On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 18:24 +0200, [email protected] wrote: > Hi - > > I have the following two symptoms, which may or may not be related: > > - syncevo-http-server (run on my Debian-wheezy laptop) produces, once > for each sync (irrespective of the --sync type, and for all calendars > and for the address book): > > [ERROR] sync: SYSYNC Session aborted because of LOCAL SyncML error code 408 > ... > [ERROR] sync: SYSYNC Rejected with error: 0 0 > > syncevolution (on the N9, from > http://people.debian.org/~ovek/harmattan/) happily seems to complete > the sync nevertheless, with no errors.
>From your logs (thanks for posting them) it looks like this is harmless: when a phone connects, a helper session is set up to parse the incoming SyncML message. That session gets aborted to start the real one with the identified server-side config. I bet that this is where the error message comes from. The "Rejected with error" was retrieved from stdout of libsynthesis and considered a potential problem because of the "error" keyword. SyncEvolution 1.2.99.x no longer shows it. > - Some calendar entries do not show on the N9, even though they are > present in evolution. I can create them on the N9, but once I change > them on the laptop and sync them back (--sync refresh-from-server or > two-way), they no longer show on the N9, even though they are reported > as successfully synced. > > I have not found a sure-fire way to reproduce this. Some new items, > created on the laptop and synced, show on the N9; others do not. > Sometimes deleting one appointment makes other appointments suddenly > show as they should. As a first step, run the "--sync refresh-from-server" with "loglevel=4", to get the actual data dumped into the N9's syncevolution-log.html file. Look for a problematic event. Is it in the file? The "Generated" text/calendar is what gets passed to the N9's calendar backend (KCal). My guess is that the import fails, triggers a bug in the backend and/or storage. > I did not notice the problem before today. Yesterday I upgraded a bunch > of things, including libsynthesis0 and libsmltk0 (both to 3.4.0.16.7-1). > Are these perhaps broken? Not as far as I know. But why did you only update these libs and not the rest of SyncEvolution? Are you perhaps on Debian Wheezy, which now has the more recent libs but not yet SyncEvolution (currently triggers a compiler bug on MIPS and thus is prevented from entering Wheezy)? You could rule out this mismatch as the root cause by installing 1.2.99.2 from syncevolution.org. Deinstall the system's libsynthesis0, libsmltk0 and syncevolution packages if apt[itude] doesn't do it automatically. -- 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
