Page 12 of 26 FirstFirst ... 2789101112131415161722 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 517
  1. #221  
    Quote Originally Posted by RexxD View Post
    Did you have to do a full or partial erase also?
    No -- Just the doctor. tried the emergency patch remove several times but it did not work. Also tried the repair utility. The only thing that I got to work was the doctor.
    Laissez Faire
  2.    #222  
    Quote Originally Posted by egaudet View Post
    Patch creators are not responsible for installation and removal problems. It is the job of AUPT to keep all patch installs/removals done properly. Try to remove all other app-launcher patches and then reinstall this one. If you get errors post your exact webos-patches.log file installation message into one of the AUPT threads.
    I hate that this might sounds like a cop-out, but my answer to pretty much every problem in this thread is the following:

    Remove all your patches, even using the webOS Doctor if you have to. Install this patch. Then, try installing your other patches one-by-one and see which one has a problem. There is no way I can possibly know what went wrong on your particular device - not even posting screenshots of error messages listing failed patch hunks will tell me that.

    This is not a problem particular to my patch - it's a problem with all patches that touch the same functionality.

    Personally, I still use quilt to manage all my patches - because that makes it easiest for me to develop patches. However, no one but developers and crazies should be using quilt - because AUPT should help resolve the issues with patches not getting installed/uninstalled properly.

    However, since I don't use PreWare / WOSQI / AUPT to manage patches myself, I have no particular advice beyond (again) removing all patches and trying them one at a time.

    And, in the end, there will always be conflicts between patches. There are only so many ways to shoehorn changes into the code that doesn't upset the reference points for other patches. Some patches just won't play nice with this one, and I'm not likely to build endless custom versions to make that happen for patches I don't use. I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader.
    Last edited by lmorchard; 02/24/2010 at 03:59 PM.
    l.m.orchard
    {web,mad,computer} scientist
    http://decafbad.com/
  3. #223  
    Sorry to say this, these are just my user-specific experience and my personal opinions, maybe wrong, surely not enough.

    but...i don't think that doctoring should be a normal practice. I don't mean that it may ruin our little pres, just that it should be emergency operation, not routine to get rid of a patch...there should be a way to work out where the problem resides in the code the patch touches and this is something the developer knows better than most of patch users, i guess. nobody says that every single user-specific patch request should be satisfied, but when a user is in need of help there should in a first step be more than just doctoring.
    still, i'd like to say that maybe a little addition should be put in the patch description saying that there are possible incompatibilities that may require to doctor the phone to get rid of the patch...just that one is aware,cause not all the patches seem to have the same level of incompatibility or problems.
  4.    #224  
    Quote Originally Posted by memfel View Post
    Sorry to say this, these are just my user-specific experience and my personal opinions, maybe wrong, surely not enough.

    but...i don't think that doctoring should be a normal practice. I don't mean that it may ruin our little pres, just that it should be emergency operation, not routine to get rid of a patch...
    Well, by the same token, patching isn't a normal practice either. That is: webOS wasn't designed to support this; it's what's called a hack. Luckily, it's a good one that happens to work exceedingly well, but it has limits.

    Quote Originally Posted by memfel View Post
    there should be a way to work out where the problem resides in the code the patch touches and this is something the developer knows better than most of patch users, i guess.
    And, as a developer, what I'm saying is that there's no way to work out where the problem resides - at least not in the general case. It's a new problem every time, and gets worse when patches want to touch the same regions of code.

    Quote Originally Posted by memfel View Post
    nobody says that every single user-specific patch request should be satisfied, but when a user is in need of help there should in a first step be more than just doctoring.
    The first step is to remove all your patches, followed by adding them again one-by-one to track down the problem in your particular case. Hopefully that doesn't require doctoring, but in some cases it does. Ideally, things like AUPT makes those cases few to none.

    It might be nice if there were a conflict-discovery tool that did the removal / application of different permutations of patches automatically - but that's probably more trouble than it's worth.

