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

Re: Is KOrganizer broken only for me?



For anyone who runs into this issue (I"ll update the bug I previously
referenced):

I think there's a problem with the time zone configuration which was
causing the calculation to fail when I selected times which caused
KOrg to default to whole day events. I went into System Settings ->
Regional Settings -> Date & Time and changed the time zone to another
one and back to my locale and the problem *seems* to have gone away.
Even if it doesn't, I think this is where the problem lies.

On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 at 00:58, Borden Rhodes <borden@bordenrhodes.com> wrote:
>
> So it seems that it's not only broken for me. Others are getting the
> same symptoms: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=410167 and it
> seems that they're no closer to figuring it out than I am.
>
> Just in case anybody else runs into this issue.
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 02:10, Borden Rhodes <borden@bordenrhodes.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for looking through the log file.
> >
> > On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 at 21:05, Sandro Knauß <hefee@debian.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > the log file is not very helpful, as this is the Akonadi one. Can you crate the
> > > log file from korganizer?
> >
> > After setting up the .ini file you suggested, I ran
> > $ korganizer &> korg_debug.txt
> >
> > and paste-binned the korg_debug.txt file. So perhaps there are other
> > switches I need to enable to get a proper korganizer dump?
> >
> > > What backend you use to store those events? a local ical file, on a server,
> > > using CalDav? As those backends have very different permission systems.
> >
> > I use an iCal directory resource stored in my home folder as the
> > calendar. The permissions on the folder and all iCal files contained
> > therein is (if my binary's correct 644 - basically read access for all
> > users and write users for me). Should I chown it to 664 or 666? Again,
> > it's been working just fine up until a few weeks ago.
> >
> > With thanks,


Reply to: