Re: [SyncEvolution] syncevolution 1.0beta2, n900, and duplicates
On Di, 2010-03-16 at 14:10 +0000, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 09:32:21AM -0800, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> Therefore it is necessecary to check the logs.
>
> So open the syncevolution-log.html inside that directory. Search for
> "Add" or something like it. If unsure, send the log to
> syncevolution(a)lists.intel.com.
Will do.
Thanks.
Regarding your tweet:
I blush: the #intel #syncevolution devs seem lost w/o my #n900
logs,can't they just knock the #nokia door and get a n900?
#meego, anyone?
Congwu has access to a N900, but as he wasn't able to reproduce the
problem, we need your logs. It might also be specific to your data. And
no, Nokia is not sending around hardware just because some developer
asks for it.
> > There doesn't seem to be a pattern, sometime they are
duplicated in
> > the very same calendar, other times to different calendars
>
> This confuses me a bit. When you say different calendars, do you mean
> different calendars in Evolution? How many do you have and how did you
> configure the Evolution side? It should always only read/write from one
> calendar in normal operation.
I do mean different calendars in Evolution, I've various of them, both
google/webcals (which AFAIU are neither supported nor considered by both
syncevolution and the N900 calendar app), and local ones. For the local
one I've just done "create new calendar" in evolution, I don't know
whether Evolution uses a single .ics file with some sort of "category"
or if it actually uses several .ics files.
It uses a single .ics file per calendar. In your mail with the log you
mentioned that events were only duplicated inside that calendar, so I'll
ignore that part of the problem unless it happens again.
The log confirms that the SyncML client in the N900 is confused, as I
suspected. It explicitly adds all of these duplicates to the host in a
normal two-way sync. Probably the change tracking on the device is
broken, perhaps because of the amount of calendar items that you have.
Congwu, can you reproduce the problem when running client-test's
testManyItems when increasing the item count via CLIENT_TEST_NUM_ITEMS?
Stefano, I might be able to discuss this with the implementors of the
SyncML client in the N900 soon. But as you bought the device and
presumably Nokia offers support for it, perhaps you can also file a bug
report somewhere?
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.