Package Details: android-sdk 25.2.2-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/android-sdk.git (read-only)
Package Base: android-sdk
Description: Google Android SDK
Upstream URL: http://developer.android.com/sdk/
Licenses: custom
Submitter: None
Maintainer: xyproto
Last Packager: xyproto
Votes: 1395
Popularity: 14.655226
First Submitted: 2007-11-12 19:26
Last Updated: 2016-09-05 08:59

Sources (7)

Pinned Comments

xyproto commented on 2016-08-22 08:39

* If the android-sdk license had allowed binary redistribution, this would probably have been a package in [community] instead of in AUR.

* If there are problems with conflicting files, you can check which package owns them with `pacman -Qo`. If no package owns the file, it has most likely been placed there by you, the user (possibly using the SDK Manager). You can remove the conflicting files, either with `rm` or by installing the android-sdk package by force.

Latest Comments

xyproto commented on 2016-09-06 07:04

@kamil1991, thanks, removed.

kamil1991 commented on 2016-08-26 12:01

Please, remove "ncurses5-compat-libs" from the dependencies of x86_64. It's not required.

xyproto commented on 2016-08-22 08:39

* If the android-sdk license had allowed binary redistribution, this would probably have been a package in [community] instead of in AUR.

* If there are problems with conflicting files, you can check which package owns them with `pacman -Qo`. If no package owns the file, it has most likely been placed there by you, the user (possibly using the SDK Manager). You can remove the conflicting files, either with `rm` or by installing the android-sdk package by force.

alonhar commented on 2016-08-03 16:36

Can you update to 25.2.1?

https://dl.google.com/android/repository/tools_r25.2.1-linux.zip

xyproto commented on 2016-07-27 11:34

@petterk The Android Studio release notes says that the latest version of the Android SDK is version 25.1.6: https://developer.android.com/studio/releases/sdk-tools.html, while the download page suggests downloading version 24.4.1: https://developer.android.com/studio/index.html#downloads. They are not entirely consistent. I wish there was a reliable webpage that contained the latest official version of the Android SDK.

petterk commented on 2016-07-19 18:39

Android studio is saying this package is out of date.

xyproto commented on 2016-06-30 14:08

Modified the shell script files so that ANDROID_SWT is no longer set. Thanks, @esrevinu.

esrevinu commented on 2016-06-29 13:41

android-sdk has swt.jar in it, so swt is not needed.
In my case, sdk manager's buttons are too narrow.
screenshot: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16498102/screenshot.png
If ANDROID_SWT is unset, the issue is gone.

N0ps32 commented on 2016-06-10 09:36

Deleting the files seems to have fixed the issue.
Thanks.

xyproto commented on 2016-06-08 10:07

N0ps32, you can check which package owns the conflicting files with `pacman -Qo`. If no package owns the file, it has most likely been placed there by you, the user (possibly using the SDK Manager). You can remove the conflicting files, either with `rm` or by installing the android-sdk package by force.

N0ps32 commented on 2016-06-08 09:16

I can't update this package to the latest version.
How can I solve this issue?

error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files)
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/emulator-check exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/emulator64-crash-service exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib64/qt/lib/libQt5Concurrent.so exists in filesystem
[...]
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/qemu/linux-x86_64/qemu-system-mipsel exists in filesystem
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.

xyproto commented on 2016-06-05 11:58

Updated the icon (changed on the server, which caused the hash sum to fail).

digitalfist commented on 2016-06-01 09:24

Replace sha1sum b8726c63294a23e5fea066a36061164e583b5732 --> 1fbaef992eafd519a1bddf9a07cec928cdc0edfb

Maksim commented on 2016-06-01 07:52

sha1sum 1fbaef992eafd519a1bddf9a07cec928cdc0edfb for android_logo.png is correct, but invalid sha1sum b8726c63294a23e5fea066a36061164e583b5732 remains in PKGBUILD

zj5121 commented on 2016-05-31 21:29

android_logo.png sha1sum has been changed, please verify:

1fbaef992eafd519a1bddf9a07cec928cdc0edfb android_logo.png

Maksim commented on 2016-05-31 20:59

It seems like for 25.1.7-1 version PKGBUILD has wrong SHA1 checksum for https://developer.android.com/assets/images/android_logo.png (it's 'b8726c63294a23e5fea066a36061164e583b5732' but valid is 1fbaef992eafd519a1bddf9a07cec928cdc0edfb)

xyproto commented on 2016-05-20 20:30

Thanks, yan12125. Updated to 25.1.7.

yan12125 commented on 2016-05-14 20:20

25.1.6 is out. The link is https://dl.google.com/android/repository/tools_r25.1.6-linux.zip and the SHA1 checksum is a375003033774604d1426eb2d33ce6e507c95900. These values can be found in https://dl.google.com/android/repository/repository-11.xml

xyproto commented on 2016-05-14 16:36

Thanks jryan, removed libstdc++ from the package.

jryan commented on 2016-05-14 04:23

Having some issues with the fact that android-sdk provides it's own libstdc++.so.6 Basically, I can't get hardware acceleration in the emulator. Removing the files seems to fix the issue, so that android uses Arch's version.

Not sure if I should report this to Android SDK people or not?

edit: I added a section under troubleshooting for this on the wiki page

xyproto commented on 2016-04-24 15:58

Version 25.0.0 is mentioned in the SDK Tools Notes (https://developer.android.com/tools/sdk/tools-notes.html), but I can't find a working download for that release yet. Unflagging as out-of-date.

Please provide a link if flagging this package as out-of-date and the version number can not be seen on the main SDK page (https://developer.android.com/sdk/).

xyproto commented on 2016-04-24 00:24

Please post comments about problems with the ncurses5-compat-libs package here instead: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ncurses5-compat-libs/

plmosqueda commented on 2016-04-23 12:52

This one worked:

$ gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys F7E48EDB
gpg: key F7E48EDB: public key "Thomas Dickey <dickey@invisible-island.net>" imported
gpg: no ultimately trusted keys found
gpg: Total number processed: 1
gpg: imported: 1

is the gpg to build ncurses5-compat-libs

I-sty commented on 2016-04-20 14:13

==> Validating source files with md5sums...
ncurses-6.0.tar.gz ... Passed
ncurses-6.0.tar.gz.asc ... Skipped
==> Verifying source file signatures with gpg...
ncurses-6.0.tar.gz ... FAILED (unknown public key 702353E0F7E48EDB)
==> ERROR: One or more PGP signatures could not be verified!
==> ERROR: Makepkg was unable to build ncurses5-compat-libs.
==> Restart building ncurses5-compat-libs ? [y/N]
==> ---------------------------------------------
==> n

xyproto commented on 2016-04-18 14:13

Added ncurses5-compat-libs as a dependency.

Doctor_Drive commented on 2016-04-15 09:50

Software-emulated emulator requires libncurses.so.5
The package should depend on ncurses5-compat-libs

xyproto commented on 2016-04-13 13:39

Updated the hash sum.

nobodynhio commented on 2016-04-13 10:29

sha1sum android-sdk.desktop
8f886de363ad91a7f93a0c6ded993e99bef3e1a7 android-sdk.desktop

(the third hash)

petterk commented on 2016-04-13 06:21

android-sdk.desktop checksum mismatch here too.

edacval commented on 2016-04-12 23:56

android-sdk.desktop checksum mismatch

xyproto commented on 2016-04-12 21:55

@dreamingincode, I was a bit quick there. Thanks for pointing that out. Fixed.

I think upstream should provide their own .desktop file, though.

dreamingincode commented on 2016-04-09 08:13

@xyproto

Why reporting to upstream for the typo @elgaton mentioned?

It's a file in this repo, https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/android-sdk.desktop?h=android-sdk#n4 .

xyproto commented on 2016-01-27 08:57

@elgaton: You are right! Please report the issue upstream to Google: https://source.android.com/source/report-bugs.html

@mralext20: 24.4.1 and r24.4.1 are pretty similar, and r24.4.1 is not more informative. Do you have a case where using "r24.4.1" makes things easier?

elgaton commented on 2016-01-21 09:44

There's a small typo in the .desktop file - it should say "Android Software Development Kit" instead of "Android Sofware Development Kit" (note the missing "t").

mralext20 commented on 2015-12-18 00:21

the way android names the versions starts with an r. can you update the package to have an r in front of the version?

mapring commented on 2015-12-12 14:30

What do I have to do to solve this:
[2015-12-12 21:27:29 - Android SDK] Error when loading the SDK:

Error: Error parsing /opt/android-sdk/system-images/android-23/android-wear/armeabi-v7a/devices.xml
cvc-complex-type.2.4.d: Invalid content was found starting with element 'd:skin'. No child element is expected at this point.
Error: Error parsing /opt/android-sdk/system-images/android-23/android-wear/x86/devices.xml
cvc-complex-type.2.4.d: Invalid content was found starting with element 'd:skin'. No child element is expected at this point.

I have reinstalled android sdk. Should I remove it along with its folder and try again?

Toost_Inc commented on 2015-10-24 15:52

@apaatsi

You need to uninstall the "Android SDK Tools" package from the Android SDK Manager. basically the Android package overlaps with this Arch package.

xyproto commented on 2015-10-24 10:04

@apaatsi, first find out which package owns the problematic files: pacman -Qo /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/ca-bundle.pem

The file is probably not installed by any package, but by the user on your system, possibly by using one of the tools that comes with the android-sdk package.

This seems to be a common problem, but there is no ideal solution. You can install the android-sdk package with --force if you wish to replace the problematic files.

apaatsio commented on 2015-10-23 10:24

What is the proper way to handle the following error? I'm trying to upgrade from 24.3.4-2 to 24.4.1-1

Packages (1) android-sdk-24.4.1-1

Total Installed Size: 360.91 MiB
Net Upgrade Size: 22.25 MiB

:: Proceed with installation? [Y/n] y
(1/1) checking keys in keyring [#############################] 100%
(1/1) checking package integrity [#############################] 100%
(1/1) loading package files [#############################] 100%
(1/1) checking for file conflicts [#############################] 100%
error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files)
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/ca-bundle.pem exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/pc-bios/bios-256k.bin exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/pc-bios/efi-virtio.rom exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/pc-bios/kvmvapic.bin exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/pc-bios/linuxboot.bin exists in filesystem
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.

xyproto commented on 2015-10-22 11:01

Updated to 24.4.1.

https://developer.android.com/tools/sdk/tools-notes.html has also been updated to reflect this.

saik0 commented on 2015-10-17 19:12

@xyproto

The xml used by the SDK Manager will almost always be more up to date than the docs/website.

https://dl.google.com/android/repository/repository-11.xml

The relevant bit of the xml tree is below:

<sdk:sdk-repository xmlns:sdk="http://schemas.android.com/sdk/android/repository/11" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
...

