I've tested the scenario where a service crosses paths with an app, i.e. both request location provider updates following different levels of location provider availability, as requested by zero and non-zero values of minTime.
The mapping of location provider requests appears such that the process with the "highest" level of GPS receiver availability trumps everything else, for the benefit of the process that operates with minTime values>0. In other words, a foreground app receives and keeps at a mimimum the location provider settings it requested. Or a "better" level yet, if the service keeps the location provider running (through minTime=0). This aspect looks "clean" after all, good. On Oct 24, 10:10 am, JP <joachim.pfeif...@gmail.com> wrote: > Intentionally, sure. But this is a *side effect*. > > On Oct 24, 9:41 am, Christine <christine.kar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > You can choke the foreground app anyway, if you want to. But you don't > > - I guess. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
