Summary:	ASTERISK-02821: [patch] See any playing files when STREAM FILE
Reporter:	Clod Patry (junky)	Labels:
Date Opened:	2004-11-15 17:08:54.000-0600	Date Closed:	2011-06-07 14:05:21
Priority:	Major	Regression?	No
Status:	Closed/Complete	Components:	Core/General
Versions:		Frequency of Occurrence
Related Issues:
Environment:		Attachments:	( 0) streamfile.diff.txt
Description:	When doing a STREAM FILE inside an AGI, there was no output in the CLI, so it was hard to see which file is streaming without the agi debug. ****** ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ****** This patch will diplay something like:    -- Playing 'vm-review' (escape_digits=0123) in the CLI if verbose > 2.
Comments:	By: Clod Patry (junky) 2004-11-15 22:39:43.000-0600 disclaimer is on file. By: Clod Patry (junky) 2004-11-26 22:49:14.000-0600 After some look, i realized the GET DATA is calling the function ast_app_getdata_full (in app.c) and that function is calling ast_streamfile (from file.c). And the STREAM FILE is calling ast_playstream (which is calling ast_readaudio_callback) and ast_waitstream_full (from cli.c), so maybe we should put that patch somewhere in one of these functions. Probably in directly in the  ast_readaudio_callback function. What do you think about it? That would be great (and consistent) to put a verbose when streaming a file (when the GET DATA has already that verbose). And by applicate a verbose to that function, it would affect the new AGI command GET OPTION too (by default). By: Olle Johansson (oej) 2004-12-12 16:02:26.000-0600 Any updates? Does this patch still apply to CVS? Is it the right patch (reading your comments on your own patch... :-) ) /Housekeeping By: Clod Patry (junky) 2004-12-12 17:14:18.000-0600 I just add this verbose to see the streaming of a file with the STREAM FILE in an AGI. What are ya thinking about my comment dated of 11-26-04 22:49 ? I've no trouble modifying my patch to support it. It's just cause the GET DATA does it, so that would be great if the STREAM FILE and the GET OPTION does that too, no? If such a patch isn't interesting for anybody, i've no trouble to close it, but i would prefer to see a certain "consistent" between all AGI commands. It would be good if someone else could express his mind about all this, it would be appreciated. edited on: 12-16-04 07:34 By: Clod Patry (junky) 2004-12-20 11:49:03.000-0600 Like no-one seems interested in that patch, i'll focus on other things. Standardize all messages in AGI should be done a day (IMO).