    Quote Originally Posted by memfel View Post
    still, i'd like to say that maybe a little addition should be put in the patch description saying that there are possible incompatibilities that may require to doctor the phone to get rid of the patch...just that one is aware,cause not all the patches seem to have the same level of incompatibility or problems.
    It would be nice if there were some way to track incompatibilities between patches in Preware, say. Beyond that, this thread is your best bet.

    Oddly enough, even though I made this patch, I'm least knowledgeable about incompatibilities - because it's always worked in combination with the set of patches I use, and I haven't spent time testing it with any other combinations.

    Crazy heroes like dBsooner, who has installed over 141 patches at once, are the kind of people who would know better than me. And that's why we have an AUPT now, and future improvements on the way.

    Me, I'm just a part-time webOS hacker who wanders away from the forums for weeks at a time. You don't want to depend on me for help
    Last edited by lmorchard; 02/25/2010 at 03:05 PM.
    l.m.orchard
    {web,mad,computer} scientist
    http://decafbad.com/
  5. #225  
    Apart from all the technical stuff u were talking about, that was interesting to read, i still believe that when u see in this thread that not one but more people have a problem with a patch u made, then it'd be good to signal in the patch description that doctoring may be necessary to remove the patch.
    For my experience this is the only patch i had this kind of problem with. For other patches i may have had incompatibility issues, implying the patch wouldn't install. but if installed then always removing was a non problem. For this patch, after adding it i was already unable to remove it, even without messing it with the install of other patches afterwords. The only way to solve is doctoring...cause the patch won't remove even if all the rest is removed...weird, but true.
    For the rest it is self-evident that it's better to solve any eventual problem looking somewhere else, but thx for the clarification!
  6. cwgtex's Avatar
    Posts
    608 Posts
    Global Posts
    609 Global Posts
    #226  
    Quote Originally Posted by memfel View Post
    Sorry to say this, these are just my user-specific experience and my personal opinions, maybe wrong, surely not enough.

    but...i don't think that doctoring should be a normal practice. I don't mean that it may ruin our little pres, just that it should be emergency operation, not routine to get rid of a patch...there should be a way to work out where the problem resides in the code the patch touches and this is something the developer knows better than most of patch users, i guess. nobody says that every single user-specific patch request should be satisfied, but when a user is in need of help there should in a first step be more than just doctoring.
    still, i'd like to say that maybe a little addition should be put in the patch description saying that there are possible incompatibilities that may require to doctor the phone to get rid of the patch...just that one is aware,cause not all the patches seem to have the same level of incompatibility or problems.
    Patch developers owe you nothing. You don't pay for patches, they are 100% free, and 100% AT YOUR OWN RISK. Remember the saying you get what you pay for?

    That said, we (patch developers) will try to help you, but when it is convenient for us, because we have lives. Don't like it? Learn html, css, and javascript and manually edit all your own files.

    Nobody gets paid to make patches; its more like our hobby. Me personally, I work at least 11 hours a day, M-F and sometimes on the weekends. I get paid monthly with no overtime. My spare time is limited and very valuable to me. Be grateful for any and all free support you get, even if that support is "just doctor it". Honestly, many times that is the quickest and simplest way to fix the problem.

    Sorry for the bluntness, that's just the way it is.
  7. #227  
    I am sorry, but it seems i am not able to explain my point. I have full respect and gratitude for the time any developer put in his work. I value my work and my time, so why shouldn't i value urs?

    I didn't said that a developer owes me smth. I still think i can say without any offense, that some developers are more helpful, some other apparently are less.I don't ask for a customer service 24/7, neither a 0/0. I arrange it on my own whenever I can try with my own resources.
    Simply, I think, most of the times support in case of any problem is what we find here in the forums with the developers, and this is as valuable as the development of a patch, and u surely know it. I think that getting to know the problems is a valuable resource also for one who develops.

