Re: [SyncEvolution] Sync Nokia E71
On Fr, 2011-01-14 at 19:30 +0000, Kip Warner wrote:
On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 13:59 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> Is the phone properly paired with your desktop? In other words, can
> you
> do other operations with it via Bluetooth?
Hey Patrick. Pretty sure it's paired properly, as I went through the
pairing process and I can also browse files if I wish to.
> The "Not found" error is a bit strange. I wonder whether it means
> "phone
> not found" - is Bluetooth enabled while you try to sync? Some phones
> also require explicit confirmation for syncing, so make sure that your
> phone's UI is unlocked while trying.
Bluetooth is enabled on both the machine and the mobile, and the mobile
prompts me that the former wants access when attempting to sync, so I
guess that much is ok.
I'm not sure what's up with the E71. Typically Nokia phones can be
reached without having to dive into the command line, like the author of
http://syncevolution.org/wiki/nokia-e71-ubuntu-1004-lts did. Reading
what he did it remains unclear to me why he is changing the OBEX
channel, in particular to the one used by "OBEX File Transfer" - that
looks just plain wrong.
If you use just the "sync-ui" to create a configuration for the E71,
using the generic "Nokia" template, does it work? If so, please fix the
Wiki.
Anyway, let's diagnose this. What is the output of "hcitool scan"? What
does "sdptool search --bdaddr <bdaddr from scan> SYNCML" say?
For the N97 I get:
$ hcitool scan
Scanning ...
A0:4E:04:1E:AD:30 Nokia N97 mini
$ sdptool search --bdaddr A0:4E:04:1E:AD:30 SYNCML
Searching for SYNCML on A0:4E:04:1E:AD:30 ...
Service Name: SyncMLClient
Service RecHandle: 0x1000b
Service Class ID List:
UUID 128: 00000002-0000-1000-8000-0002ee000002
Protocol Descriptor List:
"L2CAP" (0x0100)
"RFCOMM" (0x0003)
Channel: 7
"OBEX" (0x0008)
Language Base Attr List:
code_ISO639: 0x454e
encoding: 0x6a
base_offset: 0x100
Profile Descriptor List:
"" (0x00000002-0000-1000-8000-0002ee000002)
Version: 0x0100
Note that SyncEvolution automatically finds the right channel. There
should never be a need to specify it explicitly.
--
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.