hmmm. i'd suggest not killing any processes. the problem would be if
under normal OS usage, the alarm is not activated. i can't say i
understand exactly how the OS handles alarms, but perhaps forcefully
killing processes interrupts it's workings.
On 10/30/09 4:04 AM, marc wrote:
> jeffrey, how
jeffrey, how did you solve the problem?
i made a own process for the broadcastreceiver (as said in the linked
theme), so i have 2 processes now:
cycle:
1. user starts application
2. user schedules the alarm in the application
current processes:
- application
3. scheduled alarm expires, broadcastr
jeffrey, how did you solve the problem?
i made a own process for the broadcastreceiver (as said in the linked
theme), so i have 2 processes now:
cycle:
1. user starts application
2. user schedules the alarm in the application
current processes:
- application
3. scheduled alarm expires first time,
well, i found this,
http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=2886
works for me now.
On 9/12/09 2:00 PM, Mark Murphy wrote:
Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
mark, "perhaps some sort of service" is a little vague.
Generally speaking, if your manifest-registered Broadcas
Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
> mark, "perhaps some sort of service" is a little vague.
Generally speaking, if your manifest-registered BroadcastReceiver will
be doing things that are short (say, under a second), you won't need one
-- just do all your work in the BroadcastReceiver.
If you are going to
mark, "perhaps some sort of service" is a little vague.
the AM schedules an alarm that calls a receiver that does three things,
1. updates some data that is shared with the activity
2. sends notifications
3. broadcasts back to another receiver that
updates the activity, if it's running (the a
Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
> as i noted i'm using alarm mgr + broadcast receiver. my activity
> schedules the alarm. if the activity is destroyed (off the stack, not
> just in the background), i don't get the alarms.
Correct. As I wrote:
"If you have a running activity, but you want scheduled alarm
as i noted i'm using alarm mgr + broadcast receiver. my activity
schedules the alarm. if the activity is destroyed (off the stack, not
just in the background), i don't get the alarms.
On 9/12/09 1:08 PM, Mark Murphy wrote:
Mark Murphy wrote:
There is no reason to use AlarmManager
Mark Murphy wrote:
> There is no reason to use AlarmManager for an activity, and I would not
> expect AlarmManager to behave very well for an activity.
To clarify: if you have a running activity, and you want the activity to
do things on a periodic basis, either use Timer/TimerTask (like an
ordin
Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
> as far as i can tell, scheduled alarms are only executed if the app that
> scheduled them is active.
That is not true. The code I gave you demonstrates that.
> in your example, you start a service that never quits obviously.
Sure it does. My service inherits from Inte
thanks mark.
as far as i can tell, scheduled alarms are only executed if the app
that scheduled them is active. in your example, you start a service
that never quits obviously. so the app is active forever, in an ideal
world anyway. i suspect you'd see the same behavior if you stopped your
se
Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
> i want to schedule a repeating task. i start my app, and register with
> alarm manager (repeating). all is fine, as long as my app is in memory.
> if i for example press back to remove my app from the stack, i no longer
> receive alarms. same thing if i manually kill the
12 matches
Mail list logo
