libselinux no longer is included in any APEX. Only the platform variant
of it (/system/lib/libselinux.so) exists and APEXes link to it.
Removing the lib name from the whitelist to make it clear that the
library is not available to any APEX.
Bug: 151053366
Bug: 150999716
Test: m
Change-Id: Id4fb933141ad32ff5217a58f1c7d689cc657e9ea
Makes sure that the module snapshots do not rely on the white list
of apex available settings so that when those lists are removed it is
not necessary to update any snapshots.
Bug: 142935992
Test: m nothing
Change-Id: Iedcff7dfc2646a4da77258d16e06657dd2f411f9
Test apexes no longer check to see whether their contents are available
so the special handling is no longer necessary.
Bug: 142935992
Test: m nothing
Change-Id: Iecae7dcbb87908d19c672f74d3c1ed8810d4485b
The whitelistedApexAvailable used to map references to
com.android.art.debug/release to com.android.art before looking it up
in the white list. This change removed that mapping and simply added
both to the white list.
Bug: 142935992
Test: m nothing
Change-Id: Ibad76fb73988688eb303e056197986ee9a6119ae
Merged-In: Ibad76fb73988688eb303e056197986ee9a6119ae
NativeBridgeRelativePath should be appended after /bin or /lib and
before subdir.
Bug: N/A
Test: m (add a soong test)
Change-Id: Id0c44c66b4900caa291e816cf3361fdec8ff9421
Checking apex_available was missing some corner cases.
For example, the deps of share deps of cc_library modules are missed
while those from cc_library_shared are correctly tracked.
This was due to..
* calling DepIsInSameApex in WalkDeps: both work fine separately, but
when they are used together, it fails to work. It's due to how WalkDeps
works. (We might fix this bug too risky since it is used very widely)
* incorrect receiver for DepIsInSameApex in apex_deps mutator: receiver
is supposed to be parent, but child was used before. Interestingly lots
of deps are within the same group of module types(cc to cc, java to
java), it has worked. (note that receiver's DepIsInSameApex
implementation can be different).
This change fixes them by..
* walkPayloadDeps is now relying on ApexVariation, which is calculated
correctly by TopDown apex_deps mutator.
* use correct receiver for DepIsInSameApex in apex_deps mutator, which
requires for java.SdkLibrary to override the method and for
java.Library/Import to use passed dep instead of receiver to check its
membership of sdk.
Bug: 151071238
Test: build/boot
Change-Id: I0569ef4bb8e79635e4d97a89f421a8d8b7d26456
When the check for apex_available has failed, the build system now shows
the module that brought the unavailable module into the APEX.
Bug: 151051671
Test: m
Merged-In: Id1a3fda67fe56fdc2dc90ec800d10689415de4d6
(cherry picked from commit 7bd9444b0f)
Change-Id: Id1a3fda67fe56fdc2dc90ec800d10689415de4d6
Native modules within APEX should be linked with proper stub version
according to its min_sdk_version.
For example, when min_sdk_version is set to "29", libfoo in the apex
would be linked to libbar of version 29 from platform, even if it has
a newer version like 30.
Bug: 145796956
Test: m nothing (soong tests)
Change-Id: I4a0b2002587bc24b7deeb5d59b6eeba5e1db5b1f
If an APEX contains APKs and the manifest package name of the APKs are
overridden (either via override_android_app
orPRODUCT_MANIFEST_PACKAGE_NAME_OVERRIDES), that the path to the APK
(relative in the APEX) and the overridden manifest package name is
recorded in the bundle config file.
Bug: 148002117
Test: m
Change-Id: Ibb90bcefb77fa6b2dad77cb2facc6079de9ab154
Which is the list of JNI libraries that are embeded inside the apex.
jni_libs is handled just like native_shared_libs except that it is
stored in apex_manifest.
When linkerconfig finds an apex with JNI libs, it exposes the namespace
for the apex as visible so that libnativeloader can link the namespace
to the corresponding classloader-namespace.
Bug: 149363889
Test: m nothing(runs soong test)
Change-Id: I52ebe38b44545e6e8853e34a3404a235c858112a
Embed common properties (apexNativeDependencies) so that the logic for
adding dependencies for native modules can be reused.
Bug: N/A
Test: m
Change-Id: I789b526c09eea14213ab1544590ed2238ed8c625
Symlinking doesn't make sense for host APEXes.
Bug: 150255435
Test: m com.android.art.host and inspect the built APEX; there is
no symlink.
Merged-In: I28492dfaaef471117a430be05255fbef76e557b0
(cherry picked from commit 9b96418dfe)
Change-Id: I28492dfaaef471117a430be05255fbef76e557b0
Because APK-in-APEX embeds its jni_libs in it. We don't have to follow
deps of jni_libs.
Bug: 146992436
Test: m com.android.tethering
deapexer extract com.android.tethering.apex apex
ls apex # there should be no /lib dir
Change-Id: Ifa1a6430a420ae7376b155cd59b8ece462cced7e
Add a min_sdk_version property apexes. Currently a noop, but will
be used to enforce that dependencies are compatible with the
specified version.
Test: m checkbuild
Bug: 149591522
Change-Id: I923773c90fe15becbffae3986791aa9edde8f8f6
The optimization is confusing syshealth because the modules will use
more memory when they are switched to the prebuilt (unbundled) or
updated via Play.
Let's have a per-module switch to control the behavior and turn it on
only for non-updatable modules like ART.
