Re: [Evolution] Re: Syncing Evolution

On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 15:04 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 15:43 -0500, Paul M. Bucalo wrote:
On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 11:59 -0700, Craig White wrote:

I will second this

I have no problem using jpilot or command line 'pilot-xfer /dev/pilot'
but gpilotd is absolutely deaf to communications on FC3

I can appreciate your frustrations. I spent a lot of time figuring out
how to 'fix' this in FC3. Since I can sync my Handspring Visor by only
pressing the the base's hotsync button (nothing else before or after), I
wouldn't think "absolutely deaf to communications on FC3" would be

# rpm -qa pilot-link jpilot gnome-pilot evolution

Mine -

$ rpm -qa pilot-link jpilot gnome-pilot evolution

# uname -a
Linux 2.6.10-1.741_FC3 #1 Thu Jan 13
16:38:22 EST 2005 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux

Mine -

$ uname -a
Linux pmbnote1 2.6.10-1.760_FC3 #1 Wed Feb 2 00:14:23 EST 2005 i686 i686
i386 GNU/Linux

BTW, I forgot to mention in my reply to Andrew Greig that an entry had
to be made in '/etc/udev/rules.d/50-udev.rules' to give directions on
what to create the dynamic /dev node and symlink. I did post this
earlier, but should have recapped it in my previous post. Sorry.

Granted, all of this should have been noted in some documentation
surrounding the gnome-pilot project, but now that it is known, I suspect
this will allow many to sync that couldn't before. Linux is about
choice, and going with other applications is a great idea, if that's
what you want. I want to work with Evo, if I can. That's my choice. I'm
not stuck with it. 

I can't possibly promise this will solve syncing problems for *everyone*
under *all* conditions. Nonetheless, I'm quite happy about this small
success and that I figured it out on my own. If after making these
changes on a laptop running FC3 it now works, where it wouldn't before,
I wouldn't say "gpilotd is absolutely deaf to communications on FC3."
Sorry. :0)
I can't figure out what you did that would have made a difference but...

bad idea to edit /etc/udev/rules.d/50-udev.rules as that file is
replaced by updates - at least it was when udev update was released.
Better to create /etc/udev/rules.d/10-udev.rules as that will persist
thru updates and do the same function.

Thanks! I would never have known that. It never occurred to me that you
can have more than one set of 'rules'. I just thought all your rules go
in one file. Does the numbering of the rules file mean an order in which
it is being read?

# cat /etc/udev/rules.d/10-udev.rules

My entry in /etc/udev/rules.d/50-udev.rules

BUS="usb", KERNEL="ttyUSB[0-9]*", NAME="usb/%k"

It may help for you to know that what you placed in your file wouldn't
work for me. How I came across the syntax above is by looking at the
entry for my Epson CX-5400, which was found, driven and worked from the

This was the *only* syntax that worked for me.

# cat /etc/udev/permissions.d/10-udev.permissions
#set Palm Pilot rwx

I have this:

# pilot/palm devices

This was 'stock'. I didn't add it. When I saw this, I made sure that my
user account had been made a member of 'uucp'. I normally do this from
past issues, anyway.

and I left this out of my previous post since it obviously works or I
wouldn't be able to sync using J-Pilot or 'pilot-xfer' since the
existence of /dev/pilot depends upon them and that I press the sync
button either on the phone or on the base...there is no perceptible
difference between the two events as either will cause the /dev/pilot
symlink to be created with the permissions as indicated.

If you have done something else to make it work, I would love to know
what it was but I suspect that perhaps unknowingly, you stumbled upon
something that made it work that you can't put your finger on.

If you look both of my posts on this, together, you will come up with
all that I have done. From the time I started this project until I
finished it, I made no updates and didn't add any new programming.
Additionally, if I remove what I added to 'rules' file I will not sync
no matter what. I tried several combinations in syntax, including yours,
and nothing would work but the way I have it. 

Thanks for the bit on the 'rules' file. You will definitely save me a
lot of head banging that would have happened the first time that file
got overwritten. :0)



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]