<sdk:tool>
<sdk:revision>
<sdk:major>24</sdk:major>
<sdk:minor>4</sdk:minor>
<sdk:micro>0</sdk:micro>
</sdk:revision>
<sdk:min-platform-tools-rev>
<sdk:major>20</sdk:major>
</sdk:min-platform-tools-rev>
<sdk:archives>
<sdk:archive>
<sdk:size>320385195</sdk:size>
<sdk:checksum type="sha1">f120858b1f7eedb573608d4ebf16a046d8833024</sdk:checksum>
<sdk:url>tools_r24.4-linux.zip</sdk:url>
<sdk:host-os>linux</sdk:host-os>
</sdk:archive>
...
</sdk:archives>
<sdk:uses-license ref="android-sdk-license"/>
</sdk:tool>
...
</sdk:sdk-repository>

xyproto commented on 2015-10-12 15:43

Unflagging as out-of-date again. The latest official version, according to the Google web pages, is 24.3.4. It's not the latest official release if someone just finds a download link with a higher version number. At least wait until Google has replied to the open issue about the version number on their web page being out of date (link below).

xyproto commented on 2015-10-09 10:32

Created an issue, asking for Google to update the version number on the web page. (https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=189278). Unflagging as out-of-date, for now.

TheAifam5 commented on 2015-10-06 16:47

change only pkgver to 24.4
and pkgrel to 0
sha1sum: f120858b1f7eedb573608d4ebf16a046d8833024

download: https://dl.google.com/android/repository/tools_r24.4-linux.zip
and for @xyproto:
Every release you have new version or revision. For that you have in PKGBUILD "${pkgver}". When you know about for example v24.4 just type the 24.4, its a first release of that version. then when Google release next revision, type 24.4.1 and etc etc. :) EZ bro

JCaesar commented on 2015-10-05 11:18

Probably needs zip as a build dependency.

xyproto commented on 2015-10-04 20:09

Added lib32-pulse and lib32-fontconfig as dependencies. Keep in mind that namcap is not always correct, though. Thanks, @yan12125.

xyproto commented on 2015-10-04 19:37

Please me know if the use of ncurses.so.5 should cause any problems.

It would be possible to either package ncurses 5 for AUR and use that, link to ncurses 6 and check if it works (for what might possibly be a narrow use case) or report it upstream and ask them to use ncurses 6 (or find another solution).

Thanks for checking, @zman0900.

xyproto commented on 2015-10-04 19:28

@dront78, do you have an URL where it says that 24.4 is the latest version of the Android SDK? https://developer.android.com/tools/sdk/tools-notes.html and https://developer.android.com/sdk/ says 24.3.4.

dront78 commented on 2015-09-30 06:34

24.4 up please

zman0900 commented on 2015-09-20 10:26

Some of the libs included in this are still linked to ncurses 5. Not sure if there is anything that can even be done about it since they come pre-built, but it's probably going to cause problems.


└──╼ for f in $(find /opt/android-sdk/tools -type f -executable); do unset OUT; OUT=$(ldd $f | grep 'ncurses.*\.so\.5'); if [ -n "$OUT" ]; then echo "====> $f"; echo -e $OUT; echo ""; fi; done
====> /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/gles_mesa/libosmesa.so
libncurses.so.5 => not found

====> /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/gles_mesa/libGL.so.1
libncurses.so.5 => not found

====> /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/gles_mesa/libGL.so
libncurses.so.5 => not found

====> /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib64/gles_mesa/libosmesa.so
libncurses.so.5 => not found

====> /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib64/gles_mesa/libGL.so.1
libncurses.so.5 => not found

====> /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib64/gles_mesa/libGL.so
libncurses.so.5 => not found

yan12125 commented on 2015-09-06 15:31

The dependencies may require changes. Here's the partial log from namcap:

android-sdk E: Dependency lib32-fontconfig detected and not included (libraries ['usr/lib32/libfontconfig.so.1'] needed in files ['opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/monitor-x86/libcairo-swt.so'])
android-sdk E: Dependency lib32-libpulse detected and not included (libraries ['usr/lib32/libpulse.so.0'] needed in files ['opt/android-sdk/tools/qemu/linux-x86/qemu-system-aarch64', 'opt/android-sdk/tools/qemu/linux-x86/qemu-system-mips64el', 'opt/android-sdk/tools/qemu/linux-x86/qemu-system-x86_64'])
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-openal')
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-libstdc++5')
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-libxv')
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-sdl')
android-sdk W: Dependency lib32-zlib included but already satisfied
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('swt')

darkxsun commented on 2015-08-23 16:24

It's still an https:// address, who cares that it doesn't say "ssl" in the url anymore...

xyproto commented on 2015-08-23 12:48

@artaxlives, the downloaded files are checked against the corresponding SHA1 hash sums in the PKGBUILD file. What is the scenario that worries you, when using dl.google.com instead of dl-ssl.google.com?

xyproto commented on 2015-08-23 12:47

@artaxlives, the downloaded files are checked against their corresponding SHA1 hash sums in the PKGBUILD file. What is the scenario that worries you, when using dl.google.com instead of dl-ssl.google.com?

Det commented on 2015-08-22 18:29

@artaxlives, it's one big-ass country, tho. Do you really care that much about "privacy and security" to download through SSL? Nobody ever complained in my google-chrome* or google-earth* packages either.

artaxlives commented on 2015-08-22 18:26

@xyproto, I disagree with removing SSL for everyone because of restrictions in one country. It would be better to include a message in the PKBUILD with instructions on what to change if your Government or ISP act to undermine your privacy and security.
Instead of having those in China edit the PKBUILD, now everyone else needs to edit the PKBUILD to maintain their privacy and security.

xyproto commented on 2015-08-20 16:40

@lilydjwg, will change to just dl.google.com. Thank you.

@chrissdk, this is a problem with your AUR helper, after the transition to AUR4.

chrissdk commented on 2015-08-09 09:13

I'm having the below issue:

$ packer -S android-sdk
/tmp/packertmp-1000/android-sdk.PKGBUILD: line 1: !DOCTYPE: No such file or directory
/tmp/packertmp-1000/android-sdk.PKGBUILD: line 2: syntax error near unexpected token `newline'
/tmp/packertmp-1000/android-sdk.PKGBUILD: line 2: ` "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">'

lilydjwg commented on 2015-08-03 15:23

Can you switch to use the domain dl.google.com instead of dl-ssl.google.com? It works too, but in China people can only download from dl.google.com without a proxy / VPN.

xyproto commented on 2015-08-02 14:14

@calef13, which package owns the file in question? Try pacman -Qo. If no package owns the conflicting file, it has not been installed by pacman, but by the user, possibly using the android sdk update tool.

calef13 commented on 2015-07-13 10:00

I'm getting 'exists in filesystem' conflicts when I try to upgrade, is this just because I used to android sdk updater? Can I just continue using that and not bother updating the package? Or can I safely --force the update?

xyproto commented on 2015-06-30 22:46

Updated to 24.3.3

xyproto commented on 2015-06-30 15:44

Updated to 24.3.3. Everything works here.

lybin commented on 2015-05-28 21:41

<sdk:archive>
<sdk:size>309486044</sdk:size>
<sdk:checksum type="sha1">ecb86253e97cd14459888701fc3478b4d153a86c</sdk:checksum>
<sdk:url>tools_r24.3-linux.zip</sdk:url>
<sdk:host-os>linux</sdk:host-os>
</sdk:archive>

SirWuffleton commented on 2015-05-19 17:16

I was having a similar issue to matrs (with the multilib repo correctly configured). Couldn't get the dependencies for these to resolve even after refreshing my local repos with -Syy.

As a workaround, I manually installed the packages that makepkg was complaining about using the command: sudo pacman -S lib32-openal lib32-libstdc++5 lib32-sdl swt --asdeps

darkxsun commented on 2015-05-13 15:32

@matrs Have you enabled multilib? This is the most common reason for missing lib32-*: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Multilib

darkxsun commented on 2015-05-13 15:31

@matrs As is almost always the case with missing lib32-*, you need to enable multilib: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Multilib

matrs commented on 2015-05-13 15:28

I have this problem related to resolving dependencies:
==> Making package: android-sdk r24.1.2-1 (Wed May 13 12:22:46 CLT 2015)
==> Checking runtime dependencies...
==> Missing dependencies:
-> lib32-openal
-> lib32-libstdc++5
-> lib32-sdl
-> swt
==> Checking buildtime dependencies...
==> ERROR: Could not resolve all dependencies.
The build failed.

xyproto commented on 2015-03-17 08:57

niqingliang2003, the download link works here. Perhaps it was temporarily down? Any icon will work, just update the source and sha1sums arrays to use another image, then change the filename in the line that installs the icon, if needed (install -Dm644 android_icon_128.png "$pkgdir/usr/share/pixmaps/$pkgname.png").

niqingliang2003 commented on 2015-03-17 08:45

I can't download file:
http://tools.android.com/recent/miscellaneousimprovements-1/android_icon_128.png

other choice?

tancrackers commented on 2015-03-12 04:14

Checking in: I no longer need --force.

xyproto commented on 2015-03-03 12:03

Updated the package to 24.1.2. Thanks, giniu. :)

giniu commented on 2015-03-03 11:23

There is 24.1.2: https://dl-ssl.google.com/android/repository/tools_r24.1.2-linux.zip - also visible trough Android SDK Manager.

xyproto commented on 2015-03-03 11:17

I see no later version than r24.0.2. Unflagging as out-of-date. Please provide a link if there is a later version available than the one listed on the webpage.

xyproto commented on 2015-02-05 07:38

Ladies and gentlemen, this is a weird package. Files in /opt/android-sdk may change after the package is installed. Do you prefer to install with --force or having the package replace itself? Suggestions for better alternatives are welcome.

phunni commented on 2015-02-02 20:52

Still having problems with "exists in filesystem". I even tried uninstalling the package with the assumption that I could then install the update. Now I just don't have it installed..

