Re: Bug in smsc_emi2.c?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rapaport" <[email protected]>
To: "Bruno David Rodrigues" <[email protected]>; "Francesco Emmi"
<[email protected]>; "Enzo dell'Aquila" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Kannel-devel (E-mail)" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 6:17 PM
Subject: RE: Bug in smsc_emi2.c?


> Dear Bruno:
>
> I don't think the '39' is relevant at all.  What is relevant
> is that when the correct setting for PID is '0', it is
> omitted from the UCP and from sending.  This shouldn't happen.
>
> The '39' is just garbage from somewhere else.
>
> I would like to know the logic behind this line:
> ] > smsc_emi2.c::
> ] > 373c371
> ] > <     if(msg->sms.pid != 0) {
>
> Why omit PID if it is zero?  Isn't it a valid value?

Yes it is, and it is the default, therefor it is not needed!