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

Mon Nov 26 16:15:00 GMT 2018

Hi!

Targetting only the latest SDK platform sounds like a good compromise.
Do you plan to do it for 8.1/API27 or is there not enough manpower atm?

I didn't plan to use CI given my build stats:
https://android-rebuilds.beuc.net/SDK_9.0.0/#index7h2
(SDK / worst case: 200GB SSD + 5-6h quad-core + download time)
but if we can connect it to the F-Droid infrastructure I'm all for it :)
(I'll answer to your MR to discuss the technicalities)

++
Sylvain

On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 01:53:07PM +0100, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> To cover how apps use the Android SDK, there needs to be an
> NDK/"platform"/build-tools package for every release.  For something
> like "build-tools" and "platform", Debian Android Tools aims to provide
> one relatively recent release.  That covers use cases where users just
> want fastboot, for example.
> 
> F-Droid would like to be able to build all free software apps, so that
> means building with whatever build-tools, platform, NDK, etc that is
> specified by that app.  In that case, the Debian packages cannot cover
> all those cases.
> 
> I see you're starting to do the rebuilds on gitlab-ci!  If you need a
> large runner, I give you access to the FDroid one.  It is a 30 core VM
> with 32GB RAM and plenty of disk space.  I could also give you root/ssh
> to a dedicated VM on that box, but with 16GB RAM.
> 
> .hc
> 
> 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 ?
> 
> -- 
> PGP fingerprint: EE66 20C7 136B 0D2C 456C  0A4D E9E2 8DEA 00AA 5556
> https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xE9E28DEA00AA5556