DaVinci42 commented on 2015-02-01 10:40

http://tools.android.com/recent/miscellaneousimprovements-1/android_icon_128.png
is Error 404

xyproto commented on 2015-01-03 21:12

Updated to r24.0.2. Removed "replaces".

xyproto commented on 2015-01-03 21:11

chrbayer, my response time is slower during the holidays. Updated.

chrbayer commented on 2015-01-02 09:27

Please update package or orphan it so someone else can to this!
Thanks, Chris

farseerfc commented on 2014-12-19 13:52

@xyproto please never make a package replaces itself. This will confuse pacman to think there is always an update (in a custom repo having a package built from this PKGBUILD).

yashax commented on 2014-12-12 12:40

Please update: https://dl-ssl.google.com/android/repository/tools_r24.0.1-linux.zip

xyproto commented on 2014-12-11 20:27

Added replaces=('android-sdk') to the current PKGBUILD, hoping this will resolve the issues with "exists in filesystem".

tancrackers commented on 2014-12-11 15:06

I did yaourt -Sua --force to force the rewrite of these files. Everything works, not that I'm advocating --force ...

lw4z commented on 2014-12-09 23:02

"exists in filesystem", many errors...

tancrackers commented on 2014-12-09 14:48

On my end:
[john@john-archlinux ~]$ pacman -Qo /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/lib64emugl_test_shared_library.so
/opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/lib64emugl_test_shared_library.so is owned by android-sdk r23.0.5-1

anopows commented on 2014-11-25 10:49

I got an error while it tried installing the dependencies: http://pastebin.com/qena0wH8

(I am new to Arch. Did I mess up, or is this package not up to date?)

xyproto commented on 2014-11-14 13:41

psychoteadrink, please run "pacman -Qo /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/lib64emugl_test_shared_library.so" to see which package owns the file that causes the conflict. If no package owns it, I'm not quite sure where it came from.

psychoteadrink commented on 2014-11-10 12:36

I'm getting a large amount of 'x exists in filesystem' error when trying to install this package.

http://pastebin.com/cYmuqzcA

Could it be related to https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/android-sdk-platform-tools/ (see comment by afzalarsalan)?.

xyproto commented on 2014-10-20 13:54

Updated to 23.0.5.

xyproto commented on 2014-10-20 13:45

@audrius, ideally, the webpage should indicate the latest version number, and this package should be built from scratch from source (Which is a nightmare. Several people have tried. Contributions are welcome!). Other than that, I am not aware of any particular problems with the current version, nor the one I am updating to now.

audrius commented on 2014-10-20 13:20

Is there any problems with update?

xyproto commented on 2014-10-17 15:45

@chrbayer, thanks, will update to 23.0.5.

chrbayer commented on 2014-10-16 14:52

One more comment: If you start the SDK manager, it clearly shows which packages are outdated and what the last version is. This is better than the web page I guess... Thanks!

chrbayer commented on 2014-10-16 14:51

Hi, I updated the version to 23.0.5 in the PKGBUILD file, adapted the hash and do now have the latest version. So I flagged it as outdated again. I have no idea why it is not shown on the web page, but it exists :-)
Best regards, Christoph

xyproto commented on 2014-10-16 13:43

Adopted, unflagging as out of date since I can't see any later "SDK Tools Only" version on the download page.

xyproto commented on 2014-09-21 09:43

@thestinger, I see. Pity that the binaries aren't redistributable in combination with a cumbersome manual build process. No worries.

thestinger commented on 2014-09-19 21:26

@xyproto: It can't be moved as-is because the pre-built binaries aren't redistributable. It needs to be built by hand which is quite a lot of "fun" :).

xyproto commented on 2014-09-19 20:36

I'm ready to move android-ndk to [community] if this one is moved first. :)

thestinger commented on 2014-09-15 03:54

It's working as intended. If you want to use the SDK Manager as a package manager, install to your home directory without Pacman.

dgellow commented on 2014-09-12 21:37

Same problem

lyoneel commented on 2014-09-12 05:39

Please add sudo command to .desktop file according to DE, for example:
KDE: kdesu android
Gnome: gksu android

To avoid the errors when trying to update... "cannot make folder... " or something like.

omarch commented on 2014-09-11 08:31

Hi, I get below error when build android-sdk, how to fix it?
==> Continue building android-sdk ? [Y/n]
==> -------------------------------------
==>
==> Building and installing package
==> WARNING: Building package as root is dangerous.
Please run yaourt as a non-privileged user.
==> Making package: android-sdk r23.0.2-1 (Thu Sep 11 12:53:34 IRDT 2014)
==> Checking runtime dependencies...
==> Checking buildtime dependencies...
==> Retrieving sources...
-> Found tools_r23.0.2-linux.zip
-> Found android_icon_128.png
-> Found android-sdk.desktop
-> Found android-sdk.sh
-> Found android-sdk.csh
-> Found android-sdk.conf
-> Found license.html
==> Validating source files with sha1sums...
tools_r23.0.2-linux.zip ... FAILED
android_icon_128.png ... Passed
android-sdk.desktop ... Passed
android-sdk.sh ... Passed
android-sdk.csh ... Passed
android-sdk.conf ... Passed
license.html ... Passed
==> ERROR: One or more files did not pass the validity check!
==> ERROR: Makepkg was unable to build android-sdk.
==> Restart building android-sdk ? [y/N]
tanks.

Commander commented on 2014-09-02 10:47

For some reason when using it i'm getting:
"This Android SDK requires Android Developer Toolkit version 23.0.0 or above. Current version is 22.6"

When pointing eclipse to the SDK, any ideas?

thestinger commented on 2014-08-28 16:26

This package and the other AUR packages for Android SDK components are an alternative to using the SDK Manager as a package manager. If you want to use the SDK Manager to install components, put it in your home directory.

drdaeman commented on 2014-08-28 16:17

I presume SDK Manager is supposed to be run as root? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

If I got it right, may I suggest adding PolicyKit entry and changing the desktop entry to explicitly run the manager using pkexec?

I.e., add `/usr/share/polkit-1/actions/com.android.sdk.run-sdk-manager.policy` like this: https://drdaeman.pp.ru/tmp/20140828/com.android.sdk.run-sdk-manager.policy (not sure about the ID, though, maybe it should be more like `org.archlinux.aur.pkexec.android.policy`), then modify `android-sdk.desktop` to say `Exec=pkexec /opt/android-sdk/tools/android` (or `Exec=pkexec android` if you prefer it that way)

Tested it on my system, works supposedly fine.

friartuck commented on 2014-07-27 04:16

@xgdgsc: this may sound weird but try clearing your browser cache...(it worked for me)

giniu commented on 2014-07-03 06:54

(I know it isn't, but I just cited the wiki :) - anyway, thanks for adding another fix)

thestinger commented on 2014-07-03 06:29

@giniu: Setting the executable bit on every single file isn't a good way of solving it. It's the latest of many upstream permission mistakes and I've added another hack to work around it properly.

giniu commented on 2014-07-03 06:11

@thestinger I can confirm that after update I wasn't able to run executables, as world was without executable permissions, and executables belonged to root:root. I know there is "chmod -R 755 /opt/android-sdk" in wiki, but it would be good to do it anyway, at least for default install.

thestinger commented on 2014-07-03 03:32

@xgdgsc: It still works fine for me.

xgdgsc commented on 2014-06-28 12:17

I get
404. That’s an error.

The requested URL /recent/miscellaneousimprovements-1/tandroid_icon_128.png was not found on this server. That’s all we know.

any solution?

pelluch commented on 2014-06-27 19:52

@afzalarsalan yep, sticking
chmod -R +x opt/$pkgname
at the end of the package() function seems to fix this.

afzalarsalan commented on 2014-06-27 02:32

Latest update doesn't seem to set permissions correctly, the new files are set to root permission only

BINBIN commented on 2014-06-19 11:51

@coderkun,Thanks for your reminder.

coderkun commented on 2014-06-19 09:49

@BINBIN, I think they are all in [multilib].

BINBIN commented on 2014-06-19 09:43

missing dependencies for android-sdk,the following targets aren't found in AUR
lib32-ncurses
lib32-libxv
lib32-mesa
lib32-alsa-lib
lib32-zlib
lib32-sdl
lib32-openal
lib32-libstdc++5

saik0 commented on 2014-06-07 14:53

While were addressing launchers:

hierarchyviewer: /opt/android-sdk/tools/hierarchyviewer
http://tools.android.com/recent/miscellaneousimprovements-1/sdk-hierarchyviewer-128.png

traceview: /opt/android-sdk/tools/traceview
http://tools.android.com/recent/miscellaneousimprovements-1/traceview-128.png

saik0 commented on 2014-06-07 14:47

@thestinger here you go.

sdk:
http://tools.android.com/recent/miscellaneousimprovements-1/android_icon_128.png

ddms:
http://tools.android.com/recent/miscellaneousimprovements-1/ddms-128.png

thestinger commented on 2014-06-07 14:31

@Teasp00n: If someone makes a desktop file for it and finds a stable upstream URL for downloading a proper icon for it, sure. The existing image also needs to be replaced with an upstream URL, but I never got around to it.

thestinger commented on 2014-06-07 13:57

@cannonstar: `makepkg -s` will take care of it for you, this doesn't have any dependencies not covered by the official repositories

egore911 commented on 2014-06-06 20:25

22.6.4 was released

cannonstar commented on 2014-06-05 16:03

What do I need to download to satisfy the java-environment dependency? I downloaded jre (Oracle) from AUR but it doesn't work.

thestinger commented on 2014-06-04 19:06

@tomashavlas: This doesn't appear to be out-of-date based on <http://dl-ssl.google.com/android/repository/repository-8.xml>.

sagidayan commented on 2014-05-17 23:48

there is an error while trying to download the zip file...

as far as i can tell the new URL is
http://dl.google.com/android/android-sdk_r22.6.2-linux.tgz
(for the version 22.6.2)

my output:
curl: (23) Failed writing body (909 != 16384)
==> ERROR: Failure while downloading tools_r22.6.3-linux.zip
Aborting...
==> ERROR: Makepkg was unable to build android-sdk.

sagidayan commented on 2014-05-17 23:45

there is an error while trying to download the zip file...

as far as i can tell the new URL is
http://dl.google.com/android/android-sdk_r22.6.2-linux.tgz
(for the version 22.6.2)

my output:
curl: (23) Failed writing body (909 != 16384)
==> ERROR: Failure while downloading android-sdk_r22.6.2-linux.tgz
Aborting...
==> ERROR: Makepkg was unable to build android-sdk.

