search for: __at

...update on what have changed for this items considering new 1.6 version ? Maybe someone can point me a site with an updated comparison. As long as I could see by now SpanDSP is present on new version of Asterisk, so this item isn't a difference any more. Right ? Thanks and best regards, -- __At., _ *Technology and Quality on Information* Mauro S?rgio Ferreira Brasil Coordenador de Projetos e Analista de Sistemas + mauro.brasil at tqi.com.br <mailto:@tqi.com....

...e! I'm testing "Dial" call limit option on Asterisk version 1.4.26, but it's not working. The issued command is: "Dial(SIP/${EXTEN}|20|RtT|L(300000:60000:20000))". Am I missing something ? Does it only work with Asterisk version 1.6.X ? Thanks and best regards, -- __At., _ *Technology and Quality on Information* Mauro S?rgio Ferreira Brasil Coordenador de Projetos e Analista de Sistemas + mauro.brasil at tqi.com.br <mailto:@tqi.com....

...t; and all worked fine again. (note: always I change "rtcachefriends" to "no", I change "qualify" parameter of all SIP users to "no" as well - to avoid warnings on CLI). Does anyone had this problem ? What Am I missing here ? Thanks and best regards, -- __At., _ *Technology and Quality on Information* Mauro S?rgio Ferreira Brasil Coordenador de Projetos e Analista de Sistemas + mauro.brasil at tqi.com.br <mailto:@tqi.com....

...ssfull ack to Wengo client and sends the INVITE to Box 2 (at 10.10.100.156) that holds user "2001"; 5- Box 2 makes the challenge; 6- Box 1 replies the challenge; 7- Box 2 sends a 403 Forbidden; Has anyone had this problem ? Can anyone help me out on that ? Thanks and best regards, -- __At., _ *Technology and Quality on Information* Mauro S?rgio Ferreira Brasil Coordenador de Projetos e Analista de Sistemas + mauro.brasil at tqi.com.br <mailto:@tqi.com....

..." on private structure "sip_pvt". The first change isn't big deal. But the need of validation of the second modification, every time we make a merge with updated codes is concerning me a lot. Does anyone have a better approach to get this done ? Thanks and best regards, -- __At., _ *Technology and Quality on Information* Mauro S?rgio Ferreira Brasil Coordenador de Projetos e Analista de Sistemas + mauro.brasil at tqi.com.br <mailto:@tqi.com....

...l" functionality. I think this will lead us to lots of SIP sinalization and multi user registration problems, but that was the best shot we had here until now. I would like to know if anyone had the same demand and, maybe, have found any viable solution to it. Thanks and best regards, -- __At., _ *Technology and Quality on Information* Mauro S?rgio Ferreira Brasil Coordenador de Projetos e Analista de Sistemas + mauro.brasil at tqi.com.br <mailto:@tqi.com....

It is the old story of defined behaviour and expected outcomes. Hard to change now. So I would suggest you do something like this in your ~/.Rprofile: R> smry <- function(...) summary(..., digits=6) R> smry(155555L) Min. 1st Qu. Median Mean 3rd Qu. Max. 155555 155555 155555 155555 155555 155555 R> Maybe call it Summary() instead. Dirk --

...elling S-PLUS) also had decided to change the ~15 year old S "standard"... and indeed I was implicitly *asking* for proposals of such a change, but I think I never saw a (careful) proposal. In the spirit of probably 99% of other "base R" code, a change should really *not* round __at all__ in the summary() methods, but *only* in the print() methods of such summary() results. OTOH, for back compatibility, if a user does use summary(.., digits=.) explicitly, these digits should be 'obeyed' of course. I think summary(<1-variable>) could easily, and relatively &qu...

Full_Name: Dan B Version: na OS: na Submission from: (NULL) (80.6.127.185) I can't log into the bug tracker (I can't find where to register / login). In this way I can't add the following context diff (hopefully in the right order) for my changes to the matrix.Rd... Hmm... I guess this should be a separate report anyway... The first diff explains how the dimnames list should

I've got a package I would like to send out for testing and have noticed a "problem" with the \tabular portion of the help "compiler" the code for inserting vertical lines, in the tabular environment, causes the build to choke, but not the check command. C:\>rcmd build --binary -docs=all nlsystemfit \tabular{|l|c|c|c|}{ \hline Method \tab Instruments \tab

...hange the ~15 year old S "standard"... and > indeed I was implicitly *asking* for proposals of such a change, > but I think I never saw a (careful) proposal. > In the spirit of probably 99% of other "base R" code, a change > should really *not* round __at all__ in the summary() methods, > but *only* in the print() methods of such summary() results. > OTOH, for back compatibility, if a user does use summary(.., digits=.) > explicitly, these digits should be 'obeyed' of course. > I think summary(<1-variable&gt...