Active Topics
-
Firefox with Leste (5)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 2 days, 18 hrs ago -
Handbook (2)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 3 days, 17 hrs ago - more...
Astaoth |
2016-03-18
, 14:22
|
|
Posts: 134 |
Thanked: 370 times |
Joined on Oct 2012
@ France
|
#41
|
Originally Posted by abranson
That's not the latest version available for a PTS. When I check the available versions with org.rockwork.Pebble.CandidateFirmwareVersion, I get nothing. I think it's rather a problem with the remote connection to Pebble servers from Rockpool.
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Astaoth For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2016-03-18
, 14:51
|
|
Posts: 287 |
Thanked: 862 times |
Joined on Dec 2015
|
#42
|
Originally Posted by Astaoth
That is interesting, because Michael recently rewrote the firmware checking code because it wasn't detecting that 3.10 was more than 3.9. I've brought it over and upgraded with it myself, and you'll see he's greatly increased the amount of logging on that. Can you see anything interesting in there?
That's not the latest version available for a PTS. When I check the available versions with org.rockwork.Pebble.CandidateFirmwareVersion, I get nothing. I think it's rather a problem with the remote connection to Pebble servers from Rockpool.
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to abranson For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2016-03-18
, 21:37
|
|
Posts: 479 |
Thanked: 1,284 times |
Joined on Jan 2012
@ Enschede, The Netherlands
|
#43
|
Originally Posted by abranson
A way to avoid this problem for later users might be to mark pebbled as conflicting package in the rpm. Not sure about the ethical implications, as it will silently remove someone else's software from user's phone. But given that rockpool is more than the spiritual successor of pebbled, and pebbled can apparently cause connection problems for rockpool even if pebbled is disabled, it might be the better option.
ve had problems with pebbled starting again too, and had to remove it. If anyone else has connection problems like this, always check whether the watch thinks it's connected or not to rule out pebbled or another instance of rockpoold running.
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fuzzillogic For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2016-03-18
, 21:43
|
|
Posts: 287 |
Thanked: 862 times |
Joined on Dec 2015
|
#44
|
Originally Posted by Fuzzillogic
That sounds mean, but it might make sense. I definitely saw pebbled launching even though I'd disabled it in the pebbled UI. I wonder if it's related to the reports I've seen of Android daemons starting even though they're supposed to be disabled. If so then it could be a Sailfish bug. I think it's a systemd call.
A way to avoid this problem for later users might be to mark pebbled as conflicting package in the rpm. Not sure about the ethical implications, as it will silently remove someone else's software from user's phone. But given that rockpool is more than the spiritual successor of pebbled, and pebbled can apparently cause connection problems for rockpool even if pebbled is disabled, it might be the better option.
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to abranson For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2016-03-18
, 22:13
|
|
Posts: 207 |
Thanked: 482 times |
Joined on Mar 2016
|
#45
|
Mb more polite would be to add a clutch to servicecontrol to check pebbled status and stop it if alive?
Or to add conflict statement to the service unit
Or to add conflict statement to the service unit
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ruff For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2016-03-19
, 00:12
|
|
Posts: 889 |
Thanked: 2,087 times |
Joined on Sep 2010
@ Manchester
|
#46
|
Originally Posted by Astaoth
Have you got the latest version of Rockpool installed? The previous version didn't find an update, but the latest did and I upgraded my PTS with the dbus command supplied.
That's not the latest version available for a PTS. When I check the available versions with org.rockwork.Pebble.CandidateFirmwareVersion, I get nothing. I think it's rather a problem with the remote connection to Pebble servers from Rockpool.
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to mrsellout For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2016-03-19
, 01:46
|
|
Posts: 134 |
Thanked: 370 times |
Joined on Oct 2012
@ France
|
#47
|
Originally Posted by mrsellout
You are damn right I didn't had the latest version. I had the 0.1-2 installed, but until now I didn't had a new version available on Warehouse :/. I will try to upgrade the firmware tomorrow and will tell you if there is anything new.
Have you got the latest version of Rockpool installed? The previous version didn't find an update, but the latest did and I upgraded my PTS with the dbus command supplied.
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Astaoth For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2016-03-19
, 06:20
|
|
Posts: 287 |
Thanked: 862 times |
Joined on Dec 2015
|
#48
|
Originally Posted by ruff
^ I think this is the winner. Great idea.
Or to add conflict statement to the service unit
Originally Posted by Astaoth
mzanetti's new firmware checking code was ported over in 0.2-1 so that may very well do it! Also, loads of other new things!
You are damn right I didn't had the latest version. I had the 0.1-2 installed, but until now I didn't had a new version available on Warehouse :/. I will try to upgrade the firmware tomorrow and will tell you if there is anything new.
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to abranson For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2016-03-19
, 10:41
|
|
Posts: 479 |
Thanked: 1,284 times |
Joined on Jan 2012
@ Enschede, The Netherlands
|
#49
|
Originally Posted by abranson
It's elegant, but will it be enough? What happens if the pebbled service is (mysteriously) started when rockpool is already running? Who "wins"? What happens if a user installs pebble after installing rockpool?
^ I think this is the winner. Great idea.
From systemd's manpage: "If a unit has a Conflicts= setting on another unit, starting the former will stop the latter and vice versa". This sounds much like the current situation: either pebbled is running, or rockpool, but you don't know which one.
I don't know if this kind of conflict resolution can be resolved using a systemd unit configuration.
Last edited by Fuzzillogic; 2016-03-19 at 11:36.
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Fuzzillogic For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2016-03-19
, 11:18
|
|
Posts: 134 |
Thanked: 370 times |
Joined on Oct 2012
@ France
|
#50
|
Ok, so here is the logs when I start rockpoold from the command line : pastebin.com/p4brZPED .
If we take a look at the end, we can read that the new version is detected, but the internal status about available update is set to false. And with the calls from qdbus, I have the same results than before.
Maybe because my version number has an unexpected format rockpool can't define if my version is the latest or not ?
Edit : I did this with the 0.5-1 version
Last edited by Astaoth; 2016-03-19 at 13:01.
If we take a look at the end, we can read that the new version is detected, but the internal status about available update is set to false. And with the calls from qdbus, I have the same results than before.
Maybe because my version number has an unexpected format rockpool can't define if my version is the latest or not ?
Edit : I did this with the 0.5-1 version
Last edited by Astaoth; 2016-03-19 at 13:01.
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Astaoth For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
| Tags |
| pebble, smartwatch |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:20.