That's not the purpose of this API, which is to allow the user to force stop an application right now, immediately, I don't care what the damn app wants. :}
There is a UI in 2.0 for the user to explicitly stop any currently running services. On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 5:15 AM, Bo <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it would be nice if the to-be-killed/restarted apps/services > get a chance to say what it is doing. It's normal apps/services > obligation to provide such information; it's task manager apps > obligation to collect them and present to users. > > Or make it a system service (may be some dialogs) to make sure no apps/ > services is killed without judgement. (sounds familiar? ^_^) > > We still need such an API to be public, just make it more gentle. > > On Oct 16, 12:07 am, Dianne Hackborn <[email protected]> wrote: > > If you kill the process, it will not impact the alarms, the same as it > won't > > impact notifications etc. > > > > What these programs are doing is using the API that is tended to force > stop > > -everything- about the application: stop all services, cancel all alarms, > > remove all notifications, etc. This is all working as intended, the apps > > are just abusing this API to cause things to happen that you probably > don't > > want to have done. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Jason B. <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > When I use the method above. Even after I kill my app and service with > > > task manager my alarms still trigger. I believe its because the > > > AlarmManager service has been given a pending intent that will > > > relaunch my service which handles the alarms. > > > > > Both alarmmanager and the pending intent are allocated outside of the > > > activity, so even if the application's virtual memory space is > > > deleted, the pending intent still exists and the alarmmanager is still > > > scheduled. > > > > > Sorry if I missed the theme of the post. Good luck :) > > > > > On Oct 15, 11:53 am, String <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Oct 15, 4:34 pm, "Jason B." <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Using that approach works great for my app. That way it doesn't > > > > > matter if my app ever gets killed. The alarm will trigger in the > > > > > future and the intent will restart my service > > > > > > I believe the point of this thread is that Task Killer apps will kill > > > > all future alarms you had scheduled. > > > > > > String > > > > -- > > Dianne Hackborn > > Android framework engineer > > [email protected] > > > > Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to > > provide private support, and so won't reply to such e-mails. All such > > questions should be posted on public forums, where I and others can see > and > > answer them. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Android Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<android-developers%[email protected]> > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en > -- Dianne Hackborn Android framework engineer [email protected] Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to provide private support, and so won't reply to such e-mails. All such questions should be posted on public forums, where I and others can see and answer them. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
