business leaders who sponsor developers to work on Asterisk also have a greater voice than the typical end user. And that's true for closed source, as well. When was the last time that an end user asked for and received a new feature from Microsoft? So Digium, (I address the company since Tilghman now works for you) do you have any plans to query the user community and determine what a typical end user of the product needs? With the knowledge and skill that exists in your organization it would seem trivial to put something in place to allow user feedback not only developer feedback for release direction. It is extremely insulting for you to try to address my employer, when we're discussing code practice. For one thing, the company (though legally a person) does not generally respond on these lists. And secondly, as I mentioned before, all developers maintain their individual perspective, so when I make points on here, I do so as an individual contributor. If you have an issue with the way that I have approached something, then please talk to me. Trying to go over my head is rude and unlikely to produce better results. As far as user feedback, there are multiple forums that exist that will influence individual developers, to a certain extent, which are the -dev list (please discuss code or policy, NOT user-level assistance; that's what this list is for), the #asterisk-dev channel on Freenode (same condition applies; use #asterisk for user-level questions), and the bugtracker (which is for reporting bugs, inconsistencies, and other things that relate to execution, not policy, which should be discussed on the mailing lists). Of course, if you want your voice heard more loudly, then contribute some of your efforts towards furthering the project. Complaints are always heard more critically when they come from somebody who has made the effort to give back in some way. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
At 11:12 AM 12/16/2007, you wrote: That is precisely what ARRAY() is designed to accomplish, and it CANNOT be done by letting Set have multiple key/value pairs. Whatever, but don't call it array(). I was so excited when I saw there was a new function called array because some part of my dial plan would be so much cleaner with arrays. I'm open to suggestions for another name. Weird, I can't find it or any description of the syntax except what's on voip-info. Core show function array claims array doesn't exist on my version of 1.4 and make menuselect doesn't offer any obvious way to get it installed. Without that it's a bit hard to suggest another name. If it's intended for use with database requests only, than a prefix of DB and maybe a name of dbgetrow or dbputrow. And if it's actually a front for some sort of a SQL request than maybe it should be part of a set of SQLx commands. Maybe I'm wrong but in my life, array has always referred to an indexable structure of some sort. Ira ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Ira wrote: At 11:12 AM 12/16/2007, you wrote: That is precisely what ARRAY() is designed to accomplish, and it CANNOT be done by letting Set have multiple key/value pairs. Whatever, but don't call it array(). I was so excited when I saw there was a new function called array because some part of my dial plan would be so much cleaner with arrays. I'm open to suggestions for another name. Weird, I can't find it or any description of the syntax except what's on voip-info. Core show function array claims array doesn't exist on my version of 1.4 core show function ARRAY Names of functions are all uppercase in Asterisk. Regards, Philipp Kempgen -- amooma GmbH - Bachstr. 126 - 56566 Neuwied - http://www.amooma.de Let's use IT to solve problems and not to create new ones. Asterisk? - http://www.das-asterisk-buch.de Geschäftsführer: Stefan Wintermeyer Handelsregister: Neuwied B 14998 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Saturday 15 December 2007 15:48:01 Philipp Kempgen wrote: Tilghman Lesher wrote: If anything broke from the transition from 1.2 to 1.4, it is because you were using something that was deprecated in 1.2. After thinking about it for a while this is not true. Well, it's true for the dialplan. Changing CALLERIDNUM to CALLERID(num) is easy. But i guess people use a lot of custom applications built around Asterisk 1.2. If any of the interfaces (AGI, AMI, CDRs, queue log, ...) change that might break the app. Fixing these apps might not be trivial and probably requires a lot of fine-tuning. While that's true, the incompatible changes to AMI, AGI, and other non-C interfaces should all be documented in UPGRADE.txt, which users have been asked to read. Internal C APIs are quite a different matter, of course. Sometimes the interface simply must change, even in minor upgrades, in order to fix bugs. That is unavoidable. The best way about this is that if you've written an app in C, you should genericize it to be useful to others and contribute it back upstream. Once it's in Asterisk, you no longer need to worry about keeping the interfaces in sync -- the developers will do that for you, as an integral part of the changeset. -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When responding, remember that we don't add new features to 1.4 after release, so I'm not looking for a wishlist - that's for the coming release. We need to make a released product stable, not add new features and potential scary bugs. Success stories with 1.4 are also welcome. Upgrading to 1.4 doubled our revenues in a month and gave us 200% more quality in the voice channels or Asterisk 1.4 gave us more reliable pizza deliveries and also fixed the bad taste of the coffee in our vending machine. Anything. Also, I would like input on what you consider the most important new feature in 1.4. I will try to make a list based on the feedback. Feel free to send feedback to the list or in a private e-mail to me directly. Let's make 1.4 the choice for everyone's PBX - from small home systems to large scale carrier platforms! /Olle --- * Olle E. Johansson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Asterisk Training http://edvina.net/training/ ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Hi, Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. Just my 2 cents I have more than 70 running servers installed with 1.2, we also built our custom interface around it, our custom