Reply
Thread Tools
Moderator | Posts: 5,320 | Thanked: 4,464 times | Joined on Oct 2009
#911
Originally Posted by jalyst View Post
Re the new battery level condition for this issue, anyone know if it's a common issue?
I don't think I've ever seen it*, trying to decide whether I'd really benefit from creating a rule using this new condition.

*it's probably been right in front of my eyes countless times >.>
Yeah I guess it can't hurt setting it up even if I'm not getting the issue, it's only ever going to be triggered if the conditions are right, & I don't see it being caught in some kind of infinite loop.

Last edited by jalyst; 2012-11-28 at 12:10.
 
Moderator | Posts: 6,215 | Thanked: 6,400 times | Joined on Nov 2011
#912
Originally Posted by jalyst View Post
Yeah I guess it can't hurt setting it up even if I'm not getting the issue, it's only ever going to be triggered if the conditions are right, & I don't see it being caught in some kind of infinite loop.
If you never had it your n9 is a real unicorn

Seriously, this is like the most common issue everyone has; some just don't realise it (you may be one of them), some wonder what happened while others think this may be a hidden feature
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to thedead1440 For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,313 | Thanked: 2,977 times | Joined on Jun 2011 @ Finland
#913
Originally Posted by jalyst View Post
Yeah I guess it can't hurt setting it up even if I'm not getting the issue, it's only ever going to be triggered if the conditions are right, & I don't see it being caught in some kind of infinite loop.
Frankly I wouldn't set it up if I wasn't getting it. It's just an unnecessary rule then.

And when battery level goes that down, you wouldn't want to put extra strain to battery - which I'd imagine running a shell script and especially restarting a system level service will inevitably do.
__________________
My N9/N950 projects:
 

The Following User Says Thank You to ajalkane For This Useful Post:
Posts: 198 | Thanked: 130 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ Pakistan
#914
@ajalkane

Don't forget to add "Profile for Specific Caller/Contact" in the next version
 
Posts: 1,313 | Thanked: 2,977 times | Joined on Jun 2011 @ Finland
#915
Originally Posted by khan.orak View Post
@ajalkane

Don't forget to add "Profile for Specific Caller/Contact" in the next version
Don't hold your breath . Unless someone else wants to implement it, I doubt i have time to look into it until a couple versions forward.

But I do hope to implement it eventually. The best time estimate when I can look into it is next spring.

Just a one man free-time project, sorry!
__________________
My N9/N950 projects:
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ajalkane For This Useful Post:
Moderator | Posts: 5,320 | Thanked: 4,464 times | Joined on Oct 2009
#916
Re-posting as original post was de-fragmented mess, apologies for any inconvenience caused, just my OCD kicking-in

Originally Posted by jalyst View Post
LOL, I just realised this is probably redundant for my use anyway, as I'm not using profilematic in the same way as the person who reported problems is.
For me when internet connection is lost or disabled, status already automatically goes to offline for those services...
One thing I noticed; when I set to Flight-Mode, if I stay in Flight-Mode but connect to WiFi, Skype/GTalk/FB etc doesn't auto-login & switch to online/available.
(when I created the rule I made sure I enabled "restore previous availability") Perhaps the new rule is causing the issue here? I need some sleep :-/

*UPDATE* Nope def. not the rule, as I disabled it and the same thing occurred....
*UPDATE2* Disabling flight-mode & staying connected via WiFi or just connecting to the net (via any means) without FM beforehand sill results in the same thing.
*UPDATE3*
I've realised what may have happened here, the rule I created has set availability to offline permanently, I needed to create a corresponding (default) rule saying:
When there's any connection to the net, set availability to online/available etc (but as already mentioned the rule is prob. redundant for me, so I'll forget about both)
So yeah, this one was a big bag of wasted time... Gotta stop playing with these things in the wee hours of the morn >.>

Originally Posted by thedead1440 View Post
If you never had it your n9 is a real unicorn
Seriously, this is like the most common issue everyone has; some just don't realise it (you may be one of them), some wonder what happened while others think this may be a hidden feature
I guess the reason why I've never really noticed, is that the way I usually monitor battery level/status, is by looking at the status bar (& ofc notifications one gets).
Which doesn't tell you much at all in the stock configuration...
I've just come off a fresh full recharge, I'll try to be more diligent about spotting it this time, I'll go into settings -> device -> battery sporadically to check %.

Originally Posted by ajalkane View Post
Frankly I wouldn't set it up if I wasn't getting it. It's just an unnecessary rule then.
And when battery level goes that down, you wouldn't want to put extra strain to battery - which I'd imagine running a shell script and especially restarting a system level service will inevitably do.
Good point, it's only the false reporting of a level which is much higher typically, & as it's never really bothered me (never even noticed from what I recall), I guess there's less need to correct it.

Last edited by jalyst; 2012-11-28 at 18:40.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to jalyst For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,313 | Thanked: 2,977 times | Joined on Jun 2011 @ Finland
#917
Originally Posted by ajalkane View Post
Battery suddenly dropped to 4%. BME restarted. But after BME was restarted, battery level was 5%. So pretty much immediately it dropped to 4% and another restart was issued. After that battery level was over 10%. Then all kinds of funny stuff happened. It gradually dropped to 6%, from where it started to grow and quite soon reached 12% (I guess in under 5 minutes). There the battery level was stable, and I got a few hours of normal usage of phone (ie. mostly idle).
Today when phone reached 4%, restarting BME did not restore the battery level. I had to manually launch the custom once more and it was restored to 10%.

I don't know what's up with that. Would setting the limit to 8% help with that? Maybe I'll try that.
__________________
My N9/N950 projects:
 

The Following User Says Thank You to ajalkane For This Useful Post:
knobtviker's Avatar
Posts: 665 | Thanked: 2,388 times | Joined on Feb 2012 @ Zagreb, Croatia
#918
Backup of rules would be nice if possible. I have them in place and when I flash I need to set them manually again.
Export/Import rules?
 
Posts: 1,313 | Thanked: 2,977 times | Joined on Jun 2011 @ Finland
#919
Originally Posted by knobtviker View Post
Backup of rules would be nice if possible. I have them in place and when I flash I need to set them manually again.
Export/Import rules?
In the meantime N9QuickTweak has ProfileMatic rule backup .
__________________
My N9/N950 projects:
 

The Following User Says Thank You to ajalkane For This Useful Post:
bibek's Avatar
Posts: 368 | Thanked: 826 times | Joined on May 2012 @ India
#920
Any idea why this custom action has no effect at all? Am I doing something wrong?

rm home/user/.cache/data/twitter/twcache*
 
Reply


 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:44.