I'm wondering if we should switch to 1.2.0 for the upcoming release?
This may indicate a rough cut to the divergence of the latest
development branch 1.1.5 and the current cvs tree.
Any suggestions or constraints?
Stipe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Will that be a new development version or stable?
Jacob Vennervald
> -Original Message-
> From: Stipe Tolj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 26. marts 2002 10:57
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [RFC] new release version number?!
>
>
> I'm wondering if we should switch to 1.2.0 for
Jacob Vennervald Madsen wrote:
>
> Will that be a new development version or stable?
AFAIK, we thought of taking down the two way approach of having one
development tree and one stable tree at the same time living parallel.
It very tricky to have those two coexist, especially when there is a
lo
> Instead we should tag the current cvs to 1.1.6 and warp it to 1.2.0 as
> soon as we feal stable on that?!
Good idea.
Will the documentation be updated as well?
There are a lot of new features that should be documented
and some of the old features are configured in a new way.
Jacob
> -Orig
Jacob Vennervald Madsen wrote:
>
> > Instead we should tag the current cvs to 1.1.6 and warp it to 1.2.0 as
> > soon as we feal stable on that?!
> Good idea.
>
> Will the documentation be updated as well?
> There are a lot of new features that should be documented
> and some of the old features
Hi Angel,
can you please see
http://www.kannel.3glab.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/gateway/gwlib/date.c.diff?r1=1.8&r2=1.9
and tell me exactly why this change was necessary?
I'm getting failure reports now from checks/check_date that does
reverse date conversion.
Until we have not cleanly resolved th
Hi Stipe,
This change was made to fix a problem with EMI2 timestamps. The EMI2 driver
gets the timestamp from the UCP frame, and calls date_convert_universal().
The problem is that EMI2 timestamps have 1-based months, and
date_convert_universal() expects 0-based months (date.c v1.8). So it return
This diff is suggested by Francesco, it makes
sense to me. Could someone please respond and
say if we're crazy or it should be included?
smsc_emi2.c::
373c371
< if(msg->sms.pid != 0) {
---
> if((msg->sms.pid >=0) && (msg->sms.pid < 256) ) {
Thanks, all. See below for the use case tha
Hi Hans,
"Hanz Hager (ESF)" wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Even though it is expensive to WAP over SMS, there is one good reason for doing so.
> It might be a long shot, but still a little bit interesting for some special
>applications.
>
> When you talk on the phone you can not simultaneously have a CSD
Angel Fradejas wrote:
>
> So IMHO the best solution is to maintain date.c v1.8, and fix the EMI2
> behaviour in smsc_emi2.c, to properly build timestamps for MO messages.
yep, can you resolve this in smsc_emi2.c? I'm going to put this to
STATUS.
> I think we should consider this EMI2 MO timesta
what about doing this in gw/smsc_emi2.c:664:
else {
unitime.year += 2000; /* Conversion function expects full year */
unitime.month -= 1;
msg->sms.time = date_convert_universal(&unitime);
}
this would pass the right month base to the date_conve
Absolutely right I guess.
Angel Fradejas.
-Mensaje original-
De: Stipe Tolj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Enviado el: martes 26 de marzo de 2002 12:41
Para: Angel Fradejas
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Re: gwlib/date.c bug you reported
what about doing this in gw/smsc_emi2.c:664:
Hi,
Has anybody tried getting delivery report using Nokia phone. I went my the
book, but no success. Can anybody give their suggestion.
Shridhar Raju
Title: other smsc interfaces
Hi,
Has other tried to program other interfaces to smsc's than the standard once, like smpp and cimd? Is there a API description somewhere or other places where I can get some help (I am not a hardcoder)
BR,
Steffen Lindemann
There's no dlr implentation yet in smsc_at* modules.
- Original Message -
From: "Shridhar Raju" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Kannel Developers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Kannel Users" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 12:11 PM
Subject: DLR with virtual SMSC (Nokia 7110)
> Hi,
I might apply the patch, but I've checked and rechecked the code,
and I don't really see where could be the bug. There's no "39" anywhere,
'0' is 30, not 39, if somewhere the pid is not initialized, this patch won't
solve anything.
I'm still waiting for the UCP dump of the SENDING message, not th
Yep, it was I.
I'll commit soon this patch:
Index: gwlib/cfg.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/gateway/gwlib/cfg.c,v
retrieving revision 1.13
diff -r1.13 cfg.c
349c349
< list_insert(stack, 0, filename);
---
>
Index:
gwlib/date.c===RCS
file: /home/cvs/gateway/gwlib/date.c,vretrieving revision 1.10diff
-r1.10 date.c49c49<
tm.tm_sec < 0 || tm.tm_sec > 61)
{---> tm.tm_sec <
0 || tm.tm_sec > 59) {
May I apply this patch
Bruno David Rodrigues wrote:
> < tm.tm_sec < 0 || tm.tm_sec > 61) {
> ---
> > tm.tm_sec < 0 || tm.tm_sec > 59) {
>
> May I apply this patch or is there any reason for having 60 or 61 seconds?
