On March 18, 2014, 4:07 p.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
I would like to propose we backport ast_register_cleanup, use that to
register format_attr_shutdown. I meantioned this on #asterisk-dev last
week, Matt said he could go for this approach if it's the best way to
resolve this issue.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3209/#review11255
---
I would like to propose we backport ast_register_cleanup, use
On March 13, 2014, 3:40 p.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
/branches/11/main/format.c, line 1119
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3209/diff/2/?file=55881#file55881line1119
I think this condition still needs !ast_undestroyed_channels(). If we
have undestroyed channels then
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3209/
---
(Updated March 14, 2014, 1:05 p.m.)
Status
--
This change has been
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3209/
---
(Updated March 14, 2014, 1:35 p.m.)
Review request for Asterisk
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3209/#review11211
---
Per a discussion on #asterisk-dev when this was discarded. I
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3209/#review11180
---
Ship it!
Short of protecting the global interfaces container
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3209/#review11181
---
/branches/11/main/format.c
On Feb. 12, 2014, 5:12 p.m., Mark Michelson wrote:
I'm not a fan of this patch for two reasons:
1) We're preventing a crash by introducing a memory leak.
2) The condition of undestroyed channels doesn't seem like enough to
guarantee that the interfaces container is not currently being
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3209/#review10863
---
I'm not a fan of this patch for two reasons:
1) We're
On Feb. 12, 2014, 6:12 p.m., Mark Michelson wrote:
I'm not a fan of this patch for two reasons:
1) We're preventing a crash by introducing a memory leak.
2) The condition of undestroyed channels doesn't seem like enough to
guarantee that the interfaces container is not currently being
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3209/
---
Review request for Asterisk Developers, Corey Farrell and n8ideas.
Bugs:
12 matches
Mail list logo
