----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3979/#review13246 -----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it! Ship It! - rmudgett On Sept. 4, 2014, 6:04 p.m., Jonathan Rose wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3979/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 4, 2014, 6:04 p.m.) > > > Review request for Asterisk Developers. > > > Bugs: https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-24223 > > https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-24223 > > > Repository: Asterisk > > > Description > ------- > > Technically, we shouldn't have many (if any) instances where a channel should > be allowed to not have a call ID for any significant length of time, but the > main issue here is simply that gibberish is printed here and that's > frequently a sign of scary horrible things. In this case, the fear was a > little overblown and simply caused by a character buffer that wasn't > initialized. > > Right now, the behavior for how local channels should propagate call IDs is > undefined. I'm working on defining that behavior right now but addressing > that in this issue would be scope creep in my opinion. > > > Diffs > ----- > > /branches/12/main/cli.c 422556 > > Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3979/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Tested the CLI command both with channels that have and don't have call IDs. > Without a call ID, the call ID field now appropriately appears as (none) > > > Thanks, > > Jonathan Rose > >
-- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
