Arch Linux User Repository

My previous comment was actually wrong: fdroid needs aapt. I thought it doesn't because repo was already up to date.

So this needs to be packaged somehow. So far it works manually.

@mynacol, thanks for the hints!

I was able to manually download and extract debian's aapt package and all the dependencies. For testing, I've used combination of ANDROID_HOME and LD_LIBRARY_PATH to make sure that aapt tool works and fdroid can update repo without any problem.

Just when I started thinking about the best way to package all this mess (debian, did you really have to split each and every android library?), I realized that fdroid only uses aapt when ANDROID_HOME is set. After I've unset this env variable, fdroid switched to using python-pyaxmlparser, which is fine t me.

So it turned out that I don't need aapt after all.

If someone does actually need it, here is the list of needed debian packages:

aapt android-libaapt android-libandroidfw android-libbacktrace android-libbase android-libcutils android-liblog android-libunwind android-libutils android-libziparchive

Hey @kyak, I haven't tried this. It seems Google doesn't provide downloadable executables for ARM, so this projcet cannot easily add support for ARM.

But a web search reveals that it is possible, e.g. by building it from source. [1] is years old, but may help you; Debian seems to build it too, maybe you can work with their packages [2].

In any case, if you have a working strategy to have the build-tools for ARM, you can post it here and we may be able to include it.

Good luck!

[1] https://www.timelesssky.com/blog/building-android-sdk-build-tools-aapt-for-debian-arm [2] https://packages.debian.org/buster/aapt

Hey guys! Have any of you had success using android-sdk-build-tools on ARM? It trying to make fdroid server work on ARM here...

I just bumped the version to 29.0.3, thanks @kidonng for the notice.

At the same time, I switched to sha512 as checksum, as it is indeed faster than sha256 on modern computers. See https://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/26336/sha512-faster-than-sha256 for more information.

lib32-* should be optional now, I bump the version to 0.29 as offered by @mynacol

should anyone else wants to maintain this package, please step up

I updated the build tools to version 29.0.2 by applying the following diff:

From 311a5db6ffddfc6b6884ec5e6f7fa4c63498f524 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

PKGBUILD | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/PKGBUILD b/PKGBUILD index 2ec5ba6..99f8530 100644 --- a/PKGBUILD +++ b/PKGBUILD @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ # Maintainer: xgdgsc <xgdgsc @t gmail dot com>

pkgname=android-sdk-build-tools -_ver=28.0.3 +_ver=29.0.2 pkgver=r$_ver pkgrel=1 pkgdesc='Build-Tools for Google Android SDK (aapt, aidl, dexdump, dx, llvm-rs-cc)' @@ -14,8 +14,8 @@ depends_x86_64=('lib32-gcc-libs' 'lib32-zlib') _sdk=android-sdk

source=("https://dl-ssl.google.com/android/repository/build-tools_${pkgver}-linux.zip") -sha1sums=('ea6f2f7103cd9da9ff0bdf6e37fbbba548fa4165') -_android=android-9 +sha256sums=('1e9393cbfd4a4b82e30e7f55ab38db4a5a3259db93d5821c63597bc74522fa08') +_android=android-10 options=('!strip')

package() {

2.23.0

@somekool @xgdgsc Thank you so much for maintaining this package. I have a small question. Do you have any specific reason for not removing lib32-* from the dependencies? You have been asked to do that twice in 2017 but you didn't give any response and again twice in 2019(including myself:D)

Please remove the lib32-* dependencies or mark them as optional.

I have to enable the multilib repository just for lib32-zlib dependency of android-sdk-build-tools.

just a cosmetic note -> the PKGBUILD has the executable flag...