Scott wrote: >On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 10:27 -0500, Raymond Dans wrote: > >> The problem that I was having with using Joe's python script when >> implementing the XML/RPC interfaces was that it would always >crash due >> to a Python issue with spawning processes and secondly the script >> sometimes writes the output to standard out and sometimes to >a log file. > >Regardless of the specifics of any problems with the scripts, >I don't see why sipXconfig should be doing one thing to >upgrade the local system and something else to upgrade a >remote system. Why shouldn't it just do the same for both, >always operating through sipXsupervisor? This is the way we >do most things... > >Raymond - if you're having trouble with invoking commands from >python, I've learned more than I would have liked about how to >do this while working on the new setup scripts (not using >'system') - I'm happy to help. >
Scott - I agree with you about using one method (i.e. XML/RPC) to invoke the commands regardless of whether its local or not. I tried to convince Joe of this but I failed (I'm not a very good debater I guess). I respected his choice and moved on with my XML/RPC implementation with every attempt to keep the output as close to his as possible making it easier for SipXConfig to parse. As for the Python situation thanks for the offer. I googled the issue I was having and it seems to happen to a number of people. Everything points to some serious threading issues with "spawn". The only way I could get around it was to use "system" instead. The script I use (modified one from Joe) is in the repository under sipXpbx/bin. _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
