[asterisk-users] Dial() Macro option error in 1.4.15

[Anthony Messina]

On Thursday 06 December 2007 12:42:42 pm Mark Michelson wrote:
> Anthony Messina wrote:
> > After updating to 1.4.15, I have the following issue:
> >
> > When I try to use the "M" macro option in the Dial() option, I get the
> > following in the console:
> >
> > -- Executing Dial("Zap/1-1",
> > "Zap/g2/w5051234|60|M(set-userfield^local)KT") -- Called g2/w5051234
> > -- Zap/3-1 answered Zap/1-1
> > [Dec  6 12:10:58] ERROR[19496]: app_dial.c:1541 dial_exec_full: Unable to
> > start autoservice on calling channel
> > [Dec  6 12:10:58] ERROR[19496]: app_dial.c:1553 dial_exec_full: Could not
> > find application Macro
> >     -- Hungup 'Zap/3-1'
> >
> > The requested Macro does exist in extensions.conf as:
> > [macro-set-userfield]
> > ; Set CDR userfield to value defined in Dial() command
> > exten => s,1,Set(CDR(userfield)=${ARG1})
> > exten => s,n,MacroExit()
> >
> > This always worked for me with 1.4.14 and I'm not sure how to begin to
> > get this fixed.  Any help is appreciated.  Thanks.
>
> I think this was due to a change in the way autoservice is handled. I think
> that if you were to upgrade to SVN revision 90432 or later, this error will
> not occur.
>
> Mark Michelson

Thank you.  The strange this is, in the first example, I was pulling the 
extension from MySQL RealTime and got the error.

If, however, I place a fake extension (2289) that dials the same number in 
extensions.conf (for testing):

exten => 2289,1,Dial(Zap/g2/w5051234|60|KM(set-userfield^local)T)

it works as follows and the macro is executed properly:

-- Starting simple switch on 'Zap/1-1'
-- Executing [2289 at mss-chicago:1] Dial("Zap/1-1", "Zap/g2/w5051234|60|
KM(set-userfield^local)T") in new stack
-- Called g2/w5051234
-- Zap/3-1 answered Zap/1-1
-- Executing [s at macro-set-userfield:1] Set("Zap/3-1", "CDR(userfield)=local") 
in new stack
-- Executing [s at macro-set-userfield:2] MacroExit("Zap/3-1", "") in new stack
-- Hungup 'Zap/3-1'

Is there some sneaky difference between the two methods of matching the 
extension that might cause this?

-- 
Anthony -  http://messinet.com - http://messinet.com/~amessina/gallery
8F89 5E72 8DF0 BCF0 10BE 9967 92DC 35DC B001 4A4E
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20071206/dc79f790/attachment.pgp