linux/asterisk distro has been polished over the years and now finally we are earning the profit of all the work we did in the past. We just decided to open a new project with 1.4, but it will take us more than one year, i think, to release the first usable version. So, in the end, my opinion is that is just a matter of time. Hope it helps, have a nice Christmas everyone! -- I migliori saluti,Scrivi a: Alessio[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Hello everybody, Since 1.4 release our company installed more then 200 Asterisk servers using Asterisk 1.4 version. At start we had several bugs with SIP channel and CDR handling but starting from 1.4.6 or something it works without problems. We are really happy with 1.4 and thank you for your great job! Mindaugas Kezys http://www.kolmisoft.com MOR - Advanced Billing for Asterisk PBX -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Johansson Olle E Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 12:57 PM To: Asterisk Non-Commercial Discussion Users Mailing List - Subject: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old! Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When responding, remember that we don't add new features to 1.4 after release, so I'm not looking for a wishlist - that's for the coming release. We need to make a released product stable, not add new features and potential scary bugs. Success stories with 1.4 are also welcome. Upgrading to 1.4 doubled our revenues in a month and gave us 200% more quality in the voice channels or Asterisk 1.4 gave us more reliable pizza deliveries and also fixed the bad taste of the coffee in our vending machine. Anything. Also, I would like input on what you consider the most important new feature in 1.4. I will try to make a list based on the feedback. Feel free to send feedback to the list or in a private e-mail to me directly. Let's make 1.4 the choice for everyone's PBX - from small home systems to large scale carrier platforms! /Olle --- * Olle E. Johansson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Asterisk Training http://edvina.net/training/ ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Johansson Olle E wrote: Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When responding, remember that we don't add new features to 1.4 after release, so I'm not looking for a wishlist - that's for the coming release. We need to make a released product stable, not add new features and potential scary bugs. Success stories with 1.4 are also welcome. Upgrading to 1.4 doubled our revenues in a month and gave us 200% more quality in the voice channels or Asterisk 1.4 gave us more reliable pizza deliveries and also fixed the bad taste of the coffee in our vending machine. Anything. Also, I would like input on what you consider the most important new feature in 1.4. I will try to make a list based on the feedback. Feel free to send feedback to the list or in a private e-mail to me directly. Let's make 1.4 the choice for everyone's PBX - from small home systems to large scale carrier platforms! /Olle --- * Olle E. Johansson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Asterisk Training http://edvina.net/training/ When Digium starts using 1.4 in ABE then I would consider using it in a production environment. All I ever hear is soon, and I have heard that for months if not the whole year. Until Digium itself is comfortable selling and supporting this version, then neither am I. Thanks, Steve Totaro ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
15 dec 2007 kl. 15.42 skrev Steve Totaro: Johansson Olle E wrote: Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When Digium starts using 1.4 in ABE then I would consider using it in a production environment. All I ever hear is soon, and I have heard that for months if not the whole year. Until Digium itself is comfortable selling and supporting this version, then neither am I. Steve, That's very good feedback. Let's try to find out what's holding them. /O ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
One of the biggest barriers to upgrading are the number of little gotchas in syntax changes that can make an upgrade from 1.2 to 1.4 quite painful. After the pain I went through upgrading to 1.4, I've always been recommending to people to think twice about upgrading if 1.2 does what they require. Many of the changes may have been seen as minor - one or two changes are to be expected, but I ran into at least half a dozen - mostly variable changes if I recall correctly - things such as deprecating CALLERIDNUM in favour of CALLERID(num). Some of the breakage was minor (e.g. loss of caller ID processing) but some of them resulted in calls being dropped in unpredictable places. All I can say is with 1.6, if a change is made that causes something that worked in 1.4 not to work in 1.6, please think twice, three times or four times before making the change, or making the change in such a way that it won't break dialplan stuff from 1.4. Steve Totaro wrote: Johansson Olle E wrote: Friends in the Asterisk community, I'm kind of interested in the slow uptake of Asterisk 1.4. Between 1.2 and 1.4 there's been a lot of important development. New code cleanups, optimization, new functions. I realize that 1.4 at release time wasn't ready for release, but we've spent one year polishing it, working hard with bug fixes. The 1.4 that is in distribution now is very different from the young and immature product that was release before Christmas in 2006. Testing, testing, testing and hard work from developers has changed this and the 1.4 personality is now much more grown-up and mature :-) I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. - Bugs that are still open? - Bugs that are not reported? - Not enough reasons to upgrade, since 1.2 really works well - Just a bad karma for 1.4 When responding, remember that we don't add new features to 1.4 after release, so I'm not looking for a wishlist - that's for the coming release. We need to make a released product stable, not add new features and potential scary bugs. Success stories with 1.4 are also welcome. Upgrading to 1.4 doubled our revenues in a month and gave us 200% more quality in the voice channels or Asterisk 1.4 gave us more reliable pizza deliveries and also fixed the bad taste of the coffee in our vending machine. Anything. Also, I would like input on what you consider the most important new feature in 1.4. I will try to make a list based on the feedback. Feel free to send feedback to the list or in a private e-mail to me directly. Let's make 1.4 the choice for everyone's PBX - from small home systems to large scale carrier platforms! /Olle --- * Olle E. Johansson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Asterisk Training http://edvina.net/training/ When Digium starts using 1.4 in ABE then I would consider using it in a production environment. All I ever hear is soon, and I have heard that for months if not the whole year. Until Digium itself is comfortable selling and supporting this version, then neither am I. Thanks, Steve Totaro ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
