[App_rpt-users] [PATCH] Zaptel modified for newer kernels & IOCTL issues.

["Jeremy R. Geeo [KDØEAV]"]

Just to report back on this patch as well....

I applied this Zaptel patch against kernel 2.6.39 and it works great!

The cutoff used to be at 2.6.36. It's nice to cross that barrier finally.

Appreciated it!!


- Jeremy, KD0EAV

On 11/26/11 17:31, James Le Cuirot wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm not a radio user but I've been helping Ken out and I made the
> necessary changes to get Zaptel working with Linux 3.1.0. I know it is
> customary to send patches directly to the list so here it is.
>
> Ken didn't mention that I did not fix all the drivers. I was primarily
> just trying to get wctdm working. If you blank out the SUBDIR_MODULES
> variable in the Makefile then the build will complete, albeit with some
> drivers missing.
>
> No specialist knowledge is needed to complete this task as I merely
> applied the same changes that have already been applied to DAHDI. Both
> the name change and the other numerous modifications since then mean
> that existing patches cannot simply be applied.
>
> This brings me to a controversial point. As I won't be staying here
> long, I won't mince my words. Why on earth are you still dragging your
> heels with Zaptel? All the work that went into making this patch had
> already been done before by somebody else. This made the effort feel
> pointless, hence why I wasn't compelled to finish the job. There have
> no doubt been countless other feature additions and bug fixes to DAHDI
> that you are missing out on. Jim complains that DAHDI has stupid bugs
> that he had to fix in his Zaptel fork. I'm new here so I don't know if
> he's ever mentioned exactly what these bugs are. Why not fix them in
> DAHDI? If upstream doesn't agree, you can still continue to apply these
> patches against future versions. You can't cling to the past forever in
> the hope that things won't break because they inevitably do.
>
> Jim also stated that DAHDI would not work for radio setups. Is this
> really true? I gather that if you don't have a telephony card, only the
> ztdummy module is required for timing. I've seen the code for ztdummy
> and dahdi_dummy. It's relatively short. Do the aforementioned bugs
> apply to this code? Would they really be that hard to fix? I wish I had
> the radio hardware just so I could try it for myself.
>
> As for Asterisk, I don't know whether Jim insists on this old version
> because later versions don't support Zaptel or because he also has
> other issues with it. If it's the latter then I agree with the
> sentiment but not the solution. You only have to look as far as the
> publicly posted rationale for FreeSWITCH to learn that Asterisk has
> some fundamental flaws. This was written by someone who invested an
> awful lot of time and code in Asterisk but ultimately decided that a
> clean break was the only way to go. If Asterisk is so bad, why have you
> stuck with it and how does clinging to an older version help? One would
> hope that it has at least gone some way to address the flaws in more
> recent versions. I have just begun developing a new VoIP product and
> will be evaluating Yate in favour of Asterisk very soon. I don't know
> much about it yet but I like what I've seen so far. Maybe you should
> also consider the alternatives?
>
> Zaptel wasn't the only thing I had to modify for Linux 3.1.0.
> chan_usbradio itself was also broken. I need to go into some detail
> about that so I'll save it for another post.
>
> Regards,
> James
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> App_rpt-users mailing list
> App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
> http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.keekles.org/pipermail/app_rpt-users/attachments/20111218/9032361e/attachment.html>