On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 21:52 +0200, Thomas Pequet wrote:
Le 10/06/2013 16:48, Patrick Ohly a écrit :
> Hello Thomas!
Hello Patrick !
> One of your user reported that the SyncEvolution<->Memotoo
> started failing for him more often since April. Have you changed
> anything in the SyncML implementation of Memotoo?
May be but I have no users that tell me problem with SyncEvolution
Here's the bug report:
> The Synthesis engine in the client complains about a Sync
> comes too late:
> [2013-06-09 18:38:07.564] 'processCmd' - Processing incoming
> Cmd=Sync, IncomingMsgID=4, CmdID=2 [--][++] [->end] [->enclosing]
> [2013-06-09 18:38:07.565] Created command 'Status' (outgoing)
> [2013-06-09 18:38:07.565] Processing Sync, Source='note',
> [2013-06-09 18:38:07.565] Sync command not allowed outside of
> sync phase (-> 403)
> [2013-06-09 18:38:07.565] 'SessionAbort' - Aborting Session,
> Status=400, ProblemSource=LOCAL [--][++] [->end] [->enclosing]
> [2013-06-09 18:38:07.565] WARNING: Aborting Session with Reason
> Status 400 (LOCAL problem) ***
> The log that I got didn't include message dumps, but I suspect that
> engine was right - that part hasn't changed for a long time.
Can you send me logs to understand what happen ?
Daniel, may I share your log file with Thomas?
It might be more helpful to reproduce the problem while the log level
includes message dumps. Can you do
syncevolution --configure loglevel=3 memotoo
and then try syncing until the problem happens again?
Then archive the entire content of the session directory and send it to
Thomas and myself.
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.