Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
E32User-CBase 47:
"This panic is raised by the Error() virtual member function of an active
scheduler,
a CActiveScheduler. This function is called when an active object’s RunL()
function
leaves. Applications always replace the Error() function in a class derived
from
CActiveScheduler; the default behaviour provided by CActiveScheduler raises
this
panic."
A quick fix could be to simply not allow the radio to start if the Music Player
is
playing. And as issue 123 is tricky to fix, it would sort that too. Thoughts?
Of course, the panic should still be fixed. It would still occur when playing
audio
that doesn't get scrobbled by Mobbler, like mp3s shorter than 30 seconds or
with
missing artist tags.
Original comment by hugovk@gmail.com
on 12 Feb 2009 at 8:49
Ain't this the same issue I complained a month ago? Read issue 235 for more
Original comment by gece.bekcisi@uniturk.net
on 12 Feb 2009 at 3:57
Now I re-read issue 235, it does indeed sound the same bug. The discussion on
that
issue went on further about how to make Mobbler control the Music Player more
fully
and it got turned into an enhancement.
Let's keep this issue to deal with the bug, and issue 235 to deal with the
enhancements discussed in detail there.
Thanks for pointing it out!
Original comment by hugovk@gmail.com
on 12 Feb 2009 at 4:39
I thought that if you implement RunError on an active object then you shouldn't
get
this. Perhaps this has been done incorrectly or I am wrong about this.
Shouldn't be
too difficult to fix.
Yes, I think that we should stop radio if you start the music player and not
allow
radio to be started if the music player is playing. This is to stop things
like this
and stop stop the scrobbling functionality from getting confused.
Original comment by eartle@gmail.com
on 12 Feb 2009 at 7:06
> "I think that we should stop radio if you start the music player and not allow
radio to be started if the music player is playing"
This has been fixed in issue 123.
Panic still to be fixed in this issue.
Original comment by hugovk@gmail.com
on 19 Feb 2009 at 1:55
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
hugovk@gmail.com
on 12 Feb 2009 at 8:43