Hi Pekka,
> The valid_ussd_string() returns true if MMI input is to be sent as USSD.
> ---
> src/common.c | 39 ++++++++++++++-------------------------
> src/common.h | 2 +-
> src/ussd.c | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/common.c b/src/common.c
> index 55c4b40..e0a8387 100644
> --- a/src/common.c
> +++ b/src/common.c
> @@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ void string_to_phone_number(const char *str, struct
> ofono_phone_number *ph)
> }
> }
>
> -int valid_ussd_string(const char *str)
> +gboolean valid_ussd_string(const char *str, gboolean call_in_progress)
> {
> int len = strlen(str);
>
> @@ -401,37 +401,26 @@ int valid_ussd_string(const char *str)
> return FALSE;
>
> /*
> - * It is hard to understand exactly what constitutes a valid USSD string
> - * According to 22.090:
> - * Case a - 1, 2 or 3 digits from the set (*, #) followed by 1X(Y),
> - * where X=any number 0‑4, Y=any number 0‑9, then, optionally "*
> - * followed by any number of any characters", and concluding with #SEND
> - *
> - * Case b - 1, 2 or 3 digits from the set (*, #) followed by 1X(Y),
> - * where X=any number 5‑9, Y=any number 0‑9, then, optionally "*
> - * followed by any number of any characters", and concluding with #SEND
> - *
> - * Case c - 7(Y) SEND, where Y=any number 0‑9
> - *
> - * Case d - All other formats
> - *
> * According to 22.030 Figure 3.5.3.2 USSD strings can be:
> *
> - * Supplementary service control
> - * SIM control
> - * Manufacturer defined
> - * Terminated by '#'
> - * Short String - This can be any 2 digit short string. If the string
> - * starts with a '1' and no calls are in progress then
> - * this string is treated as a call setup request
> + * 1) Terminated by '#'
> + * 2) A short string of 1 or 2 digits.
> *
> - * Everything else is not a valid USSD string
> + * If a 2 digit string starts with a '1' and no calls are in
> + * progress then this string is treated as a call setup request
> + * instead.
> */
this is not an acceptable patch. You are removing functionality and
lengthy comment without providing a comment in the commit message from
equal length and detail.
We can not do it like this since 1 month later nobody remembers what has
been done here and why. This needs proper documentation.
Regards
Marcel
_______________________________________________
ofono mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
