Re: [Ekiga-devel-list] Ekiga Trunk in bad state: help confirming this
- From: Eugen Dedu <Eugen Dedu pu-pm univ-fcomte fr>
- To: Ekiga development mailing list <ekiga-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: [Ekiga-devel-list] Ekiga Trunk in bad state: help confirming this
- Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:38:07 +0200
Damien Sandras wrote:
> Le dimanche 20 septembre 2009 à 18:30 +0200, Eugen Dedu a écrit :
>> Damien Sandras wrote:
>>> Le dimanche 20 septembre 2009 à 18:08 +0200, Eugen Dedu a écrit :
>>>> Julien Puydt wrote:
>>>>> Damien Sandras a écrit :
>>>>> < a list of problems>
>>>>> You forgot on shutdown :
>>>>> assert.cxx(108) PWLib Assertion fail: Function
>>>>> pthread_mutex_lock failed, file ptlib/unix/tlibthrd.cxx, line 1432,
>>>>> Assertion fail: Function pthread_mutex_lock failed, file
>>>>> ptlib/unix/tlibthrd.cxx, line 1432, Error=107
>>>> There was also http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=585287, I do
>>>> not know if it is still actual or not. I will check it in a few days.
>>> This one seems to work here. I'm registered to two accounts.
>>> However, one problem is that Ekiga now waits a few seconds before
>>> starting. Is that STUN detection?
>> I noticed also on STABLE this problem. *Sometimes*, it takes 15-20 secs
>> for the GUI to appear. The -d 4 blocks right after DNS SRV Lookup for a
>> few seconds, and this appears a few times upon starting => 15-20 secs
>> for the GUI to appear.
>> I thought that it is a temporary dns problem, or maybe because I use
>> wi-fi and the packet is lost. Do you need a -d 4 (I wil lookfor it in
>> my logs) for that or not?
> I won't fix stable. It is just an annoyance. Moreover, it is not the
> same one because I don't have the problem with stable at all.
>> Finally, at work I have a static NAT. Sometimes, STUN (hence ekiga)
>> tells me symmetric nat, I think it appears only when I have executed
>> ekiga before. Is this also normal from time to time? At home, with a
>> port restricted nat, I have not noticed this problem (I think).
> Not sure what static nat is.
Well, I have a private address, and on the nat machine I have a public
address *only* for me. But maybe the administrator has done a special
configuration for me, so let's forget about that.
] [Thread Prev