After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 502758 - Contacts lists phone number twice for contacts with only one number
Contacts lists phone number twice for contacts with only one number
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 547223
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Contacts
2.12.x (obsolete)
Other All
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-addressbook-maintainers
Evolution QA team
: 516451 519087 521843 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2007-12-10 00:45 UTC by Michel Alexandre Salim
Modified: 2008-08-18 09:15 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.19/2.20



Description Michel Alexandre Salim 2007-12-10 00:45:36 UTC
Please describe the problem:
For contacts with only one number, if the number is of a {Home,Business} {Phone,Fax} type, the number is listed twice in the contact browser -- once with its actual category and another time as an "Other Phone".

Switching the phone type to Mobile, ISDN, etc. stops the issue from recurring.

Steps to reproduce:
1. Create a contact
2. Add a home phone number
3. Browse to that contact


Actual results:
Phone number listed twice

Expected results:
Phone number listed once

Does this happen every time?
Always

Other information:
Comment 1 Chris Allermann 2007-12-17 00:52:29 UTC
I am able to replicate this bug.

Operating System is Fedora Core 8
Evolution Version is 2.12.2
Comment 2 Susana 2008-03-05 19:54:13 UTC
*** Bug 516451 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 3 Susana 2008-03-05 19:54:23 UTC
*** Bug 519087 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 4 Susana 2008-03-12 20:29:06 UTC
*** Bug 521843 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 Daniel Lodge 2008-05-05 21:37:06 UTC
Happens to me too.  I have stopped using Evolution because of this database corruption.  Hopefully JPilot will work, otherwise back to windows to sync my phone.
Comment 6 Michel Alexandre Salim 2008-08-05 05:23:19 UTC
Daniel: I've not seen it actually corrupting the actual data stored, it's just a display issue. Mighty annoying though, and no response from any developer yet?
Comment 7 Daniel Lodge 2008-08-06 18:34:30 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> Daniel: I've not seen it actually corrupting the actual data stored, it's just
> a display issue. Mighty annoying though, and no response from any developer
> yet?

No response yet.  It is annoying, but more importantly the number is labeled as a fax number - leaving my unsure if the number is a home number or a fax number.
Comment 8 Matt Davey 2008-08-10 23:44:44 UTC
I suspect this is more than just a display issue.  I think it affects gnome-pilot syncing, too (that's where I started tracking down this bug from).

For example:
  1.  create a new contact, with just a name.
  2.  Sync with palm.
  3.  Edit entry on palm and enter a new 'work phone'.
  4.  Sync again.
The contact in Evolution never picks up the new work phone.

There are other oddnesses, that I suspect are caused by the same issue.

I think the root cause of the bug is in e-contact.c.  If you have a business-phone, and then you set a "other-phone", using e-contact-set(), it overwrites the business-phone, for example.

As far as I can see, the problem is that the 'other phone' has a single attribute "VOICE" and the 'work phone' (for example) has "VOICE" and "WORK".  When e_contact_set_property tries to set the "other phone" property, it looks through the existing attributes and looks for "VOICE" and successfully makes a match on "VOICE,WORK".

See, for example, e-contact.c lines 142, 153, and 821-887 (revision 9011).
Comment 9 Matt Davey 2008-08-13 22:11:38 UTC
I've added a patch that works for me to bug 547223.
Comment 10 Milan Crha 2008-08-18 09:15:05 UTC
Marking as duplicate of the above bug because it contains patch which fixes this.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 547223 ***