On Thu, 2009-10-15 at 10:06 +0100, Chen, Congwu wrote:
> Patrick wrote:
> >Congwu mentioned that some workarounds were necessary in SyncEvolution
> >because the libsyncml test tool didn't set the message type correctly.
> >What exactly was the workaround - patch?
> Two workarounds:
> 1) DEV_TYPE, why are we using desktop?

No particular reason. It seemed more appropriate than "workstation",
that's all.

>  Libsyncml is fairly stick on this and does not accept device types
> not mentioned in the mandatory list. Shall we change it to something
> like workstation?

Yes, we should do that.

> 2) The SAN message type as you already know. I think let SyncEvolution
> to guess the type is a real solution. I may come up with this if no
> disagree. 

Yes, please do.

> Also though SAN message parsing is enabled, obexd test with libsyncml
> still used the fixed "default" configuration. I think this is more
> like an interoperability issue and is safe to ignore from transport
> implementation's eye.

Agreed, although we should look into to determine why this happens. The
SAN message parsing code has extensive logging, so checking stdout of
the syncevo-dbus-server might help, plus of course single-stepping
through the code in a debugger.

-- 
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.


_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution

Reply via email to