Hi Alex, Thanks, I know about the comment :) I just did that quickly and yesterday I updated it on the redmine and provided the dpatch.
I've added the destroy and also changed the group to ucp.
here's the dpatch.
Thanks again!
MAG
On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 09:40 +0200, Alexander Malysh wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> thanks for your contribution but this is not acceptable patch, see
> below...
>
>
> +
> + //Insert the E50_HPLMN into meta_data
>
>
> we are in C and this is not C comment style ;)
>
>
> + msg->sms.meta_data =
> octstr_duplicate(emimsg->fields[E50_HPLMN]);
>
>
> potential mem leak, best to destroy meta_data first
>
>
> + if (msg->sms.meta_data != NULL) {
> + meta_data_set_value(msg->sms.meta_data, "smpp" ,
> octstr_imm("E50_HPLMN"),
> octstr_duplicate(emimsg->fields[E50_HPLMN]),1);
> + }
>
>
> why do you use smpp meta data group in UCP ? Please change to
> use ?emi? or ?ucp? group.
>
>
> Alex
>
>
>
> Am 10.07.2014 um 19:59 schrieb marc-andre.gat...@gameloft.com:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm using the meta-data to get the E50_HPLMN and set the E50_AC.
> >
> > here's the patch to support that for the EMI protocol. If you guys
> > have a better way of doing so please feel free to give me a hint.
> >
> > I'd like to apply the patch in the main repo asap.
> >
> > thanks
> >
> >
> > <emi.patch>
>
>
emi.dpatch
Description: application/shellscript