Bug: 149805758
Test: m
Change-Id: Ieb842c47f31f3b06e403b1e1f9e463c3e5524107
This change fixes a regression that was introduced with
I597bccbb177b6b6320c3a3edeff467243230d384. With the change, the content
of the permissions XML file for a java_sdk_library was determined before
the java_sdk_library is mutated for an APEX. As a result, the file path
to the implementation jar library was always set to
/system/framework/*.jar regardless of whether the java_sdk_library is
part of an APEX or not.
This change fixes the problem, by creating the permissions XML file via
a new module type. The content of the xml file is determined after the
xml file is mutated for APEXes.
Bug: 149600642
Test: m
Change-Id: Id21f8d8285df49b0b3be1daf0f101f2bc978eeb0
Bug: 149075752
Test: tapas com.android.conscrypt com.android.tethering arm64
Test: m out/target/product/generic_arm64/{,symbols/}apex/com.android.{tethering,conscrypt}/lib64/libc++.so
Test: Verified that unwinder was dynamically linked to tethering's
Test: libc++ and statically linked to conscrypt's.
Test: lunch flame-userdebug && m
Test: Verified that unwinder was dynamically linked to /system/lib64/libc++.so
Change-Id: I98eed7cb4316962b19b5c12e150c224c25d0e91d
apex { name: ["myapex"], native_shared_libs: ["libX", "libY"] }
cc_library { name: "libX", shared_libs: ["libY"] }
cc_library { name: "libY", shared_libs: ["libZ"], stubs: {...} }
apexDepsMutator was a bottom up mutator and it uses WalkDeps to traverse
the dependency tree rooted at myapex in a depth-first order. While
traversing the tree, if calls BuildForApex for a module that will be
part of the APEX.
libY is visited twice. Once via libX and once via myapex. If the visit
from libX was before the visit from myapex (since this is a depth-first
traversing), BuildForApex is not called for libY and its dependency
libZ, because libY provides a stub. And then when libY is again visited
via myapex, BuildForApex is correctly called for the module, but not for
its dependencies libZ because the paths from libY to libZ was already
visited.
As a result, the apex variant of libY has a dependency to the non-apex
variant of libZ.
Fixing the problem by changing the mutator a top-down one.
Bug: 148645937
Test: m
Change-Id: Ib2cb28852087c63a568b3fd036504e9261cf0782
The apex dependency map wasn't updated for test or non-installable
APEXes to work around the problem that a module being in such APEX
prevented the module from being installed in the system partition.
Since that problem is not happening any more, removing the unnecessary
work-around.
Bug: 123892969
Test: m
Change-Id: I43e07a9611a3e08ff39b9a64454b1c67949d35bc
This library is empty, and its functionality has moved
into libbinder/libhwbinder.
Bug: 148692216
Test: N/A
Change-Id: I5874efda9ab43fc00cf90395a1aabde45cf49579
The APEX dependency is more correctly tracked. Previously, the
dependency was tracked while we gather modules that will be installed to
an APEX. This actually was incorrect because we skipped many dependency
types that we don't need to follow to gather the modules list, such as
the headers dependency.
Now, the dependency is tracked directly when a module is mutated for an
APEX. In other words, if a module is mutated for an apex X, then the
module will appear in the X-deps-into.txt file.
This change also changes the format of the txt file. It now clearly
shows why a module is included in the APEX by showing the list of
modules that depend on the module.
Bug: 146323213
Test: m
Change-Id: I0a70cf9cce56e36565f9d55683fdaace8748a081
The function visits dependencies of an APEX that contribute to the
payload. checkApexAvailability is rewritten using the generic function.
There is no change in behavior.
Bug: N/A
Test: m
Change-Id: I1a8b4eb0a60a432f667a61b4f6f457c3b8f1cd3d
Previously, a java_sdk_library called "SDKLIB" would create a
prebuilt_etc module called "SDKLIB.xml" which installs the generated
XML permission file to /etc/permissions/SDKLIB.xml. That module
depended on the java_sdk_library "SDKLIB" to generate the XML file
as one of its outputs by specifying srcs: [":SDKLIB{.xml}"].
If the java_sdk_library is replaced by a prebuilt then the SDKLIB.xml
module expects the prebuilt to provide the XML permissions file which
it doesn't because that is an implementation detail and so the build
breaks.
A couple of alternative approaches were looked at to fix this. One was
to have the logic that replaced the source module with the prebuilt to
inform the source module that it was being replaced so it could disable
its created module. That lead to a dependency cycle where
SDKLIB -> SDKLIB.xml -> SDKLIB{.xml}
Another solution was to mark dependency tags in such a way that the
prebuilt could automatically identify and disable the SDKLIB.xml
module. Similar to how the visibility code will ignore dependencies
that are tagged with ExcludeFromVisibilityEnforcementTag. That became
very convoluted.
Instead the java_sdk_library was changed so that it was not responsible
for creating the XML permissions file. Instead it created a genrule
called "gen-SDKLIB.xml" to create it and then "SDKLIB.xml" depended on
that. The java_sdk_library also depended on the genrule to make the XML
permissions file available for APEX and testing.
Some refactoring of the APEX code and tests was necessary because they
had knowledge of the internal implementation of java_sdk_library. The
refactoring insulates them a little better from those details.
Bug: 148080325
Test: m droid && TARGET_BUILD_APPS=Camera2 m
Change-Id: I597bccbb177b6b6320c3a3edeff467243230d384
