Bug#641898: [Evolution] Bug#641898: libebook: e_book_get_changes always reports no changes in libebook evolution data server
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 11:17:19PM -0400, Chris Frey wrote: The patch is below. Hi, I haven't heard back yet, on this bug. I'm *really* hoping that the fix can be included in the next Debian update. Is there anything I can do to help this process? Thanks! - Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#641898: [Evolution] Bug#641898: libebook: e_book_get_changes always reports no changes in libebook evolution data server
On jeu., 2011-09-29 at 19:19 -0400, Chris Frey wrote: On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 11:17:19PM -0400, Chris Frey wrote: The patch is below. Hi, I haven't heard back yet, on this bug. I'm *really* hoping that the fix can be included in the next Debian update. I guess it won't. I was [VAC] during a week and have quite some real work right now, so don't hold your breathe. Is there anything I can do to help this process? Identifying the commit was really nice and it looks tiny enough that stable release team would accept it, but I need to take some time to build and upload it, and I won't have it before next week. Regards, -- Yves-Alexis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#641898: [Evolution] Bug#641898: libebook: e_book_get_changes always reports no changes in libebook evolution data server
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 11:04:42AM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: It might be worth identifiying when the bug was closed upstream and see if it's possible to backport that fix to stable. Not something I'll be able to do soon though, but if you manage to identify a relevant patch, that would definitely help. I couldn't find anything upstream... the changes in upstream code were too large to find a simple fix, but after much debugging, it ended up being a one-liner in e_data_book_respond_get_changes(). I've confirmed that this fixes my issue. The patch is below. I noticed that there is an upcoming point release, according to http://www.debian.org/News/2011/20110919, and that there's a Sept 24 deadline for bugs and testing. If this fix could be included in the next Squeeze point release, I'd be happy and grateful!! Thanks, - Chris From 15ad5dc232f493afef212a8217e82eedd0fe6e64 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chris Frey cdf...@foursquare.net Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 23:07:29 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Fixed libedata-book's e_data_book_respond_get_changes(): missing array add When building the get_changes DBUS response, the code forgot to add the values to the response array, resulting in get_changes calls that never returned any data. This fixes Ubuntu bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/evolution/+bug/658459 and Debian bug: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=641898 --- addressbook/libedata-book/e-data-book.c |4 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/addressbook/libedata-book/e-data-book.c b/addressbook/libedata-book/e-data-book.c index 7794e8b..d7a2a80 100644 --- a/addressbook/libedata-book/e-data-book.c +++ b/addressbook/libedata-book/e-data-book.c @@ -620,6 +620,10 @@ e_data_book_respond_get_changes (EDataBook *book, guint32 opid, EDataBookStatus /* Now change-vcard is owned by the GValue */ g_free (change); + + /* append vals to array */ + g_ptr_array_add(array, vals); + changes = g_list_remove (changes, change); } -- 1.7.2.3 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#641898: [Evolution] Bug#641898: libebook: e_book_get_changes always reports no changes in libebook evolution data server
On sam., 2011-09-17 at 04:42 -0400, Chris Frey wrote: Does this mean it is closed in Squeeze as well? I was hoping for a fix in Squeeze (or at least keep it open). I'm not sure what the tag means, and I don't see it via the web anymore. Closing means the bug is fixed. Versioning indicates in which versions it's present and in which it's fixed. Tagging squeeze means it's present in squeeze. Is there any flexibility with upgrading to 2.31.x or 2.32.x in squeeze? Not really. There might be backports or you might ask for them. I'm guessing not, but is it worth testing them? It might be worth identifiying when the bug was closed upstream and see if it's possible to backport that fix to stable. Not something I'll be able to do soon though, but if you manage to identify a relevant patch, that would definitely help. Regards, -- Yves-Alexis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#641898: [Evolution] Bug#641898: libebook: e_book_get_changes always reports no changes in libebook evolution data server
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:10:23AM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: version: 3.0.3-1 tag 641898 squeeze thanks On sam., 2011-09-17 at 03:03 -0400, Chris Frey wrote: I tested my own code on Debian Sid, with version 3.0.3, and it worked, so it seems Squeeze-specific. Ok so closing with version and tagging accordingly. Does this mean it is closed in Squeeze as well? I was hoping for a fix in Squeeze (or at least keep it open). I'm not sure what the tag means, and I don't see it via the web anymore. Is there any flexibility with upgrading to 2.31.x or 2.32.x in squeeze? I'm guessing not, but is it worth testing them? Thanks, - Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
