[arch-general] Android support in Linux Arch

[Hugo Osvaldo Barrera]

Looks like my message was silently dropped by mailman. Lemme retry this:

On 2014-04-16 20:49, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera wrote:
> First of all, thanks for all the efort you're putting into moving these
> arch tools into the official repos. I've been wanting to see this (and
> non-bin packages) for ages! :)
> 
> On 2014-04-17 00:50, Karol Babioch wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Am 17.04.2014 00:38, schrieb Anatol Pomozov:
> > > Are there people with Android development background? What exactly do
> > > you miss in Arch? 
> > 
> > The problem I face with the Android situation in Arch is that currently
> > there seems to be no "clean" (TM) way to install the SDK and related
> > stuff. The android-sdk package from AUR is fine and dandy, but one
> > usually also needs to install a whole bunch of API specific packages
> > through the "android" tool from the SDK.
> > 
> > - This doesn't work for normal users, e.g. you can update the packages
> > using Eclipse, but you need to start "/opt/android-sdk/tools/android" as
> > root
> 
> Does this download additional files, or actually replace files the arch package installs?
> 
> If it's the former, then you can create a user group (eg: android),
> and make the directory where files are downloaded owned by that group.
> 
> > 
> > - Installing any sort of package through the "installer" mentioned above
> > isn't compatible with the whole idea of package management, because the
> > package manager isn't aware of these files. I ran into conflicts before,
> > which I had to resolve by temporarily removing some components.
> 
> If we can make arch packages for all the packages available through that
> installed, that would make it innecesary, though still usable. Something
> similar happens with npm, gem (when used at a system level), pip, etc:
> there's a second package manager that can (optionally) be used, but it's
> a bad idea if you want to keep using arch's.
> 
> > 
> > Maybe I'm doing something wrong here, but at least this is what I've
> > experienced throughout the last couple of months. Unfortunately I don't
> > see a good way how this can be improved, as I like the idea of
> > installing only API components that I really need and get instant (!)
> > updates for them directly from the upstream project.
> > 
> 
> If you want the instante updated from upstream, then you'd need to update
> the arch package instantly ;) This is exactly what happens with some of
> the above mentioned examples (npm).
> 
> > Anyone familiar with the situation on other distributions? How do they
> > handle all of this?
> > 
> 
> I did a bit of research on this.
> Ubuntu suggest you download the SDK and install into into your home:
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/AndroidSDK
> (so no useful precedent here).
> 
> The same applies for Fedora:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/HOWTO_Setup_Android_Development
> 
> Gentoo uses the upstream binaries in their packages (ebuild?):
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Android
> 
> They DO seem to set permissions to 775, and ownership to root:android,
> so I guess they do something similar to what I suggested above.
> 
> Finally, Debian doesn't seem to package anythis other than the packages
> that were mentioned as existing in AUR as source packages, so there's
> nothing to be leart there.
> 
> > Best regards,
> > Karol Babioch
> > 
> 
> Hope this helps a bit,
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -- 
> Hugo Osvaldo Barrera



-- 
Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
A: No, it doesn't make sense.
Q: Should I include quotations *after* my reply?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20140417/1f57c14a/attachment.asc>