[Bristuff-users] a little fix for bristuff

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 11:30:57PM +0300, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Letting off some steam...
> 
> Take a look at the following patch:
> 
> index c12c112..4e8c5de 100644
> --- a/channels/chan_dahdi.c
> +++ b/channels/chan_dahdi.c
> @@ -9999,6 +9999,7 @@ static void *pri_dchannel(void *vpri)
>                                                 pri->pvts[chanpos]->progress = 1;
>                                                 ast_mutex_unlock(&pri->pvts[chanpos]->lock);
>                                         }
> +                                   }
>                                 }
>                                 break;
>                         case PRI_EVENT_PROCEEDING:
> @@ -10617,7 +10618,6 @@ static void *pri_dchannel(void *vpri)
>  #endif
> 
>                                                 ast_mutex_unlock(&pri->pvts[chanpos]->lock);
> -                                           }
>                                         }
>                                     }
>                                 }
> 
> 
> 
> One obvious conclusion from this patch is that pri_dchannel() has at 
> least 620 lines. Well, that's hardly surprising to anybody who had the
> pleasure of editing chan_zap.c / chan_dahdi.c .
> 
> But when you realise what happened here, you begin to wonder how the
> code managed to build without that???

One may also wonder how this didn't break anything. Aparantly it didn't,
because it had no functional effect, which is very odd, considering it
breaks nesting and such. I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader (and
to me to be completely sure at this).

And aparantly this was already fixed in the Debian patch almost half a
year ago by Faidon Liambotis (paravoid).

-- 
               Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755              jabber:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
+972-50-7952406           mailto:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
http://www.xorcom.com  iax:guest at local.xorcom.com/tzafrir