Teasp00n commented on 2014-05-12 22:22

Can you add monitor as an application so it comes up in menu lists etc?

thestinger commented on 2014-05-06 22:16

@klusark: That's a bug in devtools. It's not supposed to break with `umask 077` and used to work.

klusark commented on 2014-05-06 03:34

The permissions of the source files for this package seem wrong to me. If I try to build using a chroot I get permission errors, but if I give everything 0655 it works fine.

pmvalente commented on 2014-05-03 18:48

As show today.
[2014-05-03 19:37] [ALPM] warning: directory permissions differ on /opt/android-sdk/tools/apps/SdkController/res/drawable-mdpi/
filesystem: 775 package: 777
[2014-05-03 19:37] [ALPM] warning: directory permissions differ on /opt/android-sdk/tools/apps/SdkController/res/drawable-hdpi/
filesystem: 775 package: 777
[2014-05-03 19:37] [ALPM] warning: directory permissions differ on /opt/android-sdk/tools/apps/SdkController/res/drawable-xhdpi/
filesystem: 775 package: 777
[2014-05-03 19:37] [PACMAN] upgraded android-sdk (r22.6.3-1 -> r22.6.3-2)

thestinger commented on 2014-05-03 05:17

I don't see anything wrong with the permissions... directories/executables are 755 and regular files are 644. You'll need to post the output you're getting.

thestinger commented on 2014-05-03 04:36

I'll have a look at fixing the permissions again.

SimFox3 commented on 2014-05-02 17:01

Got a bunch of "directory permissions differ" warning messages on the last upgrade. Should I ignore these warnings, or actually set all directory permissions to "777"?

thestinger commented on 2014-05-01 21:52

@gfrito: Thanks!

Nothing4You commented on 2014-05-01 21:12

Oh, in the "other platforms" part there are version numbers for the sdk-only tarballs.

Nothing4You commented on 2014-05-01 21:10

Ugh sorry, didn't read comments before flagging.
Is there a way to see which version is contained in the tarball before downloading it?

Anonymous comment on 2014-05-01 16:21

Updated PKGBUILD:
http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=JwfuDx0i

Uses http://dl-ssl.google.com/android/repository/repository-8.xml as source, which is what the "android" command line tool uses. Use sha1sums since that is what is provided by Google in the xml file.

thestinger commented on 2014-05-01 05:25

Again, please don't flag this out-of-date before there's a new tarball. The out-of-date flag is for informing the packager when upstream has officially released a new version. It's not relevant if they're rolling it out via their updater, unless someone wants to suggest a different source than <https://developer.android.com/sdk/index.html>.

thestinger commented on 2014-04-30 02:48

There's no point in flagging it out-of-date before a new tarball is released.

Anonymous comment on 2014-03-29 21:38

Updated PKGBUILD for 22.6.2: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=wiNZJ0T6

Switched to md5sums because Google provides an official md5sum for the tools package at https://developer.android.com/sdk/index.html

Anonymous comment on 2014-03-26 22:44

22.6.2 has been released

thestinger commented on 2014-03-12 18:59

I could make all the dependencies optional, but I don't plan to do it. Arch is the wrong distribution to use if you care about disk space usage.

danyf90 commented on 2014-03-11 21:15

hi, isn't swt just an optional dependency (needed only if you need GUI)?

thestinger commented on 2014-03-07 05:01

Regardless of what an unprotected page on a collaboratively edited document recommends, it's not something that's supported by this package. I can't really see why anyone would be using this package if they just plan on overwriting the files with updates from `android`. Just install it to your home directory and don't run that brittle tool as root or mess with files you've asked the system package manager to manage.

There are really not a lot of extra packages, and maintaining Arch packages for them is entirely realistic. In fact, I think there are already up-to-date packages for nearly all of them. If one of them is not being maintained well, just let me know and I'll orphan it.

I'll consider leaving out the package management tool in future updates, to make this clearer.

ackalker commented on 2014-03-07 03:57

Well, installing just the core components, then using `android` to install the API etc., is precisely what the Arch Linux Wiki recommends:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Android#Install_Android_SDK_core_components
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Android#Getting_Android_SDK_platform_API

As I've said before, I utterly dislike the idea of having to run `android` as root to install extra components, but I (and I presume the Wiki editor(s)) have tried many, many other ways, but failed. Also, the 'net is awash with postings from people who have similar problems, and who in the very end settle for the same solution.

I've had similar problems with Eclipse for many years, until the Eclipse devs (probably under pressure from users of major distros like Debian&co) fixed things so that users could install Eclipse system-wide, then add components per-user.

If we give in and plonk SDKs in our home directories, etc. I don't think we're giving Google a clear enough signal to go change their ways. IMHO.

thestinger commented on 2014-03-03 15:29

You're not meant to use the `android` tool as a package manager with this package. There's no point of using this if you're going to let another package manager write over all of the files and add new untracked ones. This package will be updated when Google updates the <https://developer.android.com/sdk/index.html> page. If you're unwilling to wait, then just put the SDK in your home directory and use the included package manager and please don't flag it out-of-date before the new tarball is posted, unless you have a new source to suggest.

Zearan commented on 2014-03-03 14:34

Running `sudo -E` is the best recommendation in my eyes as it does exactly what you require ("preserve user environment when running command"). If it is not an option because you are too lazy to type it (I would be too), you can modify your /etc/sudoers to include ANDROID_SWT to 'env_keep' as described in: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/sudo#Environment_variables

A different approach without the need for a wrapper would be `sudo -i` to get a root login shell first and then run `android`.

ackalker commented on 2014-03-03 08:28

Just to be clear, `sudo -E android` is _not_ an option I would recommend (at least to me :) )

ackalker commented on 2014-03-03 08:26

On Arch x86_64, running `android` as root to update SDK components (yuck, bad software design choice, Google! But anyway...), I get the following error:

$ sudo android
SWT folder '/opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/run Java: parameters: -jar /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/archquery.jar
x86_64' does not exist.
Please export ANDROID_SWT to point to the folder containing swt.jar for your platform.

This is because `sudo` cleans out the environment before running the command, so variables like ANDROID_SWT (sourced from /etc/profile.d/android-sdk.sh) get lost.

I'm proposing a wrapper (to put in user's $HOME/bin or in /usr/bin/android) containing:
--[cut here]--
#!/bin/sh
source /etc/profile.d/android-sdk.sh
exec $ANDROID_HOME/tools/android "$@"
--[cut here]--

Please consider including this in the package, or at least adding this workaround to the Wiki.

thestinger commented on 2014-01-20 06:26

Please don't use the out-of-date flag for anything but flagging a package out-of-date. Just leave a comment if something is wrong, rather than sending an extra email causing the maintainer to check for a new release upstream.

> android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('java-runtime')
> android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-alsa-lib')
> android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-openal')
> android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-libstdc++5')
> android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-libxv')
> android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-ncurses')
> android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-sdl')
> android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('swt')

Namcap is just a lint tool and has many false positives and false negatives. It doesn't have the ability to figure out dependencies for Java.

> is anybody maintaining this anymore?

Yes.

> among other things

What other problems are there?

ILMostro7 commented on 2014-01-20 06:19

android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('java-runtime')
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-alsa-lib')
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-openal')
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-libstdc++5')
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-libxv')
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-ncurses')
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('lib32-sdl')
android-sdk W: Dependency included and not needed ('swt')

among other things; is anybody maintaining this anymore?

Synthead commented on 2013-12-07 00:47

android-sdk.desktop should have 644 permissions.
Exec (in android-sdk.desktop) should contain /opt/android-sdk/tools/android in the event that the path /opt/android-sdk/tools is not in the user's environment.

ilpianista commented on 2013-11-04 08:01

Hi,
no need to display the 'source /etc/profile' message on each update.

darkxsun commented on 2013-09-21 17:49

@donniezazen Remember that the Arch wiki is still a wiki---not everything there is a good idea, and certainly isn't any official recommendation. The procedure you followed allows the SDK's package manager to overwrite stuff pacman installed, and the wiki has an accuracy dispute tag in this section because it's generally considered bad practice.

donniezazen commented on 2013-09-21 16:15

@thestinger I am not clobbering the files/permissions with another package manager. I am using the installation method which is suggested by the Arch Linux Android wiki which suggests to change the owner. Thanks for replying.

thestinger commented on 2013-09-21 06:44

Using this package but then clobbering the files/permissions with another package manager is not supported.

Just put it in your home directory if you want to update it as non-root without Arch's package management getting in the way.

donniezazen commented on 2013-09-21 06:41

I was wondering the same thing as Xwang. I have /opt/android-sdk permissions setup as per wiki[1]. Will each update reset the /opt/android-sdk permission?

[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Android#Automatic_installation

Xwang commented on 2013-09-21 06:22

The lastest version complains that the directories permissions differ between filesystem and package (the directories have 777 on my pc after the last upgrade).

thestinger commented on 2013-09-13 01:43

You can use openjdk from the official repositories, it provides java-runtime and is the official reference implementation of Java 7.

Anonymous comment on 2013-09-13 01:13

I just install jdk from the AUR and it seems to give the java-runtime package it is looking for... note this is not openjdk available in the official repositories so there may be some licensing differences

donniezazen commented on 2013-08-11 18:32

@thorion Do you have java installed? What do you get when you run following command?

java -version

thorion commented on 2013-08-11 17:43

Anyone know more about this error? Dependency `java-runtime' of `android-sdk' does not exist.

saik0 commented on 2013-07-31 17:46

@thestinger: http://dl-ssl.google.com/android/repository/tools_r22.0.5-linux.zip

saik0 commented on 2013-07-31 17:17

@thestinger: http://dl-ssl.google.com/android/repository/tools_r22.0.5-linux.zip

thestinger commented on 2013-07-30 17:34

@smoak: why an out-of-date flag? The latest version on the site is still 22.0.4: http://developer.android.com/sdk/index.html

thestinger commented on 2013-06-07 21:01

android-sdk-platform-tools is a separate package

Stebalien commented on 2013-06-07 20:50

Please include $ANDROID_HOME/platform-tools in the PATH (android-sdk.csh, android-sdk.sh).

flocke commented on 2013-05-16 08:19

Do you have binutils-multilib installed?
This shoud contain the 'strip' binary (/usr/bin/strip).

Anonymous comment on 2013-05-07 09:50

Hi, I'm on a 64 bit environment and I enabled [multilib]. The dependencies are already installed, when it asks "==> Continue building android-sdk ? [Y/n]" I say yes and this error shows up
"==> ERROR: Cannot find the strip binary required for object file stripping.
==> ERROR: Makepkg was unable to build android-sdk."