    This said, it's easy to doctor, fast and good for me, but the only thing i am asking since the beginning is to put a line more in the patch description to say it can require doctoring for potential incompatibilities or complete removal.
    If i am the only one who had this problem just with this patch and with no other patch i tried (i had some 30 installed) then my request is unvaluable. If i am right and this patch has bit more of incompatibilities than the others, then it's just a line more in the description that would be good to have. maybe I was just lucky till here with all the other patches.
  8. #228  
    Quote Originally Posted by memfel View Post
    This said, it's easy to doctor, fast and good for me, but the only thing i am asking since the beginning is to put a line more in the patch description to say it can require doctoring for potential incompatibilities or complete removal.
    There are no incompatibilities that require a potential doctor that a patch creator should ever have to worry about. A patch creator ensures it applies and removes from STOCK webos files and tests the functionality. That is where their responsbility ends.

    The only issues that require extra intervention (EPR, not doctor) were due to an aupt-2 bug. only patches that had a combination of created files as well as webos file modifications showed an issue upon removal. This was a bug that is my fault and all patches were rebuilt and version bumped with the fixed aupt-3.

    If i am the only one who had this problem just with this patch and with no other patch i tried (i had some 30 installed) then my request is unvaluable. If i am right and this patch has bit more of incompatibilities than the others, then it's just a line more in the description that would be good to have. maybe I was just lucky till here with all the other patches.
    ALL installation and removal issues are AUPT responsiblity not the patch creator. There is nothing wrong with this patch that I would even request a note in the description for. Patch creators should NOT, in general, be finding what patches they are compatible with and putting notes in the description.

    Each patch is its own entity. AUPT is the installation/removal system that makes patches -somewhat- safe and usable by users. Patching was created for kernel development, and it will never be anything but ugly.

    Now if there are patches that have compatibility issues, the userbase can always bring it to the attention of the patch creators and ASK for it to be looked into.

    However there are no known issues that require a doctor because of a specific patch. The only special case was the hide vendors patch which was a bug, again by me, in the re-generation of the patch. If there are installation or removal issues that require a doctor please report them in the AUPT thread.

    -Eric G

    WebOS Internals Developer.
    Follow me on Twitter for updates to my projects: | Virtual Keyboard | wIRC | SuperTux | AUPT | KeyBoss | freeTether |

    Donate
  9. #229  
    My words are used to say something I even don't think about, so I think it's better to leave it here, we won't go anywhere than simply generating more misunderstanding, and I value this website and all the resources on here too much.
    Thanks anyway.
  10. #230  
    Can't wait for the 1.4 update for this patch!
  11. #231  
    Quote Originally Posted by BozackJenkins View Post
    Can't wait for the 1.4 update for this patch!
    Yes, its one of my favorites.
    Laissez Faire
  12. #232  
    i got the patch
    no update for this yet?
    i had it installed previousiously (aupt-3)
    so just need an update for it to work again right?
  13.    #233  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jupiter600 View Post
    i got the patch
    no update for this yet?
    i had it installed previousiously (aupt-3)
    so just need an update for it to work again right?
    No, no update yet: I got 1.4 at the same time as everyone else, so it'll get updated as soon as I get a chance to adjust it for the changes between OS versions. Feel free to fix it for me if you have a chance.
    l.m.orchard
    {web,mad,computer} scientist
    http://decafbad.com/
  14.    #234  
    Quote Originally Posted by lmorchard View Post
    No, no update yet: I got 1.4 at the same time as everyone else, so it'll get updated as soon as I get a chance to adjust it for the changes between OS versions. Feel free to fix it for me if you have a chance.
    Okay, so I think I've got the patch working for 1.4, but I've only spent about 10 minutes playing with it so far. Anyone feeling adventurous can install it from the attachment on first post of this thread. After I've had a chance to try it out for a day or two, I'll try submitting it to Preware.
    l.m.orchard
    {web,mad,computer} scientist
    http://decafbad.com/
  15. #235  
    I just tried version 8. I don't see the names, but I am using 4x4v3. Are they compatible with each other?
  16. #236  
    I have a weird one. I am getting ready for the 1.4 update to hit Bell customers, and in preparation I removed a few things that I knew I would have to before applying the update.

    They are:

    - Web browser ad-blocker installed by WebOS Quick Install
    - Youtube video download installed by WebOS Quick Install
    - iPhone user agent spoof installed by WebOS Quick Install
    - 600 MHz patch using luna600patch.sh
    - Auto-enable IP Forwarding In Mobile Hotspot installed by WebOS Quick Install (uninstalled using Preware)

    Now, when I load the launcher (with your patch), I only see 7 of the 10 launcher pages I created, and only a few of the apps on page 7. Any ideas what is going on? I have not updated the OS as it hasn't hit Canada yet.
  17. #237  
    Quote Originally Posted by lmorchard View Post
    Okay, so I think I've got the patch working for 1.4, but I've only spent about 10 minutes playing with it so far. Anyone feeling adventurous can install it from the attachment on first post of this thread. After I've had a chance to try it out for a day or two, I'll try submitting it to Preware.
    Error installing it.
    Laissez Faire
  18. #238  
    Why isn't the newest patch using the style from v6?
  19. Trajadoja's Avatar
    Posts
    21 Posts
    Global Posts
    36 Global Posts
    #239  
    Quote Originally Posted by lmorchard View Post
    Okay, so I think I've got the patch working for 1.4, but I've only spent about 10 minutes playing with it so far. Anyone feeling adventurous can install it from the attachment on first post of this thread. After I've had a chance to try it out for a day or two, I'll try submitting it to Preware.
    Hey l.m.orchard - No workie for me. Error installing. I look forward to the next attempt.
  20. #240  
    Version 8 doesn't install on my Pre. Here's what i get in the log:
    Code:
    ------------------------------------------------------
    PATCH INSTALLATION Sat Feb 27 15:20:15 PST 2010
    ------------------------------------------------------
    /media/cryptofs/apps/usr/palm/applications/ca.canucksoftware.patches.app-launcher-named-pages-v8/app-launcher-named-pages-v8.patch
    
    ----------------------------------
    Dry run patch attempt...
    ----------------------------------
    patching file usr/lib/luna/system/luna-applauncher/app/controllers/app-info-assistant.jsjsjs
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$controllers$/$global$-$search$-$assistant$.$js$
    $Hunk$ #$1$ $succeeded$ $at$ $265$ ($offset$ $2$ $lines$).
    $Hunk$ #$2$ $succeeded$ $at$ $285$ ($offset$ $2$ $lines$).
    $Hunk$ #$3$ $succeeded$ $at$ $306$ ($offset$ $2$ $lines$).
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$controllers$/$launcher$-$assistant$.$js$
    $Hunk$ #$4$ $succeeded$ $at$ $248$ ($offset$ -$2$ $lines$).
    $Hunk$ #$5$ $succeeded$ $at$ $315$ ($offset$ -$2$ $lines$).
    $Hunk$ #$6$ $succeeded$ $at$ $605$ ($offset$ -$2$ $lines$).
    $Hunk$ #$7$ $succeeded$ $at$ $679$ ($offset$ -$2$ $lines$).
    $Hunk$ #$8$ $succeeded$ $at$ $790$ ($offset$ -$2$ $lines$).
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$views$/$launcher$/$dialogs$/$app$-$info$.$html$
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$views$/$launcher$/$launcher$-$scene$.$html$
    $Hunk$ #$1$ $FAILED$ $at$ $18$.
    $1$ $out$ $of$ $1$ $hunk$ $FAILED$ -- $saving$ $rejects$ $to$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$views$/$launcher$/$launcher$-$scene$.$html$.$rej$
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$sources$.$json$
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$stylesheets$/$launcher$.$css$
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$controllers$/$rename$-$page$-$assistant$.$js$
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$views$/$launcher$/$dialogs$/$rename$-$page$.$html$
    
