After the discontinuation of the Android release, I did briefly use the fork- but the project origin and potential reliability were dubious, and it didn't sit right with me. In the end, I switched...
After the discontinuation of the Android release, I did briefly use the fork- but the project origin and potential reliability were dubious, and it didn't sit right with me. In the end, I switched to simply running syncthing inside Termux. This solution works absolutely fine, and you can access the web interface for full customisation of the service as you can on desktop.
None at all, although I must admit I use a rooted device, and I'm not certain if that is important? All you have to do is drop a bash script into .termux/boot that fetches a wake-lock and then...
None at all, although I must admit I use a rooted device, and I'm not certain if that is important?
All you have to do is drop a bash script into .termux/boot that fetches a wake-lock and then starts Syncthing:
At that point, you can access the Syncthing interface from your browser using the normal HTTP host/port (127.0.0.1:8384).
Remember, if you want Syncthing to handle directories that are outside of the Termux container, you must run termux-setup-storage first. This will setup the mount points so that your user's home directory is accessible inside Termux.
And using wake lock in such a manner doesn't significantly affect battery life? I'm totally going to try this. I actually much prefer this approach to replacing STF with another similar app.
And using wake lock in such a manner doesn't significantly affect battery life?
I'm totally going to try this. I actually much prefer this approach to replacing STF with another similar app.
I suppose that depends on what you count as significant! I've had a look at the battery usage statistics every day for the past four days, before plugging my phone in for the night, and Termux...
I suppose that depends on what you count as significant! I've had a look at the battery usage statistics every day for the past four days, before plugging my phone in for the night, and Termux seems to be using between 3-4% of my battery pretty consistently.
Now, given I'm not traveling a lot currently, and I'm largely on my computer instead of the phone, this is probably a proportionally higher percentage than it would be in day-to-day life for somebody who travels to-and-from an office, for example. I end most days on >50% battery- so take that as you will.
I'm not certain, but I would guess not. Termux has a package manager with a specific build of Syncthing, and you need wakelock capability. If you give it a go, though, I'd love to hear your findings!
I'm not certain, but I would guess not. Termux has a package manager with a specific build of Syncthing, and you need wakelock capability. If you give it a go, though, I'd love to hear your findings!
I use Syncthing-Fork fairly often, but the problem is that they tried to do to much that Syncthing does already, and BasicSync, appears to have basically fixed my grips by just focusing on basic...
I use Syncthing-Fork fairly often, but the problem is that they tried to do to much that Syncthing does already, and BasicSync, appears to have basically fixed my grips by just focusing on basic sync.
Has anyone used BasicSync and can talk to how it affects battery? One of the biggest problems with STF was just how much background usage it used.
After the discontinuation of the Android release, I did briefly use the fork- but the project origin and potential reliability were dubious, and it didn't sit right with me. In the end, I switched to simply running syncthing inside Termux. This solution works absolutely fine, and you can access the web interface for full customisation of the service as you can on desktop.
Why have I never thought of that?
And no issues with Termux being killed as a background task?
None at all, although I must admit I use a rooted device, and I'm not certain if that is important?
All you have to do is drop a bash script into .termux/boot that fetches a wake-lock and then starts Syncthing:
At that point, you can access the Syncthing interface from your browser using the normal HTTP host/port (127.0.0.1:8384).
Remember, if you want Syncthing to handle directories that are outside of the Termux container, you must run termux-setup-storage first. This will setup the mount points so that your user's home directory is accessible inside Termux.
And using wake lock in such a manner doesn't significantly affect battery life?
I'm totally going to try this. I actually much prefer this approach to replacing STF with another similar app.
I suppose that depends on what you count as significant! I've had a look at the battery usage statistics every day for the past four days, before plugging my phone in for the night, and Termux seems to be using between 3-4% of my battery pretty consistently.
Now, given I'm not traveling a lot currently, and I'm largely on my computer instead of the phone, this is probably a proportionally higher percentage than it would be in day-to-day life for somebody who travels to-and-from an office, for example. I end most days on >50% battery- so take that as you will.
This is interesting. Would it work on the stock terminal that comes on Android?
I'm not certain, but I would guess not. Termux has a package manager with a specific build of Syncthing, and you need wakelock capability. If you give it a go, though, I'd love to hear your findings!
I use Syncthing-Fork fairly often, but the problem is that they tried to do to much that Syncthing does already, and BasicSync, appears to have basically fixed my grips by just focusing on basic sync.
Has anyone used BasicSync and can talk to how it affects battery? One of the biggest problems with STF was just how much background usage it used.
I don't notice any substantial battery drain with Syncthing-Fork. Is Basic supposed to be better?
I've been using it for months and haven't had any battery issues. Great app.
I use BasicSync with an E-ink Android tablet (Boox Go 10.3 gen II) and battery draining is pretty normal.