Quite a newbie here, any help? Many thanks.

thestinger commented on 2013-03-13 20:50

@hobarrera: This is the base package in the SDK, there are other packages like android-sdk-platform-tools that build upon it.

hobarrera commented on 2013-03-13 20:34

Why are no binaries installed? How is this supposed to be used? How is the emulator to be run?

flamusdiu commented on 2013-02-11 14:22

@FSBmaxB: upgrade aura. maintainer fixed the bug causing this.

flamusdiu commented on 2013-02-10 21:25

@FSBmaxB, I have had this issue on a few packages with aura. It detects your system as x86_64 for some reason even though it is i686.

FSMaxB commented on 2013-02-10 19:57

@thestinger Thanks, now it works. Just didn't work when using aura.

thestinger commented on 2013-02-10 19:49

@FSMaxB: it doesn't use multilib on i686, just build it with makepkg

FSMaxB commented on 2013-02-10 12:10

Im on a x86 system, so there shouldn't be any need of multilib libraries but this package has it as dependencies, so I can't install it without changing the PKGBUILD. (I don't even know if it is save to activate the multilib-repo on a 32-Bit system)

Hoek commented on 2013-01-23 10:09

riccetn: Nevermind, forgot that it was necessary. Thanks!

riccetn commented on 2013-01-23 01:17

@Hoek: you activate the multilib repository by uncommenting it from /etc/pacman.conf

Hoek commented on 2013-01-23 00:55

I'm on a x64 system, any idea how to solve this:

> packer -S android-sdk
> Dependency `lib32-alsa-lib' of `android-sdk' does not exist.

thestinger commented on 2013-01-04 20:25

As far as I can tell, there isn't a new version out yet. Why the out-of-date flag?

thestinger commented on 2012-12-23 20:11

@Gordin: Thanks, removed it from this package.

Gordin commented on 2012-12-23 19:28

I updated the android-sdk-platform-tools package to contain the systemd service file for adb, so it should be removed here. (currently platform tools won't update due to the file conflict)

ackalker commented on 2012-12-15 23:08

Since adb is no longer part of android-sdk, shouldn't /usr/lib/systemd/system/adb.service be in the android-sdk-platform-tools package?

Kyrias commented on 2012-12-11 22:24

The java-runtime package seems to not exist anymore.

flamusdiu commented on 2012-11-17 00:00

@saik0: roger that. =)

saik0 commented on 2012-11-14 21:21

@flamusdiu: thats because the maintainer updated PKGBUILD but not pkgrel, the x86_64 files are removed when building on i686 now.

saik0 commented on 2012-11-14 21:18

@flamusdiu: thats because the maintainer updated PKGBUILD but not pkgrel, the x86_64 files are removed when building on i686 now.

flamusdiu commented on 2012-11-14 21:16

Seems its working now. I ended up removing both the installed android-sdk + the tmp files created by packer and now it installed fine. very strange. =\

saik0 commented on 2012-11-14 17:22

There are more x64 lib and bin in this release

if [[ $CARCH = "i686" ]]; then
rm -rf ${pkgdir}/opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/{monitor-,}x86_64 \
${pkgdir}/opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/lib64{EGL_translator.so,GLES_CM_translator.so,GLES_V2_translator.so,OpenglRender.so} \
${pkgdir}/opt/android-sdk/tools/emulator64-{arm,mips,x86}
fi

bolodo commented on 2012-11-14 10:28

In 32 bit version is needed add this in pkgbuild:

if [[ $CARCH = "i686" ]]; then
rm -rf ${pkgdir}/opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/{monitor-,}x86_64 \
${pkgdir}/opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/lib64{EGL_translator.so,GLES_CM_translator.so,GLES_V2_translator.so,OpenglRender.so} \
${pkgdir}/opt/android-sdk/tools/emulator64-{arm,mips,x86}

flamusdiu commented on 2012-11-14 02:18

I am getting this when making the package (through either packer or directly using makepkg command):

==> Tidying install...
-> Purging unwanted files...
-> Compressing man and info pages...
-> Stripping unneeded symbols from binaries and libraries...
strip:./opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/lib64OpenglRender.so: File format not recognized

==> ERROR: An unknown error has occurred. Exiting...
User defined signal 1


I have done some research into the issue with strip but the only thing I found was running chmod -x on the files which I did but no luck. =(

flamusdiu commented on 2012-11-14 01:51

I am getting this when making the package:

==> Tidying install...
-> Purging unwanted files...
-> Compressing man and info pages...
-> Stripping unneeded symbols from binaries and libraries...
strip:./opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/lib64OpenglRender.so: File format not recognized

==> ERROR: An unknown error has occurred. Exiting...
User defined signal 1


I have done some research into the issue with strip but the only thing I found was running chmod -x on the files which I did but no luck. =(

saik0 commented on 2012-11-13 21:59

There are more x64 lib and bin in this release

if [[ $CARCH = "i686" ]]; then
rm -rf ${pkgdir}/opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/{monitor-,}x86_64 \
${pkgdir}/opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/lib64{EGL_translator.so,GLES_CM_translator.so,GLES_V2_translator.so,OpenglRender.so} \
${pkgdir}/opt/android-sdk/tools/emulator64-{arm,mips,x86}
fi

thestinger commented on 2012-10-30 16:43

/opt/android-sdk/tools is added to the end of the PATH, so I don't think that would be the problem

egore911 commented on 2012-10-30 09:11

For me the installation of this package breaks a local installation (not via pacman) of Eclipse 4.2. From what I understand its is because we are adding a different version of SWT to the PATH than the one expected by Eclipse. For example every time I open an XML editor Eclipse would freeze.

Uninstalling resolved that issue.

thestinger commented on 2012-10-25 12:55

@bzt: why?

bzt commented on 2012-08-21 07:50

Could you write the files placed in /etc/profile.d/ in the backup array for the next version?

thestinger commented on 2012-08-17 16:39

@Stebalien: that's covered by the android-sdk-platform-tools package

Stebalien commented on 2012-08-17 16:37

Please update the path in the profile scripts to include $ANDROID_HOME/platform-tools (adb, fastboot, etc).

saik0 commented on 2012-08-14 17:11

emulator: ERROR: Could not load OpenGLES emulation library: libOpenglRender.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
emulator: WARNING: Could not initialize OpenglES emulation, using software renderer.

to fix please create this file '/etc/ld.so.conf.d/android-sdk.conf' and with the line:

/opt/android-sdk/tools/lib

then run ldconfig post_install

thestinger commented on 2012-08-14 11:35

Thanks, updated.

erdk commented on 2012-08-14 09:03

New version of SDK: http://dl.google.com/android/android-sdk_r20.0.3-linux.tgz

jmb commented on 2012-08-10 11:13

@beej it will also run with if you unset the ANDROID_SWT environment variable.

sjakub commented on 2012-08-08 04:31

frashman: This is the SDK. And it's up to date.

sjakub commented on 2012-08-07 23:01

frashman: interesting, can you provide the download link?

Anonymous comment on 2012-08-07 22:30

Please update to ADT 20.0.2

beej commented on 2012-07-27 07:17

Running "android" with JDK6 was giving me this:

Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsupportedClassVersionError: org/eclipse/swt/widgets/Display : Unsupported major.minor version 51.0

Downgrading swt to 3.7.1-1 allowed it to run. My Javafu isn't strong enough to know what's up with that.

Anonymous comment on 2012-07-19 02:37

The latest version is 20.0.1 since Jelly Bean.

thestinger commented on 2012-06-28 21:08

@queueRAM: thanks, that's a better solution

queueRAM commented on 2012-06-28 21:03

There actually aren't too many x86_64 binaries. For i686, just remove the following directories:

[ "$CARCH" = "i686" ] && rm -rf opt/$pkgname/tools/lib/{monitor-,}x86_64

juantascon commented on 2012-06-28 20:45

same error when stripping, please add:

options=('!strip')

Anonymous comment on 2012-06-28 19:03

got the same error and I'm running i686.
strip doesn't seem to know when hitting a x86_64 binary file and fails.

A different way than the one Jarav suggested is to skip stripping the
binaries by adding the following line to the PKGBUILD

options=('!strip')

You will probably waste some small amount of disk space by not stripping
the binaries and having those x86_64 files laying there for no good.

Too lazy to go looking for all x86_64 files ;)

thestinger commented on 2012-06-28 17:57

@jarav: are you on i686? I had no issues "building" this, but I'm on x86_64. Might just need to remove the x86_64 files when $CARCH is i686.

Anonymous comment on 2012-06-28 08:29

strip:./opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/monitor-x86_64/plugins/org.eclipse.equinox.launcher.gtk.linux.x86_64_1.1.100.v20110505/eclipse_1407.so: File format not recognized
/usr/bin/fakeroot: line 181: 6564 User defined signal 1 FAKEROOTKEY=$FAKEROOTKEY LD_LIBRARY_PATH="$PATHS" LD_PRELOAD="$LIB" "$@"
The build failed.

Anonymous comment on 2012-06-28 02:19

==> ERROR: An unknown error has occurred. Exiting...
/usr/lib/yaourt/pkgbuild.sh: line 200: 5288 User defined signal 1 PKGDEST="$YPKGDEST" makepkg "${MAKEPKG_ARG[@]}" -s -f -p ./PKGBUILD
==> ERROR: Makepkg was unable to build android-sdk.
==> Restart building android-sdk ? [y/N]
==> ------------------------------------
==>

thestinger commented on 2012-06-27 18:57

@Foxandxss: updated

Anonymous comment on 2012-06-27 17:57

r20 seems to be available to download, what you think about a new package?

thestinger commented on 2012-06-25 07:31

@Sephty: base-devel is an implicit dependency for building packages

Anonymous comment on 2012-06-15 19:40

binutils and pkgmake are needed for installation.

jdarnold commented on 2012-05-18 12:39

Well, r19 is mentioned on the dev site, but it is also said that you can only apply the update via the SDK Manager, so I guess the package will have to wait.

sjakub commented on 2012-04-17 18:21

There is a discussion about r18 vs r19 here: http://bit.ly/HQsmmS
It looks like r18 is somewhat broken, r19 is a temporary fix to some of the issues
and they are waiting till r20 to fix things properly.

Anonymous comment on 2012-04-17 08:41

@thestinger: The Android SDK Manager notifies me that Android SDK Tools (not Plaform-tools) r18 is outdated, and that r19 is available... Strange, as http://developer.android.com/sdk/tools-notes.html makes no mention of a r19 release Oo. And I don't think I am on a beta update channel of some sort. Still, I must be mistaken then.

