[Android-tools-devel] New Android SDK/NDK Rebuilds

[beuc at beuc.net]

Hi Hans-Christoph,


Great to hear there is activity!


Nice job isolating, checking and recompiling the base tools :)


I'm surprised by: "it doesn't make sense to include in a distro
(e.g. "platforms", NDK, support libs, etc).".

The DAT project scope is confusing to me now:

  "In the long run, the Android Tools Team aims to cover more use
  cases well, and also building the Android NDK."
  https://bits.debian.org/2017/03/build-android-apps-with-debian.html

  "apps targeted at android-23 can be built with only Debian
  packages. We will add more API platform packages via backports
  afterwards.
  https://wiki.debian.org/AndroidTools

Did it change?

Cheers!
Sylvain

On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 10:29:59AM +0100, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> 
> Hey Sylvain,
> 
> Thanks for your work!  I'm part of the Debian Android Tools Team
> (CC'ed), I also added seamlik in CC.  We are still working on things.
> seamlik almost has v8.1.0 of the core parts of the SDK in Debian.  We
> could definitely use help, its a big project.
> 
> One thing that I think would be good to think about is how to most
> efficiently use our time.  One way would be to standardize on your
> rebuilds for all of the things that it doesn't make sense to include in
> a distro (e.g. "platforms", NDK, support libs, etc).  And then
> standardize on the Debian packages as the core provider of free SDK
> tools ("tools", "platform-tools", etc).  The Debian packaging is
> actually mostly custom Makefiles, so it could be easily adopted by other
> distros.  We use absolutely no prebuilts, so we've achieved that
> already.  That was indeed quite a large part of the work (lombok,
> gradle, kotlin, etc).
> 
> The biggest blocker right now is finishing the Kotlin packaging.  That
> would be a great place for contributors to join in.
> 
> Perhaps a better place to check the status of the Debian Android Tools
> Team packages is here, where you can see most are updated to
> https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?email=android-tools-devel%40lists.alioth.debian.org
> 
> Also, FYI, almost all the Debian packages can be reproducibly built:
> https://salsa.debian.org/android-tools-team/admin/wikis/home
> 
> .hc
> 
> beuc at beuc.net:
> > Oh, if you questionned my worry about Debian & Replicant, I'm mostly
> > worried I'm the only person on earth doing free builds of the SDK/NDK.
> > Which is not a sustainable situation ;)
> > 
> > - Sylvain
> > 
> > On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 11:22:01PM +0100, beuc at beuc.net wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> Basically I don't want to accept this agreement
> >> https://developer.android.com/studio/terms
> >> but I have to if I want to download any Android tool binary.
> >>
> >> See also:
> >> https://blogs.fsfe.org/torsten.grote/2013/01/03/android-sdk-is-now-proprietary-replicant-to-the-rescue/
> >> https://code.paulk.fr/article0008/what-s-up-with-the-android-sdk
> >>
> >>
> >> Moreover I got reports of such downloads being blocked in e.g. Iran.
> >> https://medium.com/@AliBehzadian/pain-of-being-android-developer-in-iran-390fb3190cb3
> >>
> >>
> >> Rebuilding everything including the "prebuilts" binaries would be the
> >> next step (and great!).  Help is needed and appreciated :)
> >>
> >>
> >> - Sylvain
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 10:09:00PM +0000, Joonas Kylmälä wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> is the SDK code free if you build it from AOSP source code?
> >>>
> >>> The license list at
> >>>
> >>> https://android.googlesource.com/platform/development/+/master/sdk/
> >>>
> >>> is overwhelming me but at least
> >>>
> >>> https://android.googlesource.com/platform/sdk/
> >>>
> >>> looks to be simply Apache License 2.0 licensed.
> >>>
> >>> What are your worries about the current situation? Is it that it
> >>> wouldn't be available on a free operating system because it is hard to
> >>> package it to small packages because all the different parts of source
> >>> code depend on each other? Something else?
> >>>
> >>> On a side note: what I don't like about the AOSP SDK code is that some
> >>> of the things are already in binary form in the source code (though,
> >>> they are free) and if you want to trust actually the binary you are
> >>> getting you need to re-build also the binary blobs in the source code
> >>> yourself from their respective source code.
> >>>
> >>> Joonas
> >>>
> >>> beuc at beuc.net:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> The Android SDK license agreement changed but it remains non-free.
> >>>>
> >>>> I recompiled SDK 9.0.0, NDK r18b and SDK Tools 26.1.1
> >>>> (without this non-free EULA):
> >>>>
> >>>>   https://android-rebuilds.beuc.net/
> >>>>   https://gitlab.com/android-rebuilds/auto
> >>>>
> >>>> NDK is significantly easier to recompile now; new tools are present
> >>>> such as the Android Gradle Plugin (though I didn't manage to produce a
> >>>> useable repository for it); Android Studio claims it comes with
> >>>> non-free components such as CLion so I don't redistribute it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Feedback welcome!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm a bit worried about the current situation by the way:
> >>>>
> >>>> - AFAICS Replicant delegated all SDK work to Debian Android Tools
> >>>>   https://blog.replicant.us/2017/04/there-wont-be-a-replicant-6-0-sdk-because-there-is-already-something-better/
> >>>>
> >>>> - Debian Android Tools provided initial SDK 6 support
> >>>>   https://wiki.debian.org/AndroidTools
> >>>>
> >>>> - Debian Android Tools didn't update the SDK, and plus SDK 6 doesn't
> >>>>   compile with newer tools and was removed from the upcoming release:
> >>>>   https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=android-sdk-platform
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Are there other efforts for free SDK/NDK/Studio ?