Re: [Freeswitch-dev] ftdm_call_place and caller_data.call_id
Hi, When posting the original question I was working with the testapplication, rather a prototype based on the testapplications from the freeswitch git to become familiar with the freetdm library. However, now when I wanted to use this approach in application which would use only public freetdm library api and headers, I had a problem caused by fact that the ftdm_channel is declared in the include/private/ftdm_code.h header and not known to application. Please, is then my approach from the post earlier really proper way? Are the applications which load and use the freetdm supposed to know the private/core declarations? Thank you Juraj
Hello,
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Juraj Fabo <juraj.fabo at gmail.com <http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-dev>> wrote:
**>>* - from sources I see, that after the ftdm_call_place_ex(..) application could*>>* use caller_data.fchan->caller_data.call_id*>>* I tested it and it was ok, please is this a proper way how to use this API*>>* function?*>>**> Yes that is the proper way.
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Juraj Fabo <juraj.fabo@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
When posting the original question I was working with the testapplication, rather a prototype based on the testapplications from the freeswitch git to become familiar with the freetdm library. However, now when I wanted to use this approach in application which would use only public freetdm library api and headers,
I had a problem caused by fact that the ftdm_channel is declared in the include/private/ftdm_code.h header and not known to application.
Please, is then my approach from the post earlier really proper way? Are the applications which load and use the freetdm supposed to know the private/core declarations?
You are better off using mod_freetdm.c as the reference, the sample/test applications may be outdated. ftdm_channel_t is an opaque type to API users. I don't remember what your exact question was. You should not use fchan.caller_data, you always get a copy of caller_data when you need it, the fact that is internally attached to the fchan pointer is not something you should rely on (and that's why is in a private header). *Moises Silva **Software Engineer, Development Manager*** msilva@sangoma.com Sangoma Technologies 100 Renfrew Drive, Suite 100, Markham, ON L3R 9R6 Canada t. +1 800 388 2475 (N. America) t. +1 905 474 1990 x128 f. +1 905 474 9223 **<http://www.sangoma.com/contact?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email+signatures> Products<http://sangoma.com/products?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%2Bsignatures> | Solutions<http://sangoma.com/solutions?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%2Bsignatures> | Events<http://sangoma.com/about_us/events?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%2Bsignatures> | Contact<http://www.sangoma.com/contact?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%2Bsignatures> | Wiki<http://wiki.sangoma.com/?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%2Bsignatures> | Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/pages/Sangoma-VoIP-Cards/43578453335?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%2Bsignatures> | Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/sangoma?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%2Bsignatures>`| | YouTube<http://www.youtube.com/sangomatechnologies?utm_source=signature&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%2Bsignatures>
participants (2)
-
Juraj Fabo
-
Moises Silva