569760 - upgrade android NDK and SDK

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Release Engineering :: General, defect)

Description

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

The Android dev team have requested that the stock NDK be replaced with the Crystax NDK because it has been custom compiled to include STL.

Comment 1

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

Based on an IRC discussion today in #mobile the android devs requested that the custom NDK be added to the staging build process to allow the code blocked by needing the STL to move forward.

Using the NDK still raises certain red-flags IMO about the STL and what parts of the STL are exempt for LGPL use and so on.  I've cc'd Harvey so that he can be aware of this.

Comment 2

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

The CrystaX NDK can be found at http://crystax.net/android/ndk-r3.php

Comment 3

[Michael Wu [:mwu]]

A newer version is available at http://www.crystax.net/android/ndk-r4.php

Comment 4

[harvey anderson]

Just poked around the site, but did not see any license terms. Can you provide the license.

Comment 5

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

(In reply to comment #4)
> Just poked around the site, but did not see any license terms. Can you provide
> the license.

The core issue is that it's the license that comes with the normal NDK 

http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/index.html

blended with the license from GNU libstdc++ found at

http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/bk01pt01ch01s02.html

We would doing our own custom compile of the NDK using the prior work of the CrystaX site dev as a roadmap if there are no legal hurdles.

Comment 6

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

Attachment: Adjust puppet manifest for new NDK and SDK

I used -r4c for the version number (added the "c") to denote that it's a custom NDK - seemed the simplest way to make that difference

Comment 7

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

Attachment: Change the rpmbuild SPEC files for new NDK and SDK versions

Comment 8

[Luis Villa [Outside Counsel; for non-law use [e-mail]]]

Talked this over with Stuart; he's still inclined to look at http://libcxx.llvm.org/ (which is definitely license-safe) so I'm going to hold off on a full review of this until that is decided.

Comment 9

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

Do you want me to pause deploying the custom NDK until the libcxx.llvm.org decision has been made?

Or deploy it to staging only to allow work to continue internally?

Comment 10

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

(In reply to comment #9)
> Do you want me to pause deploying the custom NDK until the libcxx.llvm.org
> decision has been made?
> 
> Or deploy it to staging only to allow work to continue internally?

I don't think deploying to staging is going to help mobile devs much. Those environments aren't going to be guaranteed to be running all the time.

Comment 11

[John O'Duinn [:joduinn] (please use "needinfo?" flag)]

(In reply to comment #9)
> Do you want me to pause deploying the custom NDK until the libcxx.llvm.org
> decision has been made?
> 
> Or deploy it to staging only to allow work to continue internally?

Stuart: any update on this NDK discussion?

Comment 12

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

Comment on attachment 449029 [details] [diff] [review]
Adjust puppet manifest for new NDK and SDK

I think this is woefully bitrotted at this point.

Comment 13

[Luis Villa [Outside Counsel; for non-law use [e-mail]]]

I discussed the Crystax situation yesterday with Shaver. After that discussion, I'm OK with us shipping Crystax by analogy to previous exceptions to the
licensing policy.

Note that we need to publish the Crystax source (or the analogous
source we use to build from if we build it ourselves.)

Comment 14

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

(In reply to comment #13)
> I discussed the Crystax situation yesterday with Shaver. After that discussion,
> I'm OK with us shipping Crystax by analogy to previous exceptions to the
> licensing policy.
> 
> Note that we need to publish the Crystax source (or the analogous
> source we use to build from if we build it ourselves.)

Thanks Luis! Shaver!   I'll get going with the integration of that NDK.

Comment 15

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

Attachment: Change the rpmbuild SPEC files for new NDK and SDK versions

tweaked the source zip filename

Comment 16

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

Attachment: Changes to devtools.pp to install new Android NDK and SDK versions

Comment 17

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

Attachment: Change the rpmbuild SPEC files for new NDK and SDK versions

that's what I get for last minute tweaks. changes the source to .zip but forgot to update the install section

Comment 18

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

Attachment: Changes to devtools.pp to install new Android NDK and SDK versions

Comment 19

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

Attachment: Changes to devtools.pp to install new Android NDK and SDK versions

one should not try to "fix" things at 0430 - I created a dependency loop.

Comment 20

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

Attachment: Change the rpmbuild SPEC files for new NDK and SDK versions

added "AutoReqProv: no" to spec to prevent dependency check

Comment 21

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

Updating summary to match reality.

Comment 22

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

This is really a releng thing at this point, too.

Comment 23

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

Comment on attachment 451564 [details] [diff] [review]
Changes to devtools.pp to install new Android NDK and SDK versions

changeset:   179:e10fb3ec5468

Comment 24

[[e-mail] (:bhearsum)]

Comment on attachment 451587 [details] [diff] [review]
Change the rpmbuild SPEC files for new NDK and SDK versions

changeset:   4:c0b4402bfea6

Comment 25

[Stuart Parmenter]

bear: Can you post a copy of the NDK + CrystaX patch together as a source tarball somewhere on ftp?

Comment 26

[Mike Taylor [:bear]]

(In reply to comment #25)
> bear: Can you post a copy of the NDK + CrystaX patch together as a source
> tarball somewhere on ftp?

yep - tracking this as bug 572865