On Saturday 15 December 2007 10:02:23 Rob Hillis wrote: One of the biggest barriers to upgrading are the number of little gotchas in syntax changes that can make an upgrade from 1.2 to 1.4 quite painful. After the pain I went through upgrading to 1.4, I've always been recommending to people to think twice about upgrading if 1.2 does what they require. Many of the changes may have been seen as minor - one or two changes are to be expected, but I ran into at least half a dozen - mostly variable changes if I recall correctly - things such as deprecating CALLERIDNUM in favour of CALLERID(num). Some of the breakage was minor (e.g. loss of caller ID processing) but some of them resulted in calls being dropped in unpredictable places. All I can say is with 1.6, if a change is made that causes something that worked in 1.4 not to work in 1.6, please think twice, three times or four times before making the change, or making the change in such a way that it won't break dialplan stuff from 1.4. If anything broke from the transition from 1.2 to 1.4, it is because you were using something that was deprecated in 1.2. What we had attempted to do in deprecation modes was to print the warning ONCE for each deprecated operation, per Asterisk startup. I think that this was much too conservative. It is very easy to miss that deprecation warning, since it occurs so few times. Of course, the opposite side is that we don't want deprecation warnings to fill up your logs, so there's a balancing act here. But we could probably do with making the deprecation warnings a bit more prominent and print them multiple times (for example, every 10th usage). That should make it more clear that there's something to change. Of course, all of these deprecations should be covered in UPGRADE.txt, so please read that file every time you upgrade to a new version. It will contain everything that has changed in a possibly incompatible way. And if you find something that broke that wasn't in this file, please let us know, so we can revise that file. We may not have gotten everything, but we do try. -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
Tilghman Lesher wrote: If anything broke from the transition from 1.2 to 1.4, it is because you were using something that was deprecated in 1.2. What we had attempted to do in deprecation modes was to print the warning ONCE for each deprecated operation, per Asterisk startup. I think that this was much too conservative. It is very easy to miss that deprecation warning, since it occurs so few times. Of course, the opposite side is that we don't want deprecation warnings to fill up your logs, so there's a balancing act here. But we could probably do with making the deprecation warnings a bit more prominent and print them multiple times (for example, every 10th usage). That should make it more clear that there's something to change. A bit more prominent: yes. Every 10th usage: no. I wouldn't want gcc/perl/php/... to complain about deprecated syntax every 10th usage. IMHO that would be really confusing. And having to count those usages of deprecated things would mean additional overhead. Of course, all of these deprecations should be covered in UPGRADE.txt Definitely. Regards, Philipp Kempgen -- amooma GmbH - Bachstr. 126 - 56566 Neuwied - http://www.amooma.de Let's use IT to solve problems and not to create new ones. Asterisk? - http://www.das-asterisk-buch.de Geschäftsführer: Stefan Wintermeyer Handelsregister: Neuwied B 14998 ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Upgrade to Asterisk 1.4 - it's one year's old!
I wonder if there are any major obstacles for upgrading. From our perspective I'd have to say package management. We manage a *lot* of asterisk boxes at client locations at the end of DSL connections. We have a schedule to make sure each box is updated once a month (e.g. these 10 boxes are updated in week 1 by Marcus, then in week 5 by Tom, etc.). If we can login and run a couple of simple commands to bring everything up to date, that saves us many hours every month. For better or worse, we generally use Gentoo Linux on our servers. With one command (emerge -DuavN world) I can bring a box completely up to date. Asterisk 1.2's portage packages are generally stable and fairly up-to-date. So, doing a portage update automatically upgrades asterisk, zaptel, libpri, speex and any other relevant packages at the same time as updating other core system libraries. Installing 1.4 is a pain. The individual installers for each relevant package have to be grabbed from Digium (or a mirror), then saved somewhere, then untarred, then ./configure'd, then made, then installed. And in a month's time if something's been updated, the procedure has to be repeated. It changes updating a server from a 5 minute operation into an hour or so. Yeah, part of it's laziness, but it's more about efficient use of employee time. If 1.2 does what the client needs and 1.4 would require many times the admin time, it isn't happening. In terms of fixing it - Digium could perhaps consider providing packages for the common *nix distros, which would be updated by them when new versions are released. We could then add the Digium layer (as it's referred under portage, other package managers probably call it something different) and it would be sync'd at the same time as the main distro portage tree. This is something I'd consider paying an annual subscription for. Regards, Chris -- C.M. Bagnall, Director, Minotaur I.T. Limited For full contact details visit http://www.minotaur.it This email is made from 100% recycled electrons ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
