992403 - [B2G][Contacts] Contacts with only a phone number appear randomized

Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 993991

(Firefox OS Graveyard :: Gaia::Contacts, defect)

Description

[Rachel Pribble [:rpribble]]

Attachment: TarakoContacts.png

Description:
Contacts that have a number only (no name) appear to be stored in a random order rather than chronological order. Changing the 'sort by last name' option has no effect on number-only contacts.

Repro Steps:
1) Update a Tarako to BuildID: 20140404004001
2) Tap the contacts icon
3) Import or create multiple contacts with a phone number only
4) Observe the contacts displayed in no apparent order

Actual:
Contacts with a number only appear to be displayed in random order.

Expected:
Contacts with numbers only are displayed in chronological order in the same manner as contacts with names.

v1.3T Environmental Variables:
Device: Tarako v1.3T MOZ ril
BuildID: 20140404004001
Gaia: acd18bbd94ebfa534e252a24a75a0617e4b5d5ae
Gecko: 91a1b54da4a6
Version: 28.1
Firmware Version: sp8810

Notes:

Repro frequency: 100%
See attached: Screenshots

Comment 1

[Rachel Pribble [:rpribble]]

Attachment: BuriContacts.png

This issue does not occur on the Buri v1.3 MOZ ril.

Environmental Variables:
Device: Buri v1.3 MOZ ril
BuildID: 20140404000202
Gaia: b4f3b84ec68233a99fd5865c15cfe28aebe26531
Gecko: 3186bbc50050
Version: 30.0a2
Firmware Version: v1.2-device.cfg

Contacts appear sorted by number from low to high.

Comment 2

[Rachel Pribble [:rpribble]]

Attachment: Logcat.txt

Comment 3

[Rachel Pribble [:rpribble]]

Attachment: ContactsDmesg.txt

Comment 4

[Jason Smith [:jsmith]]

Does this happen on 1.4?

Comment 5

[Ross Kuhlman ([e-mail])]

Issue does not occur in v1.4

v1.4 Environmental Variables:
Device: Buri v1.4 MOZ
BuildID: 20140408000202
Gaia: 26983f356ecb1bcf30e862d334b5de790071803e
Gecko: 70b076fc7558
Version: 30.0a2
Firmware Version: v1.2-device.cfg

Comment 6

[Germán Toro del Valle (:gtorodelvalle)]

Hi rpribble, as a way to try to narrow down the issue, would you be so kind to try the following to check the outcome using the Tarako device?

1. Delete all you contacts :-)
2. Open the Contacts app.
3. Create a contact assigning it only the phone number 1.
4. Create a contact assigning it only the phone number 2.
5. Create a contact assigning it only the phone number 3.
6. Create a contact assigning it only the phone number 4.
7. Create a contact assigning it only the phone number 5.
8. Check if the ordering of the contacts is the correct one.
9. Close the Contacts app.
10. Open the Contacts app.
11. Check if the ordering of the contacts is the correct one.

If you want to increase the number of created contacts, it is fine ;-)

Looking forward for the results :-) Thanks!

BTW, did you import (I guess you did :-) ) or created the contacts to get the observed results in the Tarako (attachment 8402056 [details]) and the Buri (attachment 8402057 [details])? Would it be possible to have those contacts so I can try it out in my device? Thanks again!

Comment 7

[Germán Toro del Valle (:gtorodelvalle)]

Setting the need-info regarding comment 6 ;-)

Comment 8

[Jason Smith [:jsmith]]

I get the feeling that this is reproducing on 1.3. Can we please check this?

Comment 9

[Rachel Pribble [:rpribble]]

Attachment: TarakoContacts.png

Hi Germán, all contacts used for the original images were entered manually with only the phone number showing assigned (they have since been wiped after flashing or I would attach them for you, apologies!).
Following the steps you listed, manually entered contacts that are assigned only the phone numbers 1 through 6 appear organized in the correct order (increasing numerical). When contacts with 10 digit phone numbers assigned are manually entered as well, they do not appear to follow the same order (see TarakoContacts attachment).

Environmental Variables:
Device: Tarako v1.3T MOZ ril
BuildID: 20140409004001
Gaia: 643f3e6676cbb89c62708a9f7cbef2edc795a552
Gecko: e757fdd55426
Version: 28.1
Firmware Version: sp8810

Jsmith, I had originally checked this on v1.3, but not through the new steps listed by Germán.
Leaving qawanted request for the issue to be retested on v1.3 with the new steps on another device.

Comment 10

[Germán Toro del Valle (:gtorodelvalle)]

OK, great! That helped ;-) I get the same order when trying it on my Hamachi device and Gaia master... Which is fine since it does not seem to be a Tarako device issue :-)

In fact, I guess you are getting that order after closing and restarting the Contacts app, right? I mean, if you create the 1, 2, 3 and then 2345678901, you'll get the last one located in the third place (after the 2) but after restarting the app it appears the last, right? In that case, I would definitely support setting this bug as a duplicate of bug 993991.

What do you think, Rachel?

Comment 11

[Jason Smith [:jsmith]]

(In reply to Germán Toro del Valle from comment #10)
> OK, great! That helped ;-) I get the same order when trying it on my Hamachi
> device and Gaia master... Which is fine since it does not seem to be a
> Tarako device issue :-)
> 
> In fact, I guess you are getting that order after closing and restarting the
> Contacts app, right? I mean, if you create the 1, 2, 3 and then 2345678901,
> you'll get the last one located in the third place (after the 2) but after
> restarting the app it appears the last, right? In that case, I would
> definitely support setting this bug as a duplicate of bug 993991.
> 
> What do you think, Rachel?

I don't think we can safely claim that these bugs are the same unless this bug reproduces on 1.3 as well. Let's wait for qawanted to come back here on testing.

Comment 12

[Chris Kreinbring [:CKreinbring]]

Using the steps in comment 6, I was unable to repro on Buri 1.3 mozilla RIL.  All of the numbers are shown in order, even the 10 digit numbers that I added afterwards.

Build ID: 20140414004002
Gecko: https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-b2g28_v1_3/rev/3e26908fca71
Gaia: 8b92c56267fe50772095f1f25d6cc1f9c9966eb4
Platform Version: 28.0
Firmware Version: V1.2-device.cfg

Comment 13

[Germán Toro del Valle (:gtorodelvalle)]

Hi ckreinbring, we need to test the steps mentioned in comment 10. In fact I just did test it in v1.3 and it does reproduce :-) I would definitely vote for setting this bug as a duplicate of bug 993991. If not, we may need a more concrete STR (concrete data in fact) for the present bug to isolate and deal with it, please :-) What do you think Jason?