This commit renames `_platform` suffix to `` (empty string) so that
non-apex variations are not renamed to `_core_shared_platform` or
`_vendor_shared_platform`.
This commit makes sure that `_core_shared` and `_vendor_shared` is
always under `$OUT_DIR/soong` regardless the usages from apex modules.
Furthermore, this avoids the confusing stale lsdump files (e.g. both
`_core_shared` and `_core_shared_platform exist) while creating
reference ABI dumps for VNDK ABI checks.
Bug: 121986692
Test: lunch aosp_arm64-userdebug; make # no more _platform variants.
Change-Id: Ic02a60ac45f982580349661c22331d114617fd92
This change fixes a problem that APEX variations are created for the
modules that actually shouldn't built for any APEX. For example,
consider this case.
apex { name: "myapex", native_shared_libs: ["mylib"],}
cc_library { name: "mylib", shared_libs: ["libfoo#10"],}
cc_library { name: "libfoo",
shared_libs: ["libbar"],
stubs: { versions: ["10"], }, }
cc_library { name: "libbar", ...}
Before this change, both the stubs and non-stubs variations of libfoo
were mutated with apexMuator, which is incorrect for the non-stubs
varia; there is no dependency chain from the apex "myapex" to the
non-stubs variation, but to the stubs variation due to the #10 syntax.
This was happening becauses we used the name of the module to determine
whether it should be built for APEX or not. Both stubs and non-stubs
variations have the same module name "libfoo".
Fixing this issue by recording the list of APEX variations required
directly on the module. So, the stubs variation of libfoo has myapex in
its apex variations list, but the non-stubs variation doesn't, and thus
apexMutator does not pick up the non-stubs variation.
Test: m (apex_test updated and passing)
Test: cherry-pick ag/5747464 and m
Change-Id: I31e618626809a828a55fff513ef5f81f79637afa
When the stubs variant of a library is dependend by a platform component
and the library is included in one or more APEX, the library is not
installed to the platform, because it is provided by APEX.
Bug: 120266448
Test: m
Test: add stubs: { versions: ["1"], }, to libnetd_resolv
then build netd. libnetd_resolv.so does not exist under /system.
Change-Id: I09b78e38df285033ef6e9c85f7ea4b0274e85070
When a native module is built for an APEX and is depending on a native
library having stubs (i.e. stubs.versions property is set), the stubs
variant is used unless the dependent lib is directly included in the
same APEX with the depending module.
Example:
apex {
name: "myapex",
native_shared_libs: ["libX", "libY"],
}
cc_library {
name: "libX",
shared_libs: ["libY", "libZ"],
}
cc_library {
name: "libY",
stubs: { versions: ["1", "2"], },
}
cc_library {
name: "libZ",
stubs: { versions: ["1", "2"], },
}
In this case, libX is linking to the impl variant of libY (that provides
private APIs) while libY is linking to the version 2 stubs of libZ. This is
because libY is directly included in the same apex via
native_shared_libs property, but libZ isn't.
Bug: 112672359
Test: apex_test added
Change-Id: If9871b70dc74a06bd828dd4cd1aeebd2e68b837c
ApexModule is the interface for APEX-aware modules. The module type apex
uses the interface to get APEX-specific information from other modules,
such as the list of APEXs that a module should be built for.
A module that is included in an APEX will be built specificaly for the
APEX. This is especially required for shared libraries; we shouldn't
just copy the artifacts built for platform, because they may be linking
against private (=unstable) symbols that are not available to APEXs
which are basically unbundled.
This CL, as a first step, makes cc.Module an APEX-aware module type.
Bug: 112672359
Test: m apex.test; the built apex has all the direct and transitive
shared lib dependencies of the libs and executables listed in Android.bp
Change-Id: I21f6a586654779984f0f5154b2a08b2adbf2168b
Logan Chien