No expert here, but from what I see, the doctype is missing the \ just before the quote. Guess it isn't the problem, when I add it, it returns same error with \\ instead of none on the error.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Hodgen Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 5:47 PM To: 'Discussion list for users of sipXecs software' Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Lastest Patches and Alias George, seeing an error - Config error: file contains no section headers File: file://///etc/yum.repos.d/sipxecs.repo <file:///\\etc\yum.repos.d\sipxecs.repo> , line: 1 Any ideas? Did a yum clean all with not improvements. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of George Niculae Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2012 3:12 PM To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Lastest Patches and Alias Yes, just sipxregistry and sipxconfig rpms George On Sep 30, 2012 1:03 AM, "Todd Hodgen" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks George. > > > > so from this directory I would just do a yum update of those two files then? > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of George Niculae > Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2012 2:57 PM > > To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Lastest Patches and Alias > > > > Ah, you should try from here > > http://download.sipfoundry.org/pub/sipXecs-stage/4.4.0/CentOS_5/i386/ > > George > On Sep 30, 2012 12:18 AM, "Todd Hodgen" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > This might be a problem, as I believe the site is a 32-bit installation. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of George Niculae > > Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2012 12:49 PM > > To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software > > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Lastest Patches and Alias > > > > Todd, > > > > you should yum update sipxregistry and sipxconfig from here for the moment, > > they contain changes reverted: > > > > http://download.sipfoundry.org/pub/sipXecs-stage/4.4.0/CentOS_5/x86_64/ > > > > George > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Todd Hodgen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Sorry I don't. > > > > > > This is unfortunate, as it creates service issues for this site. > > > > > > This brings up a concern with this patching process that is being used. > > > Yum update pulls in all of the patches, and has the potential of > > > bringing in patches that are not fully vetted and regression tested to > > working sites. > > > > > > I wish there was a different method of ensuring you know exactly what > > > patches you are putting into a system, along with a method of removing > > > them should there be an issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [email protected] > > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of George > > > Niculae > > > Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2012 3:43 AM > > > To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software > > > Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Lastest Patches and Alias > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Todd Hodgen <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> I haven't dug into it yet, but will in morning. Last night I did a > > >> Yum Update to a site that was running on 4.4, with a Patton Gateway > > >> to > > > PRI. > > >> Everything was running well, but the certificate was about to expire. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Here are the steps I took - > > >> > > >> Stopped sipxecs > > >> > > >> Yum Update to get the latest patches > > >> > > >> Started sipxecs > > >> > > >> Logged in and Sent profiles for the server > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Did backup of system > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Stopped sipxecs > > >> > > >> Followed instruction from Wiki for creating a new Certificate - as > > >> this one was going to run out 10/8/2012. > > >> > > >> Started sipxecs > > >> > > >> Logged in and sent profiles for the server. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> I tried to restart all of the phones, but only some did a restart. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Otherwise, everything okay. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Today, I discovered calls to the auto-attendant are processing fine. > > >> However, calls to DID numbers - which are all aliases on this system > > >> are not. Thought maybe related to certificates, so I factory reset > > >> two of the phones with this issue, no joy. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Have I missed an issue with the latest patches for 4.4, or is anyone > > >> else seeing a similar issue on 4.4 with latest patches. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Yes, I know, hard to tell without a trace - I'll get it in the > > >> morning, but curious if anyone else has discovered an issue like this > > >> - possibly a new configuration items I am not aware of? > > >> > > > > > > Todd, > > > > > > there could be a problem with latest update19 - we noticed same > > > problem last night. Until we figure it out, do you have any mean to > > > downgrade sipregistrar /config to patch 18? > > > > > > George > > > _______________________________________________ > > > sipx-users mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > sipx-users mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ > > _______________________________________________ > > sipx-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > sipx-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ > > > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list > [email protected] > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