>
Leap seconds. 62 is a maximum number of seconds in one minute, altought
it happens qu
if everything of the major improvements have been captured my me.
Stipe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Wapme Systems AG
Münsterstr. 248
40470 Düsseldorf
Tel: +49-211-74845-0
Fax: +49-211-74845-299
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet: http:
Bruno David Rodrigues wrote:
>
> Yep, it was I.
>
> I'll commit soon this patch:
thanks for fixing this.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Wapme Systems AG
Münsterstr. 248
40470 Düsseldorf
Tel: +49-211-74845-0
Fax: +49-211-74845-299
E-Mail
Is it worth to code it now that new gprs phones don't have wap over sms
option ?
- Original Message -
From: "Aarno Syvänen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Hanz Hager (ESF)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 11:18 AM
Subject: Re: WAP
Bruno David Rodrigues wrote:
>
> Is it worth to code it now that new gprs phones don't have wap over sms
> option ?
BTW, has anyone ever seems something working with a commercial WAP GW
and a real phone?!?!
I'd suggest in forgeting about this, just my 2ct.
Stipe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi!
I just wanted to know how hard it was to do.
I am interested to use it for the reasons I explained earlier, but I have no idea of
which phones support Wap over SMS and what phones does not. Nor do I know of any WAP
gateway supporting WAP over SMS.
I have no problem understanding the people
Stipe Tolj wrote:
> Bruno David Rodrigues wrote:
>
>>Is it worth to code it now that new gprs phones don't have wap over sms
>>option ?
>>
>
> BTW, has anyone ever seems something working with a commercial WAP GW
> and a real phone?!?!
>
Yes, you can, and yes, I have, using Kannel as my G/W.
Well, I noticed an error is caused by the different
speed.
As noticed by someone else there should be some problems
autodetecting speed.
As Bruno said speed should be autodetected if not
specified,
by the way is not so now (but it was).
I have 6 modem wavecom
5 modem has 9600, one has 19200.
Dave White wrote:
>
> Stipe Tolj wrote:
>
> > Bruno David Rodrigues wrote:
> >
> >>Is it worth to code it now that new gprs phones don't have wap over sms
> >>option ?
> >>
> >
> > BTW, has anyone ever seems something working with a commercial WAP GW
> > and a real phone?!?!
> >
>
> Yes, you ca
Stipe Tolj wrote:
>
> sounds like you did this already using portions of Kannel?!
>
Yes, a (mostly) stock Kannel. The SMS/IP gateway was a seperate program.
> Can you contribute this to the group?
>
Directly, no. The code belongs to my company, and it's in Java.
However, I would be very
I could be more explicit in
documentation...
If you have modemtype = auto in smsc, kannel would
autodetect speed and modem.
If you set the modemtype, kannel will use the group
from modems.conf, and if speed
is unset in it, kannel uses 9600.
If you explicitly want kannel to autodetect, u
>If you set the modemtype, kannel will use the group from modems.conf, and
if speed
>is unset in it, kannel uses 9600.
>If you explicitly want kannel to autodetect, use speed = 0 in smsc group.
I would have preferred to not set speed=0 to have it autodetect.
Now that I know it, I'll do it.
Actual
Just set the speed on the smscgroup you want
- Original Message -
From: "Andrea Viscovich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: speed (smsc_at2.c)
> >If you set the modemtype, kannel will use the group from modems.conf, and
> if
- Original Message -
From: "Andrea Viscovich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: speed (smsc_at2.c)
> >If you set the modemtype, kannel will use the group from modems.conf, and
> if speed
> >is unset in it, kannel uses 9600.
>
The problem I and the other guy reported is (once
again) related with http keepalive.
I've just disabled the #if at line 904 from
http.c and everything works ok now.
We should disable it again until we can fix for real the http-keepalive
problem.
Context (or one situation that I can rep
I'm all for it.
--
Oded Arbel
m-Wise Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
God did not create the world in seven days. He partied/procrastinated
the first six days and pulled an all-nighter.
> -Original Message-
> From: Stipe Tolj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 11:57 AM
>
- Original Message -
From: "Steve Rapaport" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Bruno David Rodrigues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Francesco Emmi"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Enzo dell'Aquila" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Kannel-devel (E-mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 6:17 PM
Subject: RE:
- Original Message -
From: "francesco emmi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 5:52 PM
Subject: Bug in smsc_emi2.c?
> Hi Mr. Rodrigues,
>
> As you ask, I put to your attention, two different UCP dumps obteined,
when
> we try
] > Why omit PID if it is zero? Isn't it a valid value?
]
] Yes it is, and it is the default, therefor it is not needed!
Okay, I have a response from our EMS guy, and the problem is
this:
Our gateway (and perhaps some others, obviously not yours) substitutes
a 39(hex) instead of a zero when no
Ok, can you wait until Oded do the new kannel release so I can change
some behaviour of pid and other variables ?
like not having the variable, having &pid= or &pid=-1 sets
the internal variable to -1, thus don't include it on packets.
It will break mclass and coding, because the right thing is
38 matches
Mail list logo
