[Top][All Lists]

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

Some Nokia 3410 (and general) issues

From: Bertrik Sikken
Subject: Some Nokia 3410 (and general) issues
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:04:40 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020826

Hi all,

I'd like to work on Nokia 3410 support and I have a couple
of questions/issues. I sent these to Pawel Kot and he's
helping me with some of them (thanks!) but perhaps the
mailing list is also a good place to discuss these.

Here they are:

1) I tried enabling the netmonitor for the 3410 by adding the PM_NETMONITOR
bit for the 3410 in misc.c. Netmonitor seems to work perfectly fine with
the 3410, both on the phone and in the xgnokii dialog.

2) I also tried enabling the calendar. This works only partially.
It shows the stuff that is in the "reminders" menu on the phone.
The 3410 seems to use a slightly different format, the date is bogus
(2092 instead of 2002), alarm date/time is correct, the text has an
extra 0x01 character in front of it.
I have a log of this.

3) I think it would be nice to get the network status using the
gnokii commandline interface. The GOP call is apparently already
there, so this would not be very hard to implement I think.

4) And what about getting info about the simlocks?
I tried command 0x40/0x8A and it actually seemed to return some
useful info. I have a log of this.

5) Downloading the operator logo in xgnokii doesn't seem to work.
(I set a logo previously using some Windows software, so I'm sure
there is a logo present). I do see a block of data coming back
from the phone, but it does not show up in the logo dialog.

6) I can't seem to move the xgnokii main window.
I'm running KDE 3 (the rpm that came with Mandrake 9.0)

7) What would be the best way to develop for the 3410?
Apparently it is mostly compatible with the 6100, but not completely.
Would it be a good idea to start a nk3410.c file and somehow
inherit all compatible functions from nk6100.c and make new
implementations for the functions that are not compatible?

Kind regards,
Bertrik Sikken

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]