April 2010 - Syncevolution-issues

[Bug 9711] New: (Mobile Phone) "Bad Request" reply to (syncevo) OBEX SAN

by bugzilla＠moblin.org

http://bugzilla.moblin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9711 Summary: (Mobile Phone) "Bad Request" reply to (syncevo) OBEX SAN Classification: Moblin Projects Product: SyncEvolution Version: upstream Platform: Netbook OS/Version: Moblin Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: Undecided Component: SyncEvolution AssignedTo: patrick.ohly(a)intel.com ReportedBy: pat-moblin(a)mailinator.com QAContact: yanshuang.zheng(a)intel.com CC: syncevolution(a)lists.intel.com Having compiled SyncEvolution 1.0beta1 to test direct (bluetooth syncml) device sync from desktop (ubuntu karmic) with a Sony Ericsson K700i (quiet old - SyncML Version 1.1) i get the following error - the sync fails. Btw. Opensync 0.22 works 3/4, Opensync 0.39 works half-way. Looking for a 1/1 solution I stumbled over syncevolution and am hoping to see it work... and still have high hopes. Sorry for not really reading the bug reporting guidelines - please ask if you need any further information. # [-- collapse all --][++ expand all ++] # [2010-02-12 18:02:29.293] CreateContext SyncEvolution// => 0 # [2010-02-12 18:02:29.293] Module_Capabilities: PLATFORM:Linux DLL:true MINVERSION:V1.0.6.0 MANUFACTURER:SyncEvolution DESCRIPTION:SyncEvolution Synthesis DB Plugin plugin_datastore_str:no plugin_datastore_key:yes ITEM_AS_KEY:yes plugin_datablob:no # [2010-02-12 18:02:29.293] Module_PluginParams Engine=01060100 # [2010-02-12 18:02:29.294] SyncML server account: # [2010-02-12 18:02:29.294] client: SyncEvolution 1.0beta1 for workstation # [2010-02-12 18:02:29.294] device ID: sc-pim-462b4d11-53b1-4184-b8f6-399bf47880d0 # [2010-02-12 18:02:29.296] memo: inactive # [2010-02-12 18:02:29.296] todo: inactive # [2010-02-12 18:02:29.296] calendar: inactive # [2010-02-12 18:02:29.325] creating /home/pat/.cache/syncevolution/k700i-2010-02-12-18-02/addressbook.before # [2010-02-12 18:02:29.373] /home/pat/.cache/syncevolution/k700i-2010-02-12-18-02/addressbook.before created # [2010-02-12 18:02:30.008] Connecting Bluetooth device with address 00:0E:07:87:20:93 and channel 15 # [2010-02-12 18:02:30.684] OBEX progress # [2010-02-12 18:02:30.736] OBEX Transport: get header who from connect response with value SYNCML-SYNC� # [2010-02-12 18:02:30.737] Server sending SAN # [2010-02-12 18:02:30.737] ObexTransport send is called # [2010-02-12 18:02:30.737] OBEX progress # [2010-02-12 18:02:30.788] OBEX progress # [2010-02-12 18:02:30.823] OBEX Request 3 got a failed response Not found # [2010-02-12 18:02:30.824] TransportException while sending SAN package # [2010-02-12 18:02:30.825] Server Alerted Sync init failed -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.moblin.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching someone on the CC list of the bug.

12 years, 4 months

1
13
0 / 0

[Bug 10483] SAN fail when syncing with N900 phone

by bugzilla＠moblin.org

http://bugzilla.moblin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10483 --- Comment #7 from pohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com> 2010-04-26 06:43:34 PST --- Congwu, Jingke, what is the status regarding this issue? We agreed that this looks like a regression in the underlying Bluetooth transports (Bluez, kernel). To proof that, we need to find an old image where this kind of sync still works, then install the same SyncEvolution version on a recent image and show that it fails. If SyncEvolution is the same in this test but the OS is not, then it should be investigated by the OS maintainers. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.moblin.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching someone on the CC list of the bug.

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 10120] New: SAN parsing regression introduced by SAN 1.1 support

by bugzilla＠moblin.org

http://bugzilla.moblin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10120 Summary: SAN parsing regression introduced by SAN 1.1 support Classification: Moblin Projects Product: SyncEvolution Version: upstream Platform: Netbook OS/Version: Moblin Linux Status: ASSIGNED Severity: major Priority: Undecided Component: SyncEvolution AssignedTo: congwu.chen(a)intel.com ReportedBy: congwu.chen(a)intel.com QAContact: jingke.zhang(a)intel.com CC: syncevolution(a)lists.intel.com I found this regression with Jingke, I did a silly mistake in "SAN version check" commit which always take a valid SAN message as invalid, thus breaking the server alert sync feature. Fixed in commit 9c67f994b75c92c348f4a28dd484dd9d37d99681 in libsynthesis. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.moblin.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching someone on the CC list of the bug.

12 years, 4 months

1
4
0 / 0

[Bug 1197] syncevo-phone-config: broken Python syntax, error messages

by bugzilla＠meego.com

http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197 --- Comment #17 from pohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com> 2010-04-25 23:24:11 PDT --- (In reply to comment #15) > Regarding the newly implemented combined calendar+todo test, I agree testing > calendar and todo separately and then checking URI equalness is a good hint for > most cases, but I am not entirely sure whether it works reliably. > > The first concern is does calendar and todo has the same URI will always mean > they are combined? I think there is at least one slightly difference between > the two: > combined means not only same URI but also same type, while it might be possible > that the phone has calendar and todo with the same URI but different types. How can that possibly work? The type is associated with the URI, so it has to be the same. > The second concern is does testing possible calendar URIs for Calendar and > calendar URIs + todo URIs for Todo works? Is it possible that the phone has a > combined calendar+task and has the URI named as 'todo'? I find that unlikely. (In reply to comment #16) > Tested with N900 works but there are some syntax error need be fixed, see > > http://git.moblin.org/cgit.cgi/syncevolution/commit/?h=congwu&id=04948ba9... Thanks, merged. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.meego.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching someone on the CC list of the bug.

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 1187] "Fix a sync emergency" window needs up-down scroll-bar

by bugzilla＠meego.com

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 1194] sync-ui: simplify device configuration names

by bugzilla＠meego.com

http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194 jingke <jingke.zhang(a)intel.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|MeeGo_1.0_Release_Blocker? | --- Comment #1 from jingke <jingke.zhang(a)intel.com> 2010-04-25 20:05:30 PDT --- Since it is expected to be fixed in 1.1, I remove the "MeeGo_1.0_Release_Blocker". Not propose it currently. :) -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.meego.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching someone on the CC list of the bug.

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 1197] syncevo-phone-config: broken Python syntax, error messages

by bugzilla＠meego.com

http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197 --- Comment #16 from congwu <congwu.chen(a)intel.com> 2010-04-25 19:36:37 PDT --- Tested with N900 works but there are some syntax error need be fixed, see http://git.moblin.org/cgit.cgi/syncevolution/commit/?h=congwu&id=04948ba9... -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.meego.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching someone on the CC list of the bug.

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 1197] syncevo-phone-config: broken Python syntax, error messages

by bugzilla＠meego.com

http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197 --- Comment #15 from congwu <congwu.chen(a)intel.com> 2010-04-25 19:05:33 PDT --- One typo: allContacts-> allSources -if options.source and options.source not in allContacts: - parser.error("Option -s/--source can only be one of " + "|".join(allContacts) + ".") +if options.source and options.source not in allSources: + parser.error("Option -s/--source can only be one of " + "|".join(allSources) + ".") Regarding the newly implemented combined calendar+todo test, I agree testing calendar and todo separately and then checking URI equalness is a good hint for most cases, but I am not entirely sure whether it works reliably. The first concern is does calendar and todo has the same URI will always mean they are combined? I think there is at least one slightly difference between the two: combined means not only same URI but also same type, while it might be possible that the phone has calendar and todo with the same URI but different types. The second concern is does testing possible calendar URIs for Calendar and calendar URIs + todo URIs for Todo works? Is it possible that the phone has a combined calendar+task and has the URI named as 'todo'? In other words, I think both calendar and todo has to test with all possible URIs for calendar and todo (which means test cases were not effectively reduced but increased actually). -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.meego.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching someone on the CC list of the bug.

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 1197] syncevo-phone-config: broken Python syntax, error messages

by bugzilla＠meego.com

http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197 --- Comment #14 from pohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com> 2010-04-24 04:59:41 PDT --- (In reply to comment #12) > > - check whether we can get the correct config without adding tests > > > > Congwu, does the following logic work: > > - if normal testing of "calendar" and "todo" finds the same URI, > > conclude that they have to be combined > > - if the URI is different, no need to combine; we can avoid false > > positives by testing the self.uris['calendar'] after the ones > > specific to "todo" > > I have implemented this, but wasn't able to test with a device which actually > combines events and tasks. After thinking some more about this, I think the current version of the script will fail to detect combined calendar+todo for Nokias, because of the changed order of URIs that we test. I think Nokia phones ignore the URI that we send to it and then decides on the data store entirely based on the data type. That way the first URIs for calendar and todo are accepted ("Calendar" and "Task"), which breaks the "URI equal" comparison. The fix should be simple - test the calendar URIs first when testing todos, as it was done before my last commit: diff --git a/test/syncevo-phone-config.py b/test/syncevo-phone-config.py index 3f93458..38d7cc6 100755 --- a/test/syncevo-phone-config.py +++ b/test/syncevo-phone-config.py @@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ class TestingConfiguration(): self.uris = {} self.uris['addressbook'] = ['Contact', 'contact', 'Contacts', 'contacts', 'Addressbook', 'addressbook'] self.uris['calendar'] = ['Calendar', 'calendar', 'Agenda','agenda'] - self.uris['todo'] = ['Task', 'task', 'Tasks', 'tasks', 'Todo','todo'] + self.uris['calendar'] + self.uris['todo'] = self.uris['calendar'] + ['Task', 'task', 'Tasks', 'tasks', 'Todo','todo'] self.uris['memo'] = ['Memo', 'memo', 'Notes', 'notes', 'Note', 'note'] if (types): I've put that into the git branch. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.meego.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching someone on the CC list of the bug.

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 1197] syncevo-phone-config: broken Python syntax, error messages

by bugzilla＠meego.com

http://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197 --- Comment #13 from pohly <patrick.ohly(a)intel.com> 2010-04-23 13:51:06 PDT --- Congwu, can you review my changes and perhaps retest with the 7210c? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.meego.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching someone on the CC list of the bug.

12 years, 4 months

1
0
0 / 0

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

Syncevolution-issues April 2010