On Fr, 2011-07-08 at 18:09 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> Is suspect that part of the problem is that Client::eas_event::Source
> needs to "simulate" access by two different clients. Both use the
> ActiveSync account defined by
>   ~/.config/syncevolution/client-test/peers/target-config/config.ini
> so essentially this looks to the Exchange server like one client. 

I fixed this with the following commit:

commit 6300b3ea9184e114b521ef2e5eafda476c836e5c
Author: Patrick Ohly <[email protected]>
Date:   Mon Jul 11 14:40:06 2011 +0200

    SyncEvolution: fixed change tracking in testing
    
    When testing with "Client::Source::*::testChanges", two different
    accounts must be used. Otherwise the two simulated SyncEvolution
    clients share the same sync keys and testing fails.
    
    The solution is to switch to a different account, derived by appending
    _B to the original account ID, for the second client.
    
    With this fix, the testing continues. But it also needs change in
    client-test itself: "testChanges" had a check that all items can be
    read, which is not the case for ActiveSync because there unmodified
    item data is not available.

The README was updated accordingly. Please give this a try, it should
help you to trigger the issues that I am seeing (GNOME keyring, sync key
issues).

Note that you'll need an updated SyncEvolution to run all of the
testChanges test:

commit 0852e0ad1fd1531a3c0293813f1ad69c7b309fa2
Author: Patrick Ohly <[email protected]>
Date:   Mon Jul 11 18:05:19 2011 +0200

    testing: relax requirements for ActiveSync backend
    
    In an incremental sync, the ActiveSync backend is only able to provide
    data for updated or new items. This is sufficient, other items will
    not be read during such a sync and item access doesn't use incremental
    sync mode.
    
    Therefore this commit relaxes the testChanges test by removing the
    reading of an unmodified item.

I'll put this into the "eds" project soonish, after it has passed at
least one nightly build run. In the meantime please compile
SyncEvolution from source.

I have to go back to fixing some other issues elsewhere now. Let me know
when you think that these issues are fixed.

-- 
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