search for: unbusied

Displaying 10 results from an estimated 10 matches for "unbusied".

Did you mean: unburied
2004 Sep 25
1
How can I dial one unbusy channel of 4 available?
Hi. I'm using asterisk as a PSTN -> SIP gateway, so that you can call to any of the 4 PSTN lines connected to the asterisk box from and dial your number, and asterisk will dial out through one of the 4 sip accounts I have on a SIP -> PSTN provider. I think of something like this in the extensions.conf [incoming] exten => s,1,Wait,1 ; Wait a second, just for
2007 Nov 15
3
3.53-pre5 released - release candidate
Hi all, I have received a fair number of bug reports over the last few weeks -- even days -- and I am therefore declaring 3.53-pre5 a release candidate for a 3.53 bug fix release. This 3.53 will not contain either of the two major features under development -- client side state (including boot-once) and gPXE integration -- since I want to avoid destabilizing the code base beyond the bug
2007 Oct 25
2
Unable to dial out over Zap - span 1 got hangup, cause 44
Hi I posted earlier about having issues connecting to Telewest's ISDN, only to find out later Telewest had forgotten to turn it on - hopefully I'm not having a similar silly problem. My PRI span is now up and operational, but when I try to send a call out over it, I just get congestion tones. Occasionally, I get about one second of ring tones, only for it to cut out and play congestion.
2011 May 12
8
Light indicator managed by Asterisk
Hello, is there some way to make Asterisk light up a certain light on an IP-phone ? Like MWI, the message waiting indicator can light up if there is voicemail. Could this light, or even other lights (like BLF-buttons) be used to give a visual notification to the user ? For example : if a certain value is set in the Mysql-DB and Asterisk reads out this value, can Asterisk react upon it inside
2020 Jul 10
24
[PATCH 00/18] Allow architectures to override __READ_ONCE()
Hi all, This is version three of the patches I previously posted here: v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191108170120.22331-1-will at kernel.org/ v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200630173734.14057-1-will at kernel.org Changes since v2 include: * Actually add the barrier in READ_ONCE() for Alpha! * Implement Alpha's smp_load_acquire() using __READ_ONCE(), rather than the other
2005 Jan 31
5
RE: Answering Machine Function?
-----Original Message----- <snip> Is this possible with asterisk? Anyone have a sample dialplan? -other than the problem outlined below I would try something like S,1,wait(20) S,2,voicemail(uwhatever) S,3,hangup That should ignore the call for 20 seconds and then leave a message in the unavailable greeting for 'whatever' then hangup That leaves another problem -
2020 Jun 30
32
[PATCH 00/18] Allow architectures to override __READ_ONCE()
Hi everyone, This is the long-awaited version two of the patches I previously posted in November last year: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191108170120.22331-1-will at kernel.org/ I ended up parking the series while the READ_ONCE() implementation was being overhauled, but with that merged during the recent merge window and LTO patches being posted again [1], it was time for a refresh. The
2020 Jun 30
32
[PATCH 00/18] Allow architectures to override __READ_ONCE()
Hi everyone, This is the long-awaited version two of the patches I previously posted in November last year: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191108170120.22331-1-will at kernel.org/ I ended up parking the series while the READ_ONCE() implementation was being overhauled, but with that merged during the recent merge window and LTO patches being posted again [1], it was time for a refresh. The
2019 Nov 08
15
[PATCH 00/13] Finish off [smp_]read_barrier_depends()
Hi all, Although [smp_]read_barrier_depends() became part of READ_ONCE() in commit 76ebbe78f739 ("locking/barriers: Add implicit smp_read_barrier_depends() to READ_ONCE()"), it still limps on in the Linux memory model with the sinister hope of attracting innocent new users so that it becomes impossible to remove altogether. Let's strike before it's too late: there's only
2013 Jul 24
1
NFS deadlock on 9.2-Beta1
Two machines (NFS Server: running ZFS / Client: disk-less), both are running FreeBSD r253506. The NFS client starts to deadlock processes within a few hours. It usually gets worse from there on. The processes stay in "D" state. I haven't been able to reproduce it when I want it to happen. I only have to wait a few hours until the deadlocks occur when traffic to the client machine