iliyantn / websmsdroid

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/websmsdroid
0 stars 0 forks source link

national numbers are not resolved to names #247

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
If the numbers in the phone book does not begin with +49 (for germany), but 
simply in the form 0179112233, SMSDroid sometimes shows the number instead of 
just a name, although this number is assigned to a name.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by miche...@gmail.com on 8 Jun 2010 at 6:07

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
:x

this would unburry the unded zombie issue #200 again

are there any special cahrs in unresolved numbers?
anykind of " /()"?
what makes those number defferent from those resolved propperly?

Original comment by felix.bechstein on 8 Jun 2010 at 6:34

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
The only sonspicuousness was that all these phone numbers began with 016x. No 
special characters so far! Well, i can fix this issue by adding +49 to affected 
phone number. but i will waste a lot of time for this editing more than 200 
numbers.

Original comment by miche...@gmail.com on 8 Jun 2010 at 7:24

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
are all 01xx numbers not resolved as they should?
well. i think this is a duplicate of issue #199 (note to mee)

Original comment by felix.bechstein on 8 Jun 2010 at 4:09

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
no, just some numbers. can discover no system behind it

Original comment by miche...@gmail.com on 8 Jun 2010 at 4:19

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
issue #199 linked some android issues. please check if you are affacted by one 
of these.

Original comment by felix.bechstein on 8 Jun 2010 at 4:24

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Issue 260 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by felix.bechstein on 26 Jun 2010 at 9:27

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
is this still a problem in v0.5.1?

Original comment by felix.bechstein on 6 Jan 2011 at 5:30