PS: I did not flag the package as out-of-date

thestinger commented on 2012-04-16 13:39

hmm, they haven't posted r19 on the developer site yet (is it a stable release or just a beta?)

@espace.ariane: upgrading or installing packages with the SDK manager (as root) is safe enough, but then you end up with files lying around that pacman won't know about

Anonymous comment on 2012-04-16 07:09

@thestinger : Probably because r19 is out now. By the way, is it "safe" to upgrade through Android SDK Manager ?

thestinger commented on 2012-04-13 07:43

why the out-of-date flag?

thestinger commented on 2012-04-04 05:26

@nichtverstehen:

updated with the service file, thanks

Anonymous comment on 2012-04-02 12:52

Please, consider adding a systemd service definition file for ADB. Here is the proposed config file: http://pastebin.com/4FergCym. Just package it and on install copy to /lib/systemd/system/adb.service.

thestinger commented on 2012-03-17 21:54

@bravebug:

The Exec key can be a full path or a name to look up in $PATH

this package adds the necessary directory to $PATH in /etc/profile.d so either will work

source: http://standards.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/latest/ar01s06.html

thestinger commented on 2012-03-17 21:54

@bravebug:

The Exec key can be a full path or a name to look up in $PATH

this package adds the necessary directory to $PATH in /etc/profile.d so either will work

bravebug commented on 2012-03-08 06:19

android-sdk.desktop should linked to /opt/android-sdk/tools/android
or not?

bravebug commented on 2012-03-08 06:17

android-sdk.desktop should linked to /opt/android-sdk/tools/android

sm4tik commented on 2012-02-26 07:15

@thestinger: duh.. now I feel stupid (first time setting up a 64bit system). Anyways, thanks for the quick reply, all fine now! :)

thestinger commented on 2012-02-25 21:59

@sm4tik: the "Flag Out-of-date" button is meant for flagging stuff that is out-of-date. You should just leave a comment if something doesn't work for you (otherwise you're just sending the maintainer 2 emails).

All of the lib32- packages are available in the [multilib] repository.

sm4tik commented on 2012-02-25 21:53

Trying to install on an x84_64 will fail due to dependencies not available. All the lib32- stuff are missing from repos/aur. Flagged out of date bacause of this.

thestinger commented on 2011-12-31 00:34

@Musikolo: To get /opt/android-sdk in PATH, you'll have to login again (android-sdk.sh is put in /etc/profile.d, which sets ANDROID_HOME, ANDROID_SWT and PATH).

To install stuff with `android', you should just use root (or preferably, don't install stuff that way; use pacman packages instead, lots of stuff is already in the AUR such as android-ndk). Adding write permissions to a directory in the PATH of other users subverts the basics of the *nix security model.

Musikolo commented on 2011-12-31 00:01

@thestinger: The desktop file is broken, i.e., the link doesn't work because the path is not specified (I don't have /opt/android-sdk in my PATH variable) and the command to run is not android-sdk, but android instead.

Apart from that, I have added write permission to the /opt/android-sdk directory to allow my non-root user to run the android command. Is there any better way to do this? Is it a permission bug that should be fixed?

Best regards and good work.

thestinger commented on 2011-12-13 19:07

@nema: thanks, updated

nema commented on 2011-12-13 12:09

r16 - sha1: 'c12f2431f243d7f2b7f61168d2839dcd36726176'

thestinger commented on 2011-11-07 15:45

@jdarnold: I'm not sure what the problem is. The directories all have their permissions set in the tarball from google.com and I don't change them (I use cp -a). The permissions on those directories are correct when I build and install the package on my computers (755).

thestinger commented on 2011-11-07 15:44

@jdarnold: I'm not sure what the problem is. The directories all have their permissions set in the tarball from google.com and I don't change them (I use cp -a).

jdarnold commented on 2011-11-04 19:00

Still (again?) getting these errors:
warning: directory permissions differ on opt/android-sdk/
filesystem: 775 package: 777
warning: directory permissions differ on opt/android-sdk/add-ons/
filesystem: 755 package: 777
warning: directory permissions differ on opt/android-sdk/platforms/
filesystem: 775 package: 777

jdarnold commented on 2011-11-04 18:59

I think the current thinking is that you should always use AUR to update the android-sdk packages.

manuel commented on 2011-10-30 15:04

So i got arounr it with a "-f" once i noticed i already had up-to-date Android SDKs, my question is, what's the right way to update it? Via the Android tool or yaourt?

manuel commented on 2011-10-30 14:49

I got a bunch of conflicts with "yaourt -Sayu", i just don't know if i should update via yaour or android??

Proceed with installation? [Y/n] y
(1/1) checking package integrity [-------------------------------] 100%
(1/1) checking for file conflicts [-------------------------------] 100%
error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files)
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/ant/build.xml exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/chimpchat.jar exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/commons-codec-1.4.jar exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/commons-logging-1.1.1.jar exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/httpclient-4.1.1.jar exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/httpcore-4.1.jar exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/httpmime-4.1.1.jar exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/libEGL_translator.so exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/libGLES_CM_translator.so exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/libGLES_V2_translator.so exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/libOpenglRender.so exists in filesystem
android-sdk: /opt/android-sdk/tools/lib/mkidentity.jar exists in filesystem

thestinger commented on 2011-10-29 06:29

updated to r15, let me know if you encounter any problems :)

EgidioCaprino commented on 2011-10-23 18:26

@thestinger: thank you :)

thestinger commented on 2011-10-23 17:40

@Aegidius: did you relogin after installing it? You need to do that so /etc/profile.d scripts get sourced.

EgidioCaprino commented on 2011-10-23 07:21

I installed it but when I run the command "android" it says "command not found".

JB26 commented on 2011-10-21 20:57

There is a Bug in android-sdk r14 that prevents the emulator from starting if you got any video devices (Web-Cam, TV-Card…) in your PC.
Try renaming all /dev/video… files, than it should work again. See also: https://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=20952

thestinger commented on 2011-10-19 19:15

The permissions problem should be fixed now, let me know if there are still issues.

jdarnold commented on 2011-10-19 18:31

I get these warings when I install:

warning: directory permissions differ on opt/android-sdk/
filesystem: 775 package: 777
warning: directory permissions differ on opt/android-sdk/add-ons/
filesystem: 755 package: 777
warning: directory permissions differ on opt/android-sdk/platforms/
filesystem: 775 package: 777

If I check the pkg/opt/android-sdk folders after doing 'makepkg -s', I do see that those folders are, in fact, 777. Shouldn't they be 755?

BTW, thanks for the quick update on the android-sdk. Can't wait to play with some of the new APIs.

Anonymous comment on 2011-10-05 04:32

Thanks very much @riccent

riccetn commented on 2011-10-02 03:58

@aeslava You have a old package database and need to run 'pacman -Sy'

Anonymous comment on 2011-10-02 02:39

Hello, I have a error:

:: Descargando paquetes desde extra...
error: fallo al obtener archivo 'swt-3.7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz' desde mirror.archlinux.cl: File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access)
error: fallo al obtener archivo 'swt-3.7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz' desde mirror.rit.edu: Not Found
error: fallo al obtener archivo 'swt-3.7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz' desde mirror.rit.edu: File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access)
error: fallo al obtener archivo 'swt-3.7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz' desde archlinux.mirrors.uk2.net: Not Found
error: fallo al obtener archivo 'swt-3.7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz' desde ftp.archlinux.org: File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access)
error: fallo al obtener archivo 'swt-3.7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz' desde mirrors.aarnet.edu.au: No address record
error: fallo al obtener archivo 'swt-3.7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz' desde mir1.archlinux.fr: File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access)
error: fallo al obtener archivo 'swt-3.7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz' desde repo.archlinux.fr: Not Found
error: fallo al obtener archivo 'swt-3.7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz' desde www.laqee.unal.edu.co: Not Found
precaución: error al descargar algunos archivos desde extra
error: error al realizar la transacción (Not Found)
Ocurrieron errores, no se actualizaron paquetes

thanks

thestinger commented on 2011-09-22 19:07

Giving users write access to directories and files that are in root's $PATH is much worse than running a trusted program as root. Ideally, you wouldn't need to use the android updater/installer to manage packages (there are AUR packages for android-sdk-platform-tools, android-ndk, etc.).

The android group also didn't work properly (files were installed with the owner/group of the user, not root:android), since you can't easily use setuid/setgid on scripts and jar files without making wrappers for them.

marquicus commented on 2011-09-22 18:51

why do we need to install android packages as root? why did you remove the group?

Leryan commented on 2011-09-10 12:50

In the /etc/profile.d/android* scripts, put ANDROID_SWT="/sur/share/java" please.

Leryan commented on 2011-09-10 12:49

It seems to be a problem with the /opt/android-sdk/tools/android script.

Leryan commented on 2011-09-10 12:48

Hi, for my problem, it can be solved this way:

$ export ANDROID_SWT="/usr/share/java/" #path where is swt.jar file
$ android

thestinger commented on 2011-09-09 20:29

added swt as a dependency

Leryan commented on 2011-09-09 14:29

I have this error :

Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: no swt-gtk-3550 or swt-gtk in swt.library.path, java.library.path or the jar file
at org.eclipse.swt.internal.Library.loadLibrary(Unknown Source)
at org.eclipse.swt.internal.Library.loadLibrary(Unknown Source)
at org.eclipse.swt.internal.C.<clinit>(Unknown Source)
at org.eclipse.swt.internal.Converter.wcsToMbcs(Unknown Source)
at org.eclipse.swt.internal.Converter.wcsToMbcs(Unknown Source)
at org.eclipse.swt.widgets.Display.<clinit>(Unknown Source)
at com.android.sdkmanager.Main.showSdkManagerWindow(Main.java:319)
at com.android.sdkmanager.Main.doAction(Main.java:307)
at com.android.sdkmanager.Main.run(Main.java:108)
at com.android.sdkmanager.Main.main(Main.java:97)

Svenstaro commented on 2011-08-15 00:41

Seems to be a packer problem. Tell the author.

Anonymous comment on 2011-08-14 22:26

if I have android-sdk-platform-tools, packer reinstalls android-sdk every time I run an aur update, wtf? also I get this error:

warning: directory permissions differ on opt/android-sdk/
filesystem: 775 package: 755

M0Rf30 commented on 2011-08-12 17:35

please use android-udev in optdepends

M0Rf30 commented on 2011-08-12 17:35

please use android-udev in optsdepend

M0Rf30 commented on 2011-08-12 17:18

please use android-udev in optsdepend

vnoel commented on 2011-08-01 06:22

Hi,

I think we miss the swt dependency, see for example: http://www.receptorblog.com/wordpress/get-ddms-working-on-64bit-fedora/

I needed it on my side, I don't know if it is restricted to 64bits.

Svenstaro commented on 2011-06-19 05:05

Turns out I'd need to make the SDK from source in order to be able to redistribute it. Bah. This package will stay in AUR for a while to come.

thestinger commented on 2011-06-15 19:44

Looks like it's already done. Just needs quotes around $srcdir/$pkgdir :P.

Svenstaro commented on 2011-06-15 07:22

thestinger could you quickly pick up android-ndk and make is consistent with this package? I will then move both packages at the same time. I orphaned it for you.

Svenstaro commented on 2011-06-15 07:20

Is fastboot part of the sdk (perhaps in source form)?

ajes commented on 2011-06-15 07:18

Could you add to this package 'fastboot' from htc? It is precompiled on this site: http://developer.htc.com/adp.html

TioDuke commented on 2011-06-14 09:50

OK. Fair enough. Thanks for the answer.

thestinger commented on 2011-06-14 06:06

I originally added the android group because the old version of the package chown'ed the stuff to the user who built/installed the package, so I wanted to keep the ability to install stuff as non-root.

It "worked", but it was broken/unsafe on a multiuser system. There would need to be a setuid/setgid wrapper for the `android` program (since it isn't native C/C++, but java), so stuff wouldn't just be installed as username:users - I'm really not sure how you would make that safe, so I decided just to KISS and get rid of it. Installing packages/updating isn't something you need to do every day, so using root/sudo is a good compromise.

If you still want to use it, it's just commented out in the PKGBUILD and .install file.

TioDuke commented on 2011-06-14 04:14

Why did you remove the android group stuff? It worked like a charm. Why is running as root the prefrered way to go now?

thestinger commented on 2011-06-13 16:53

@mangust: fixed. Thanks

Det commented on 2011-06-13 10:37

Why does it even need to be the full path? Isn't 'groupdel' just enough?

mangust commented on 2011-06-13 07:56

@thestinger: correct in android-sdk.install line 3 "... && usr/sbin/groupdel android"

Svenstaro commented on 2011-06-13 07:51

Very well, I will prepare an Android development group this week along with some wiki docs. I will then delete this package at some point.

thestinger commented on 2011-06-13 02:15

It is now. I removed the android group stuff because it never worked properly (you'd need a C setgid wrapper, and I'm not sure how safe that would be). Feel free to move it to [community] :).

Svenstaro commented on 2011-06-12 23:21

Is this package currently in a well maintainable state?

thestinger commented on 2011-06-12 22:33

I think it would be great if you took the android stuff to [community]. I don't really use the SDK much, but I needed it at one point so I adopted the package and fixed it up.

Svenstaro commented on 2011-06-12 21:09

I'd like to raise your attention to this: http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2011-June/014823.html

Note that I will not take your package if you want to keep it here in AUR.

thestinger commented on 2011-06-11 16:32

I think I might remove the android group stuff and give up on the idea of installing stuff as non-root. They end up with the wrong owner, so it's probably better just to use root for that. Any opinions?

thestinger commented on 2011-06-11 15:59

Added the SDK license, I just ripped it out of their HTML markup because there doesn't seem to be a text version.

Svenstaro commented on 2011-05-27 16:27

This should definitely install the license since it is a custom license.

Anonymous comment on 2011-05-10 19:36

Here is the diff on PKGBUILD to bring this up to date for version 11:

5,6c5,6
< pkgver=r10
< pkgrel=2
---
> pkgver=r11
> pkgrel=0
28c28
< md5sums=('c022dda3a56c8a67698e6a39b0b1a4e0'
---
> md5sums=('026c67f82627a3a70efb197ca3360d0a'

thestinger commented on 2011-05-05 21:17

@fwalch

looks like it's used by a few other things too, added it :)

fwalch commented on 2011-05-05 12:26

Could you change the /etc/profile.d/android.sh to:

export ANDROID_HOME=/opt/android-sdk
export PATH=$PATH:$ANDROID_HOME/tools

ANDROID_HOME is needed for using Maven with Android; I don't know if it is used by anything else, though. Thanks!

thestinger commented on 2011-04-28 21:06

/opt/android/tools gets added to PATH, so just 'android' should be fine (unless there's another program with the same name)

http://standards.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/latest/ar01s06.html

eduardosm commented on 2011-04-28 18:12

On android-sdk.desktop, shouldn't be the executable '/opt/android-sdk/tools/android' instead of 'android'?

Synthead commented on 2011-04-13 14:08

Where is lib32-sdl?

Anonymous comment on 2011-04-08 13:07

Shouldn't the 'apache-ant' package be one of the dependencies? Or at least an optional one.

johanbcn commented on 2011-04-03 14:35

Why isn't fastboot included in the package?

thestinger commented on 2011-03-03 07:42

added /opt/android-sdk/add-ons to the android group (with group write perms)

Gordin commented on 2011-02-28 09:54

@ntony adb is included in android-sdk-platform-tools. That package also adds platform-tools to the PATH and lets you start it as a daemon

antony.ho commented on 2011-02-28 09:10

Also when installing Google API add-ons, it prompts "Failed to create directory /opt/android-sdk/add-ons".

I have done:
chgrp -R android /opt/android-sdk/add-ons
chmod g+w /opt/android-sdk/add-ons

It's solved after changing its group and file permission.

antony.ho commented on 2011-02-28 08:53

Thanks for the package!
adb has been moved to platform-tools/ directory. Please also add this directory to PATH. Otherwise, user will not be able to install/update to lastest ADT.
I have added /opt/android-sdk/platform-tools to my PATH. It's working fine now.

jackgu1988 commented on 2011-02-23 17:30

I figured out how to get over it here: http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers/browse_thread/thread/9e77be29d3f900d6?fwc=1 (3rd post)

jackgu1988 commented on 2011-02-23 17:21

After the last update I get on eclipse:

This Android SDK requires Android Developer Toolkit version 10.0.0 or above. Current version is 9.0.0.v201101191456-93220. Please update ADT to the latest version.

matteo81 commented on 2011-02-16 20:48

Thanks @jdarnold @Lorem-Ipsum. Working fine now ...

jdarnold commented on 2011-02-14 16:36

Have you added multilib to your list of mirrors? And have you updated said list recently?

[multilib]
Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist

Lorem-Ipsum commented on 2011-02-14 16:33

lib32-libstdc++5 > http://www.archlinux.org/packages/multilib/x86_64/lib32-libstdc++5/

Update your package repos

matteo81 commented on 2011-02-14 16:03

I am trying to install this under x86_64 but I get an error: Dependency `lib32-libstdc++5' of `android-sdk' does not exist. Any idea how to solve this?

thestinger commented on 2011-02-12 19:36

@ale6: updated :D.

Anonymous comment on 2011-02-12 14:44

Can you add "chgrp g+w /opt/android-sdk/platforms/" to enable users in the android group to install AVDs ? Thanks! :)

thestinger commented on 2011-01-31 20:59

actually fixed now I hope :P

Gordin commented on 2011-01-31 20:44

Also, your package destroys the PATH for everybody now 0o The way you're doing it you hardcode the PATH your currently using into android.sh and android.csh.
You have to put the echo in ' ', not in " " !

Gordin commented on 2011-01-31 20:35

The post-install still tells people to set the PATH manually, I think that can be removed now :)

thestinger commented on 2011-01-31 20:30

Added tools to PATH

Gordin commented on 2011-01-31 13:41

I updated the PKGBUILD to include profile.d files so the tools are automatically added to the PATH:
PKGBUILD: http://aur.pastebin.com/69e53gTJ
contents of android-sdk.csh: setenv PATH ${PATH}:/opt/android-sdk/tools
contents of android-sdk.sh: export PATH=$PATH:/opt/android-sdk/tools

vnoel commented on 2011-01-31 11:49

Hi, has the profile.d file disappeared?

Gordin commented on 2011-01-29 23:53

Maybe you could add my "android-sdk-platform-tools" package to the optdepends. It provides the platform-tools including adb. (Which seems to be the main reason for people to install android-sdk)

thestinger commented on 2011-01-26 21:06

Updated. Tell me if there are any problems :).

Anonymous comment on 2011-01-25 15:55

Allright. My misstake. Downloading platform-tools right now. Didn't read the wiki.

Anonymous comment on 2011-01-25 15:41

I don't have any platform-tools dir and no adb. At least I can't find them in /opt/android-sdk/ dir. Is it me or the package that are bad? Could be Google to of course.

thestinger commented on 2011-01-24 20:29

@TamCore: platform-tools can be written to by a regular user, so it shouldn't be in root's path. I could add the tools directory though if you really want...

TamCore commented on 2011-01-24 12:53

Why you don't put the "export PATH=$PATH:/opt/android-sdk/tools:/opt/android-sdk/platform-tools" into a file in /etc/profile.d ?

$ cat /etc/profile.d/android.sh
export PATH=$PATH:/opt/android-sdk/tools:/opt/android-sdk/platform-tools

works fine.

jdarnold commented on 2011-01-24 12:20

adb was moved from tools to platfom-tools by Google

Anonymous comment on 2011-01-23 10:12

Again, after the last update i have got no adb in the tools directory. This time an andoid update sdk didn't help, because there are no packages selectable for update.

Any ideas?

thestinger commented on 2011-01-18 20:49

@Det: fixed. zsh made me forget how sh/bash handle variables xD.

I'll add quotes to the rest of my packages too.

Anonymous comment on 2011-01-18 18:49

Works as a charm on a fresh install.

Det commented on 2011-01-18 14:52

Good. You only forgot the quotes (") around srcdirs and pkgdirs :P.

thestinger commented on 2011-01-18 05:45

Fixed it up a bit and added an android group for updating the platform. It works, but it's not perfect for a multi-user environment because the updates get written to the disk with the current user as the owner, I need to figure out how to get setgid working with the script that starts it (if it's possible).

thestinger commented on 2011-01-18 05:44

Added android group for updating the platform, it's not perfect because the stuff get creates as the user that's running it, I need to figure out how to do the setgid thing since the android executable is just a script.

thestinger commented on 2011-01-18 05:41

Added android group for updating the platform.

thestinger commented on 2011-01-18 04:43

Fixed it up a bit, but I'm not liking the current install method at all.

Giving write permissions to non-root users after adding stuff in the directory to root's path is a VERY bad idea.

I'll definitely get rid of the android.sh file and replace it with a post install message explaining how to add the stuff to $PATH.

I think we could do something like chgrp everything to an android group and then set the setgid bit on executables that need to be able to write to the directories/files. I'll check out the PKGBUILDs for games in ABS because I think they do something similar.

thestinger commented on 2011-01-18 04:40

Fixed it up a bit, but I'm not liking the current install method at all.

Changing ownership of the directory to a non-root user after adding stuff in the directory to root's path is a VERY bad idea.

I'll definitely get rid of the android.sh file and replace it with a post install message explaining how to add the stuff to $PATH.

I think we could do something like chgrp everything to an android group and then set the setgid bit on executables that need to be able to write to the directories/files. I'll check out the PKGBUILDs for games in ABS because I think they do something similar.

thestinger commented on 2011-01-18 03:58

adopted, I'll upload a new src tarball in a bit

Anonymous comment on 2011-01-17 18:57

i drop this package because unfortunately i have not time to spend on it :(

Det commented on 2011-01-17 13:35

And 'java-runtime' should be a dependency. Please follow the comments, marlock.

Det commented on 2011-01-14 19:10

Also it'd be more convenient if the url was this one instead: http://developer.android.com/sdk/index.html

Det commented on 2011-01-06 09:50

You should replace the orhpan "$startdir/pkg" with "$pkgdir" and use quotes (") around dir variables ("$srcdir" and "$pkgdir") in your PKGBUILD.

In addition, these lines:

mkdir -p (")$pkgdir/opt(")
mkdir -p (")$pkgdir/etc/profile.d(")

..could be just:

mkdir -p "$pkgdir"{/opt,/etc/profile.d}

E: also the "chown -R myusername:users" comment could be done in the PKGBUILD with: "chown -R ${user}" (the 'users' group is already the owner of the second group).

Det commented on 2011-01-06 09:41

You should replace the orhpan "$startdir/pkg" with "$pkgdir" and use quotes (") around dir variables ("$srcdir" and "$pkgdir") in your PKGBUILD.

In addition, these lines:

mkdir -p (")$pkgdir/opt(")
mkdir -p (")$pkgdir/etc/profile.d(")

..could be just:

mkdir -p "$pkgdir"{/opt,/etc/profile.d}

Anonymous comment on 2011-01-03 17:24

@u2ix You need to enable the "multilib" repository in pacman.conf

u2ix commented on 2010-12-30 10:34

cannot install it on 64. he doesn't find the lib32-xx dependencies

Mr.Elendig commented on 2010-12-28 19:34

Why does the .install do "echo 'Also, an installation of ALSA has been detected, so you should install lib32-alsa-lib as well'", without checking if the system actually is a 64bit system in the first place?

Seems rather silly, specially when the package explicitly depends on lib32-alsa-lib in the first place for x86_64...

jdarnold commented on 2010-12-17 18:52

You'll also need to update the Android Ecplipse plugin, as it puts adb into platfom-tools now and the old plugin doesn't find it in tools, so it is confused.

Svenstaro commented on 2010-12-14 02:26

marlock, I orphaned android-ndk, do you want to take up maintainership?

hoban commented on 2010-12-10 15:33

Thanks for the notes about how to get adb back. This is the kind of thing that should have been handled in the install file or at a minimum should have been printed out during installation. Otherwise, things look good. Thanks.

Lucky commented on 2010-12-10 09:58

@Bobyl
run "android update sdk", select "Android SDK Platformtools" and install it.

Bobyl commented on 2010-12-10 07:27

Isn't adb included in the latest release?

It's annoying to have lost the only tool I was using in the sdk...

Anonymous comment on 2010-12-07 16:35

thank you ech0s7! android.sh updated

Anonymous comment on 2010-12-07 14:58

@marlock:
You have to change android.sh to (some tools as adb are moved in platform-tools):
#!/bin/sh

export PATH=$PATH:/opt/android-sdk/tools:/opt/android-sdk/platform-tools


I have already notified before, but you haven't read it.

vnoel commented on 2010-12-07 12:04

Nice :)

Thanks!

Anonymous comment on 2010-12-07 10:38

updated to r08 & added udev-android-rules to optdepends

Anonymous comment on 2010-12-07 10:33

You have need also to change android.sh to:
#!/bin/sh

export PATH=$PATH:/opt/android-sdk/tools:/opt/android-sdk/platform-tools

Anonymous comment on 2010-12-07 10:14

@corruptz0r: your PKGBUILD is bugged. (There are $ at end of line, instead of right text)

corruptz0r commented on 2010-12-06 20:34

Here is a PKGBUILD for revision 8: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=3jwsS3RL

corruptz0r commented on 2010-12-06 20:32

Here is a PKGBUILD for revision 8: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=3jwsS3RL

vnoel commented on 2010-12-06 17:30

Hi,

I use this thing:
SUBSYSTEM=="usb", ATTR{idVendor}=="04e8", MODE="0660", GROUP="users"

I would say that it should be added as optional depend…

Anonymous comment on 2010-12-06 17:07

Please update to Revision 8. Thanks http://developer.android.com/sdk/index.html

Anonymous comment on 2010-12-06 16:03

i can add all the Manufacturers. it's not a problem.
the dedicated package can be a good thing but it must be well thinked.
In android-sdk it should be added in depends or in optional depends?

i used 666 because i followed the google documentation: http://developer.android.com/guide/developing/device.html
are you suggesting to modify MODE from "0666" to "users"?

vnoel commented on 2010-12-06 13:54

And do not use 666 as MODE, would be better to decide for a group of people that have access to this kind of devices!

I use users, but we could use a dedicated one, named adbusers or something like that!

vnoel commented on 2010-12-06 13:52

Why not put all of them?

I have HTC and Samsung for example.

Actually, would be better to have a package dedicated to that, so that updating it is easier :)

Thanks!

Anonymous comment on 2010-12-06 09:52

added udev rule: choose you device by setting the vendor ID inside the PKGBUILD (default is HTC)

Anonymous comment on 2010-12-06 06:14

I am a robot. AUR guidelines suggest to not include binaries. Examples:
android-sdk/android-sdk.png
A survey of TUs suggests an icon or two is okay, but please ask upstream to officially include it. This robot will not bother you again.

Huulivoide commented on 2010-12-06 00:00

Could you add a udev rule to the package so that the normal
users can use adb ass well now only root is allowed.

/etc/udev/rules.d/51-android.rules:
SUBSYSTEM=="usb", SYSFS{idVendor}=="0bb4", MODE="0666"

tomxtobin commented on 2010-10-02 22:44

The android-sdk.install incorrectly informs a 32-bit user that they need to install lib32-alsa-lib.

Anonymous comment on 2010-09-18 20:36

Can you please do something with fastboot?

dogukan commented on 2010-09-11 04:28

r07 available

filand commented on 2010-09-05 20:50

I have a suggestion about notification in the post-inst script about setting user/rights. May be it would be a better solution to create a group 'android' and set the g+rw for /opt/android-sdk during the instalation. The user should be notified about adding the responsible users to the group instead. Just like many other packages are doing (f.e. wireshark, virtualbox) what do you think?

MartinZ commented on 2010-09-03 02:34

All lib32 are now in a separate repo, look here: http://www.archlinux.org/news/508/

Anonymous comment on 2010-09-02 14:59

I have problem with dependency lib32-alsa-lib - does not exist.

arfoll commented on 2010-09-01 07:26

I get this problem when installing:
Dependency `lib32-libxv' of `android-sdk' does not exist.

Anonymous comment on 2010-08-30 13:19

@windscape This package is fine with the new system ... the correct dependency is still 'lib32-gcc-libs' from multilib ... that package and 'gcc-libs-multilib' are not the same and do not provide the same things.

Anonymous comment on 2010-08-27 23:00

Here is a PKGBUILD to make android-sdk work with the new multilib repo announced today. It requires the new PKGBUILD I linked to in the comments of lib32-libstdc++5 at http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=11191.
http://aur.pastebin.com/r2WYDV7i

dront78 commented on 2010-08-17 07:02

chmod g+ws $pkgdir/opt/android-sdk should be more generic in multiuser development environment
also please update icon to be more comfortable like this http://bit.ly/9cuxo7

Anonymous comment on 2010-07-22 18:48

also requires lib32-zlib for aapt to work

Anonymous comment on 2010-07-22 16:11

I had to installs some 32 bit libs for ADB to work:
sudo pacman -S lib32-glibc lib32-ncurses lib32-libstdc++5

Anonymous comment on 2010-07-21 16:14

should add 'java-runtime' as a dependency

Anonymous comment on 2010-07-18 14:51

Could you please add fastboot (http://android-dls.com/files/linux/fastboot) to the tools? (probably with an install command)

Thanks.

Anonymous comment on 2010-07-03 15:09

sorry, that's my fool. Installation is made as root, so 'whoami' returns 'root'.
$USERNAME can be used instead of `whoami`. 'su' and 'sudo' don't change it.

uag=$(getent passwd | grep $USERNAME | awk -F: '{print $3 ":" $4}')
chown -R $uag /opt/android-sdk/

Anonymous comment on 2010-06-22 14:48

This package has not targets (or system images)

Anonymous comment on 2010-06-21 11:16

it does not work...
i putted that lines into android-sdk.install file, but the owner is still root

i really don't understand why...

Anonymous comment on 2010-06-12 19:51

this should work;
uag=$(getent passwd | grep `whoami` | awk -F: '{print $3 ":" $4}')
sudo chown -R $uag /opt/android-sdk/

Anonymous comment on 2010-06-07 13:06

i added a launcher in /usr/bin, an icon and a menu entry

i would like also to change automatically permissions on /opt/android-sdk using the post_install script, but i failed.

anyone having some good ideas is very welcome

td123 commented on 2010-06-07 05:32

Letting someone more interested take this one over. Orphaning.

td123 commented on 2010-05-31 01:13

@gskbyte
done

gskbyte commented on 2010-05-30 23:47

You should include "lib32-alsa-lib" as dependency for x86_64, if it is not installed, emulator crashes on startup. See here: http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers/browse_thread/thread/9cbd759e8d59f3bc?pli=1

td123 commented on 2010-05-24 21:58

that is not a new version, that is a completely new package, not a newer version of this...

gskbyte commented on 2010-05-24 21:00

New version released, this is the updated PKGBUILD: http://aur.pastebin.com/4TF2QDMG