F-Droid build (1.76.0) crashes #13850
Comments
|
Same issue here on CalyxOS Android 14 FP4. |
|
Same on Graphene OS. Have downgraded back to 1.72.0 |
|
How's it crash? Got any logs? |
|
It never opens. I tap the icon and then I just get the android popup for an app crashed. |
|
Seems to be related to #13527 |
|
What makes you think that? Any logs? What's "adb logcat" say while you attempt to start it? |
|
My logs are attached to my previous comment. That's line 446 and 451 |
|
Ah, thanks. I only saw the other commenter's logs. I wish f-droid would test their builds before publishing them. |
|
F-Droid does not develop the app, only packages it. If the upstream APKs work fine and the F-Droid one misbehaves, yes please open an issue on Gitlab. |
|
@linsui looking at your https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroiddata/-/commit/00d207cd1981c57fb57607ea6d9d156ecc6886c9#281743176537bad7e7758254b7095f352bea0c57_1554_1555 you mean that even if updating the go lib commit it still crashes? |
|
I didn't update the commit. It's read from the go.toolchain.rev file. |
|
@linsui it sure looks like the problem was that prior to you disabling the build in https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroiddata/-/commit/00d207cd1981c57fb57607ea6d9d156ecc6886c9#281743176537bad7e7758254b7095f352bea0c57_1554_1555 , the It's not clear why you were bumping the In summary, F-Droid was building with a bad mix of components and recent Tailscale now detects that mismatch and panicked as a result. That panic is meant to catch such build system screw-ups, but no automated or human testing is involved in F-Droid releases, so the mistake shipped to F-Droid users. |
read the recipe in full: https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroiddata/-/blob/00d207cd1981c57fb57607ea6d9d156ecc6886c9/metadata/com.tailscale.ipn.yml#L1543-L1573 the /LE: I only asked about the bumped commit because I was not expecting any change in the srclibs section, and also because I didn't know by heart the rest of the recipe |
|
the build log is here: https://f-droid.org/repo/com.tailscale.ipn_303.log.gz maybe you can find other issues in it @bradfitz ? |
How is it guaranteed that the clone point will contain code from the future to be able to Do you see that you're both building the That is, you're not entirely building this from source, as is the F-Droid way. You're still using our pre-built binaries in this recipe, for at least parts. |
The srclib stage clones that repo at HEAD, then checks out that |
|
Gotcha. In any case, it seems like the recipe is using a mix of Go toolchains. That |
|
https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroiddata/-/jobs/8109300998#L6115 But TOOLCHAINDIR is set. |
|
I uninstalled Tailscale from F-Droid. If I try to install an earlier version, an error pops out saying "Update version code 254 is older than current 303". If I try to install in Google Play, says "another user has already installed an incompatible version". Is there another workaround at this moment? |
|
@chunjiw looks like the F-Droid version remained installed? Perhaps try rebooting the phone after uninstalling. We also publish APKs on our website nowadays so give that a try, these are the same builds as the Play Store: https://pkgs.tailscale.com/stable/#android (Even though the APK might work, I recommend switching to the Play Store when you get a chance, so you can get automatic updates which is better for security). |
|
I tried rebooting the phone, updating F-Droid, restarting F-Droid, nothing works. I also tried directly install APK as downloaded from link you provided (thank you 👍 ) but it says "App not installed as package conflicts with an existing package". Seems like F-Droid does not properly let the system know that this app is uninstalled. |
|
@chunjiw F-Droid does not do installs and uninstalls itself, only the system does this. Go to Android Settings - Apps - Tailscale - Uninstall to retry |
|
Thank you for the suggestion! But I cannot even find Tailscale in Settings - Apps list. |
|
@licaon-kter @linsui Maybe the two broken versions could be removed from F-Droid? I somehow still see them in F-Droid. |
|
They'll be removed. I don't know when. Removed. |
I am having the same issue. I uninstalled the F-Droid build but still cannot install any other build or any older versions of the F-Droid build due to conflicting signatures. I opened a new issue for that #13877 |
|
@agottardo @licaon-kter My bad... Eventually I figured it out: I have Tailscale also installed in "Secure Folder" sandbox environment (Galaxy S24+). I believe it is a copy of the installed app. So when I uninstall the app before, I left the one in "Secure Folder" still installed. Once I uninstalled both, I was able to reinstall from Play Store. I want to say thank you for your help and patience when trouble shooting with me. |
We've suffered misalignment in versioning and toolchain usage due to the shell invocations downstream of ./version/tailscale-version.sh, but also the whole version data scheme in the Makefile was quite complicated, and required synchronization in the build.grade. - Makfile no longer needs to be version aware itself. - A Makefile target tailscale.version refreshes a local cached output from tailscale.com/cmd/mkversion which is updated when go.mod / go.sum change. - build.gradle loads tailscale.version to get the version string. - ldflags are produced from tailscale.version via version-ldflags.sh Updates tailscale/tailscale#13850 Signed-off-by: James Tucker <[email protected]>
We've suffered misalignment in versioning and toolchain usage due to the shell invocations downstream of ./version/tailscale-version.sh, but also the whole version data scheme in the Makefile was quite complicated, and required synchronization in the build.grade. - Makfile no longer needs to be version aware itself. - A Makefile target tailscale.version refreshes a local cached output from tailscale.com/cmd/mkversion which is updated when go.mod / go.sum change. - build.gradle loads tailscale.version to get the version string. - ldflags are produced from tailscale.version via version-ldflags.sh Updates tailscale/tailscale#13850 Signed-off-by: James Tucker <[email protected]>
The explicit target was removed during patch production, but the dependency wasn't removed from the clean action. Updates #546 Updates tailscale/tailscale#13850
The explicit target was removed during patch production, but the dependency wasn't removed from the clean action. Updates #546 Updates tailscale/tailscale#13850
The explicit target was removed during patch production, but the dependency wasn't removed from the clean action. Updates #546 Updates tailscale/tailscale#13850 Signed-off-by: James Tucker <[email protected]>
The explicit target was removed during patch production, but the dependency wasn't removed from the clean action. Updates #546 Updates tailscale/tailscale#13850 Signed-off-by: James Tucker <[email protected]>
The explicit target was removed during patch production, but the dependency wasn't removed from the clean action. Updates #546 Updates tailscale/tailscale#13850 Signed-off-by: James Tucker <[email protected]>
|
How long until we are likely to see a version in F-Droid that is updatable to? |
|
It works now. Do you want to switch to reproducible build? @bradfitz |
I don't understand the question; what does "reproducible build" mean in this context? |
|
ref: https://f-droid.org/docs/Inclusion_How-To/#reproducible-builds YES - YES in the picture: https://f-droid.org/docs/Reproducible_Builds/ |
|
Oh, great. I didn't know F-Droid had such an effort. We're huge fans of reproducible builds in general. |
|
I hope you are fans, because it might just work or add an extra layer that needs troubleshooting :) |
|
Switching to reproducible build means the old users can't upgrade. The broken version forced users to uninstall so maybe it's a chance. |
|
@bradfitz Any dicision? Should we try to switch to reproducible build? |
|
I'll leave the timing of that to @kari-ts. |
|
@bradfitz @raggi @agottardo @barnstar Any news? Maybe we should release the fixed version on F-Droid without reproducible build? |
|
We had a discussion about it. The difficulty is all about making the sign work out such that the F-Droid binaries have the same signature as https://pkgs.tailscale.com/stable/tailscale-android-universal-1.78.3.apk Google Play manages the signing keys for our official APKs, though, so we'd need to extract the signatures from the Google Play build (which we mirror at pkgs.tailscale.com, at least for the big universal APK) It might be easier to start with just releasing the fixed version for now. In parallel, if anybody wants to try to see if they can do the F-Droid reproducible thing and get the same bytes out, that'd be interesting. |
|
OK, let's release the fixed version for now. :) I'm not sure if we can make the apk reproducible with the Google Play one if app bundle is involved. |
|
My opinion as a user: For reproducible builds: And is it desirable that Google keeps the signing keys for the F-Droid releases (if tailscale extracts the signature)? |
|
Hmmm, tailscale/tailscale-android@1ffe285#diff-393313cfc99ef61e5782f45e70f091a14243d37dc36ac4c33859cb1b60a004ebL67 this line was removed by mistake and 1.78.2 can't be built... It's fixed in the branch. Should we update to 1.78.3? |
What is the issue?
Since 1.76 builds crashes. 1.76.1-t24929f6b6-ga20b1114dd5 apk can be downloaded from https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroiddata/-/jobs/8109300998/artifacts/file/tmp/com.tailscale.ipn_308.apk . Could you please take a look? Thanks
Steps to reproduce
No response
Are there any recent changes that introduced the issue?
No response
OS
Android
OS version
No response
Tailscale version
1.76.1-t24929f6b6-ga20b1114dd5
Other software
No response
Bug report
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: