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 748418 - editing fails when contact has the same type of detail twice
editing fails when contact has the same type of detail twice
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 701990
Product: gnome-contacts
Classification: Core
Component: general
3.8.x
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: GNOME Contacts maintainer(s)
GNOME Contacts maintainer(s)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2015-04-24 15:42 UTC by Stepan Salenikovich
Modified: 2015-04-27 22:50 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Stepan Salenikovich 2015-04-24 15:42:53 UTC
Not sure how best to describe this, but basically, if I have a contact with multiple instances of the same detail type (eg: multiple work phone numbers) then when I edit another contact and then that contact weird things happen and some of my changes get lost.

Steps to reproduce :
(note this is done using the local address book,
also, I use "work phone number" but I assume the same is true for other types of numbers)

1. Have 2 contacts, contact A has one work phone number, contact B has 2 work phone numbers.
2. Edit work phone number of contact A.
3. Edit the second work phone number of contact B.
4. Now return to contact A, the work phone number of contact A is now the same as the first work phone number of contact B.
5. Not always, but often if you go back to contact B, the changes which were made to the second work phone number are lost. Other times the second phone number will just be completely missing.
6. Occasionally an info bar will pop up that says "error setting property phone-number...." or something about an "unknown error", I don't have time to read it before it goes away.

Sometimes this has succeeded, but it fails most of the time.

Variations of this fail too, eg: editing contact B first and then contact A.

Often a similar bug will occur if I try to add a work phone number to a contact which already has one and the detail is usually never added. In this case I also receive the following error in my terminal:
"(gnome-contacts:24063): folks-WARNING **: phone-details.vala:72: Empty phone number passed to PhoneFieldDetails."

A workaround to these issues is to close and re-open gnome-contacts after any edit operation.
Comment 1 Stepan Salenikovich 2015-04-24 15:55:35 UTC
I just noticed that when the bug happens, the info bar with the error pops up if I wait long enough, because it has to do with a timeout. I was finally able to read it completely after trying it enough times:

Unknown error setting property 'phone-numbers': changing the "phone-numbers" property failed due to reaching the timeout.
Comment 2 Erick Perez Castellanos 2015-04-24 21:51:44 UTC
Does this also happens in 3.16? I'm thinking this is the same error as in bug 701990.
Comment 3 Stepan Salenikovich 2015-04-27 19:12:12 UTC
I just checked in version 3.16. I get the same timeout error, however, I don't get the same "side-effect" of the values switching between contacts or losing any of the entries entirely, as I described in my initial bug report. Seems like that was fixed somewhere between 3.8 and 3.16.
Comment 4 Erick Perez Castellanos 2015-04-27 21:22:51 UTC
(In reply to Stepan Salenikovich from comment #3)
> I just checked in version 3.16. I get the same timeout error, however, I
> don't get the same "side-effect" of the values switching between contacts or
> losing any of the entries entirely, as I described in my initial bug report.
> Seems like that was fixed somewhere between 3.8 and 3.16.

So, by now, I can safely made this bug a duplicate of bug 701990?
This would be good, because folks maintainers have been chasing this for a while.
Comment 5 Stepan Salenikovich 2015-04-27 21:32:58 UTC
Yes, seems that the remaining problem is a duplicate of that bug.
Comment 6 Erick Perez Castellanos 2015-04-27 22:29:10 UTC
It would be good to collect some data of this setup which has the same problem.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 701990 ***
Comment 7 Stepan Salenikovich 2015-04-27 22:50:00 UTC
What kind of info do you need?