İOS 26 beta battery %1

Are you able to reproduce the issue using this sample code: Customizing your app’s navigation bar on iPadOS 26 (23A341)? If you are not able to reproduce the issue, please apply the learnings from the sample code to your project. If you're able to reproduce the issue using that sample, please share a test project that reproduces the issue and I'd be happy to look into the issue.

This behavior looks like a bug and is unexpected when using our application. I could argue either side of this issue. There's a hierarchy in place that prioritizes different identification/blocking data sources, with the users own contact configuration being considered the most authoritative. I believe the contact entry would always have overriden an external blocking entry, so the change here is really about giving the outgoing recents call higher authority. Was this a planned callkit change in iOS 26? Yes and no. I'm not sure there was a formal decision that this was a particular case we should handle differently, however, adding support for LiveCaller ID involved large scale changes throughout this area. Part of that process involved reviewing all of our data sources and that review is what changed the behavior here. Is it possible to get the correct call blocking behavior back? I don't know. Please file a bug on this and post the number back here. __ Kevin Elliott DTS Engineer, CoreOS/Ha

Thank you for the post. I just downloaded your code Upon reviewing your code, I observe the following: The thumbnails images are set up correctly. The view is animated with animation set to true, allowing the iOS device to determine the most suitable animation. override func collectionView( _ collectionView: UICollectionView, didSelectItemAt indexPath: IndexPath ) { guard let cell = collectionView.cellForItem(at: indexPath) else { return } let dvc = DetailViewController(imageurl: thumbnailUrl[indexPath.item]) dvc.setZoomProvider { return cell.contentView } navigationController?.pushViewController(dvc, animated: true) } Are you anticipating a new animation or an animation that is not currently happen? If you'd like us to consider adding the necessary functionality, please file an enhancement request using Feedback Assistant. Once you file the request, please post the FB number here. If you're not familiar with how to file enhancement requests, take a look at Bug Reporting: How and Why? Albert Pascual


I tested this behavior in WhatsApp, and it seems to work correctly there. Does it work correctly in Speakerbox? Speakerbox is effectively our reference implementation for CallKit, so that's the first question I'll nearly always ask. Critically, if it DOESN'T have happen in Speakerbox, then the issue is being caused by something your app is doing. Continuing with the assumption that Speakerbox works correctly... I’m developing a VoIP app that uses Linphone and CallKit. Everything works as expected until the user enables the speaker on the native CallKit screen. After that, all subsequent calls start with the speaker already on. Even if I call AVAudioSession.sharedInstance().overrideOutputAudioPort(.none), I can't really tell you exactly what the problem might be, however, what generally causes these kind of audio issues are the complicated interactions between a number of different factors: The audio system has a rigid but poorly documented set of rules about exactly what changes you can make to an active audi

See https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/799739?answerId=857423022&page=1#858089022

Thank you for sharing the post and providing a detailed description of the issue. Beta 2 is an outdated version. I recommend updating the phone to the latest beta release or release. Could you please provide the current version displayed in the “About” view? I have not encountered this issue on iOS 26 betas, but I recommend updating to the latest version as beta 2 is an early beta. If still happens on the release version I’ll encourage you to please post in the Apple Support Community. The Apple Developer Forums are for questions about APIs and features intended specifically for developers. Albert Pascual
  Worldwide Developer Relations.

Greetings, I did get this working, thanks Ed. I didnt fully understand that I needed 2 AppIntentsPackage, one in the framework and one in the main project. This project used it and reading their code was helpful: https://github.com/ztzhang/locked_capture_example Here is the one in the framework: https://github.com/ztzhang/locked_capture_example/blob/main/MyIntentFramework/AppIntentsPackage.swift And here is the one in the main project, including that one in the framework: https://github.com/ztzhang/locked_capture_example/blob/main/AVCam/AppIntents.swift And then a bonus one because they had an extension where they also had an intent: https://github.com/ztzhang/locked_capture_example/blob/main/ControlButtonExtension/AppIntents.swift As for my other issue with This current action is not allowed, I still havent been able to reproduce it in a smaller project unfortunately, there is seem to work, but its also a lot simpler. So I'm still looking for a solution f

Tested on wwdc Speakerbox sample, same code iPhone 15 Pro (iOS 17.4.1) - video button disabled iPhone 14 (iOS 17.6.1) - video button active} What can be the reason of this behavior? If it happens in Speakerbox, then it's a bug. Please file a bug on this and post the bug number back here. __ Kevin Elliott DTS Engineer, CoreOS/Hardware

Bug number: FB20072274 Title: (SMB Disconnect Causes macOS Disk I/O Call open () to Hang for 10 Minutes). You may have already gotten this through bug feedback, but this is actually a side effect of how the volume was mounted. The default when mounting through mount_smbfs is a hard mount which, among other things, ends up using the default response timeout (~10 min). However, you can also mount as a soft mount: mount_smbfs -o soft …at which point syscalls should fail after ~1 min. Soft mount is what the Finder uses (which is why this hadn't come up before), however, if you were mixing mount_smbfs and Finder mounts to the same server. I think the behavior here might actually come from the session itself (not necessarily the individual mount), in which case an existing mount_smbfs might alter the behavior of the Finder mount. Note that this could also be overridden using forcenewsession on the mount. __ Kevin Elliott DTS Engineer, CoreOS/Hardware