Thanks for that heads up. I've changed it so that now Evolution syncs
directly (through Multisync) with my SyncML server. I'm still not
getting changes synced back from the server to Evolution. Not all bad
news, as I think I've pinpointed the problem.
The other device that is syncing to my Sync
Hello!
I've got the travel bug real bad. I need to hit the road, but I also need
to stay connected with my online business. I decided the best way to stay
connected would be to take with me a tri-mode PDA/cell phone combo and a
Knoppix (bootable Linux) disc with a USB memory key. Between the ha
> Hmmm, I may have solved the problem...
>
> You know those little files in ~/evolution/local called local?.db ?
>
> They should be deleted if you reconfigure multisync..
Right, they may cause problems... Thanks for the report, I'll make sure
the Evo plugin deletes these when a new sync pair
Bo Lincoln wrote:
This seems just like it should be. You need a separate server for each
client (so far), i.e. just like with remote_sync.
/Bo
Hmmm, I may have solved the problem...
You know those little files in ~/evolution/local called local?.db ?
They should be deleted if you reconfigu
Thank you very much for the information. I'll do some testing on my own
machines to see if I can reproduce the behavior.
> It was setup with the main machine having two conduits, evolution to
> syncml server on port 5079) and evolution to syncml server on port 5080.
>
> My wife's machine was evol
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 12:06, Rob Davis wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 11:22, Bo Lincoln wrote:
> > > All I want is for it to work like it did in 0.70.. :-( I don't want syncml
> >
> > I'll do my best to make it work better :) After implementing SyncML, I'm
> > not a fan o that standard either, bu
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 11:22, Bo Lincoln wrote:
> > All I want is for it to work like it did in 0.70.. :-( I don't want syncml
>
> I'll do my best to make it work better :) After implementing SyncML, I'm
> not a fan o that standard either, but it's better to follow a standard
> than to create own
> All I want is for it to work like it did in 0.70.. :-( I don't want syncml
I'll do my best to make it work better :) After implementing SyncML, I'm
not a fan o that standard either, but it's better to follow a standard
than to create own protocols.
So: If you create new sync pairs Evolution <
Bo Lincoln wrote:
I think the biggest issue for me seems to be that deleted contacts don't
seem to be applied when the instances of multisync are synced across
machines. So, if mistakes are made, I then need to delete all instances
(about 96) on each machine, which is very time consuming.
You
Rob Davis wrote:
Bo Lincoln wrote:
I think the biggest issue for me seems to be that deleted contacts
don't seem to be applied when the instances of multisync are synced
across machines. So, if mistakes are made, I then need to delete
all instances (about 96) on each machine, which is very ti
The backup plugin is not a normal plugin in that you can change
something in the directory and have it synced back. The idea is to just
collect all data from the other side (Evolution) and save it. If you
want to restore from the backup (i.e. push data back), you have to go to
the plugin options ("
11 matches
Mail list logo
