[asterisk-users] Unicall and Private CID

[Steve Underwood]

Moises Silva wrote:
> I would not call that properly a fix. We need to know why is failing
> in newer spandsp versions in the first place. Can you make a diff and
> post it?
>   
Why are people so determined to break things. If you want to use 
unicall-0.0.3pre11, use it with spandsp-0.0.2.

The latest versions of unicall (0.0.5) work with the latest spandsp 
(0.0.4), but I have done nothing about making either of them work with 
Asterisk.
> On 8/3/07, Carlos Chavez <cursor at telecomabmex.com> wrote:
>   
>> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 00:23 -0300, Luis Antonio Prata Barbosa wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi Carlos,
>>>
>>> I suggest you download spandsp-0.0.3pre22.
>>> (http://www.neuwald.biz/files/spandsp-0.0.3pre22.gz)
>>>
>>> I don´t know why , spandsp after that uses digits 1,2..8,9,A,B,C,D,E,F
>>> instead of 1,2,..,9,0,A,B,C,D,E. So, do you get "F" digits that are
>>> incompatible with mfcr2 .
>>>       
Its OK. I know why. :-) Its because people kept sending me bogus problem 
reports saying "I should be getting signal 15 and I get 'E'". Well 'E' 
was signal 15, but that seemed to confuse people. I have made matching 
changes in more recent versions of spandsp and Unicall, to make signals 
11 to 15 give 'B' to 'F', instead of 'A' to 'E'. It doesn't affect the 
behaviour of the software at all, as long as you use a matching set of 
spandsp and unicall versions.
>>>       
>> Thank you.  I got an older set of files I had on another server (pre6)
>> and now everything is working.  The customer now gets CID and calls from
>> Nextel.
>>
>> This is probably the way to fix Unicall on 1.4 since it uses a newer
>> version of spandsp and has the exact same problem.
>>     

Steve