    ----------------------------------
    $dry$ $run$ $failed$, $checking$ $if$ -$R$ $would$ $succeed$
    ----------------------------------
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$controllers$/$app$-$info$-$assistant$.$js$
    $Unreversed$ $patch$ $detected$!  $Ignore$ -$R$? [$n$] 
    $Apply$ $anyway$? [$n$] 
    $Skipping$ $patch$.
    $3$ $out$ $of$ $3$ $hunks$ $ignored$ -- $saving$ $rejects$ $to$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$controllers$/$app$-$info$-$assistant$.$js$.$rej$
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$controllers$/$global$-$search$-$assistant$.$js$
    $Unreversed$ $patch$ $detected$!  $Ignore$ -$R$? [$n$] 
    $Apply$ $anyway$? [$n$] 
    $Skipping$ $patch$.
    $3$ $out$ $of$ $3$ $hunks$ $ignored$ -- $saving$ $rejects$ $to$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$controllers$/$global$-$search$-$assistant$.$js$.$rej$
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$controllers$/$launcher$-$assistant$.$js$
    $Unreversed$ $patch$ $detected$!  $Ignore$ -$R$? [$n$] 
    $Apply$ $anyway$? [$n$] 
    $Skipping$ $patch$.
    $8$ $out$ $of$ $8$ $hunks$ $ignored$ -- $saving$ $rejects$ $to$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$controllers$/$launcher$-$assistant$.$js$.$rej$
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$views$/$launcher$/$dialogs$/$app$-$info$.$html$
    $Unreversed$ $patch$ $detected$!  $Ignore$ -$R$? [$n$] 
    $Apply$ $anyway$? [$n$] 
    $Skipping$ $patch$.
    $1$ $out$ $of$ $1$ $hunk$ $ignored$ -- $saving$ $rejects$ $to$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$views$/$launcher$/$dialogs$/$app$-$info$.$html$.$rej$
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$views$/$launcher$/$launcher$-$scene$.$html$
    $Hunk$ #$1$ $FAILED$ $at$ $18$.
    $1$ $out$ $of$ $1$ $hunk$ $FAILED$ -- $saving$ $rejects$ $to$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$views$/$launcher$/$launcher$-$scene$.$html$.$rej$
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$sources$.$json$
    $Unreversed$ $patch$ $detected$!  $Ignore$ -$R$? [$n$] 
    $Apply$ $anyway$? [$n$] 
    $Skipping$ $patch$.
    $1$ $out$ $of$ $1$ $hunk$ $ignored$ -- $saving$ $rejects$ $to$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$sources$.$json$.$rej$
    $patching$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$stylesheets$/$launcher$.$css$
    $Unreversed$ $patch$ $detected$!  $Ignore$ -$R$? [$n$] 
    $Apply$ $anyway$? [$n$] 
    $Skipping$ $patch$.
    $3$ $out$ $of$ $3$ $hunks$ $ignored$ -- $saving$ $rejects$ $to$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$stylesheets$/$launcher$.$css$.$rej$
    $The$ $next$ $patch$, $when$ $reversed$, $would$ $delete$ $the$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$controllers$/$rename$-$page$-$assistant$.$js$,
    $which$ $does$ $not$ $exist$!  $Ignore$ -$R$? [$n$] 
    $Apply$ $anyway$? [$n$] 
    $Skipping$ $patch$.
    $1$ $out$ $of$ $1$ $hunk$ $ignored$
    $The$ $next$ $patch$, $when$ $reversed$, $would$ $delete$ $the$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$views$/$launcher$/$dialogs$/$rename$-$page$.$html$,
    $which$ $does$ $not$ $exist$!  $Ignore$ -$R$? [$n$] 
    $Apply$ $anyway$? [$n$] 
    $Skipping$ $patch$.
    $1$ $out$ $of$ $1$ $hunk$ $ignored$
    
    ----------------------------------
    $Installation$ $FAILED$!
    ----------------------------------
    $1$ $out$ $of$ $1$ $hunk$ $FAILED$ -- $saving$ $rejects$ $to$ $file$ $usr$/$lib$/$luna$/$system$/$luna$-$applauncher$/$app$/$views$/$launcher$/$launcher$-$scene$.$html$.$rej$
    $ls$ -$R$ /$media$/$cryptofs$/$apps$/$usr$/$palm$/$applications$/$ca$.$canucksoftware$.$patches$.$app$-$launcher$-$named$-$pages$-$v8$
    /$media$/$cryptofs$/$apps$/$usr$/$palm$/$applications$/$ca$.$canucksoftware$.$patches$.$app$-$launcher$-$named$-$pages$-$v8$:
    $app$-$launcher$-$named$-$pages$-$v8$.$patch$
    $package_list$
    *** $FAILED$ ***

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions