[Asterisk-Users] multiple instances of asterisk spawning

[Andrew Kohlsmith]

Please forgive the top-post but this is a PERFECT example of a beautiful 
response to -users to help a user.  I'm not so much responding to you, 
Stephen, as I am to everyone criticising the help.

Yes, Stephen tends to be blunt.  I am too when I see the same questions over 
and over and over...  I tend to just not answer the ones I feel haven't done 
done any research at all.  To me that indicates that we need to raise the bar 
to the mailing lists a little and perhaps *force* posters to do some 
searching -- maybe the first dozen posts to the list are auto-replied with a 
list of URLs and how to use Google and then their post go to a moderator...  
after the first dozen or so posts, then their subsequent posts are 
automatically posted ot the list...

It'd be a neat exercise in natural language processing. Maybe we need to get 
the code to the subservient chicken and work with it.  (the code, not the 
chicken.)  :-)

I don't know -- I'm not into elitism but the problem with *any* popular OSS 
project are the people who waste no time spewing a dumb-ass question to tens 
of thousands of people without the slightest hint of research.  There MUST be 
a way to solve this, and it isn't to request that the people who have the 
answers count to 10 before replying.  There needs to be a shred of common 
sense excercised by *everyone*.

Regards,
Andrew

> Link to google... http://tinyurl.com/38fdu
> Look closely at the search terms that will show up when you get there.
> When I search with those terms, I see over half of the first page with
> subjects pertaining to thread safe and reentrant functions. This should
> be the flaming blue clue hammer that lights the way.

...

> I'm still assuming you are on a RH system. It is well known that RH
> dorks with stuff it shouldn't. Add to this that they ship kernels that
> sometimes are significantly different from stock(not a flame or a slam,
> just fact). So unless you trust them to provide you the kernel, and
> stayed with their revisions, that may have been the cause.

> It has been noted here that it is possible if you picked up the kernel
> from RH, you also picked up some other things possibly unknown to you
> that changed the behavior.

> Can you tell I don't trust RH!