Re: fluctuating between XXX_UNDEF and '-1' in Kannel code

Hi Davy

Davy Chan wrote:

> **>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 19:40:58 +0100
> **>From: Stipe Tolj <[email protected]>
> **>To: Davy Chan <[email protected]>
> **>CC: [email protected]
> **>In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
> **>
> **>Hi Davi,
> **>
> **>any patch for this one now? Looking forward to review and commit ;)
> 
> Sorry ... was into it full steam and then hit into the wall called
> wapbox.  With most of the other code, -1 = bad.  With wapbox code,
> -2 = bad, -1 = might be bad depending on the current state engine.
> Am busy now trying to understand the WAP code (gessh...tracing
> gateway/gw/wap_push_pap_compiler.c for return codes is really painful...
> Oh look! -2 = bad, don't even have a -1 return, but we check for
> that return code ... aaaggh!).
> 
> Unfortunately, my boss called and reminded me about my other commitments.
> 
> So, I don't think I'll be able to post a clean patch until next week
> at the earliest.

understand. wapbox code is pretty complex to trace. But we'd also accept 
cleanups for the sms part first. And drop the wap related cleanups afterwards.

Any patch to submit?

Stipe

mailto:stolj_{at}_wapme.de
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wapme Systems AG

Vogelsanger Weg 80
40470 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany

phone: +49.211.74845.0
fax: +49.211.74845.299

mailto:info_{at}_wapme-systems.de
http://www.wapme-systems.de/
-------------------------------------------------------------------