I have an extension that I recently upgraded to manifest version 2. To do this I removed the background_page property in the manifest file and replaced it with background: {page: "background.html"}. This works and everything is fine. Turns out, however, that there are browsers and people out there with old versions of Chrome, or versions of Rockmelt and other Chromium-based browsers that don't support the background-property, or the manifest_version: 2 yet.
A simple solution would be to just add the background_page: "background.html"-property to the manifest file, in addition to the background-property. This gives the warning in chrome://extension developer mode:
There were warnings when trying to install this extension:
'background_page' requires manifest version of 1 or lower.
My question is: can having both have any negative impact? For example, what will happen when background_page is deprecated? Will my users see any warnings? Any ideas?
You should replace "background_page" with "background".
Like:
"background": "background.html"
Rather than:
"background": {"page": "background.html"}
Even thought having undocumented, deprecated or experimental attributes in manifest.json gives warnings, these warnings are only visible with "Developer mode" active. They don't affect end-user. In my option you are perfectly fine keeping background-page: in your manifest.
You can also consider using minimum_chrome_version to block users with older browsers from downloading your latest update. It's a bit too late for that (since your manifest_vesion: 2 update is published) but you can do a small trick here. Downgrade to manifest_version: 1, wait for everyone to download downgraded version and, yet again, push update with manifest_version: 2 this time adding minimum_chrome_version: 18.
Related
Since upgrading to Gradle 3.3 I'm having trouble building my code due to missing-translation errors:
Error: xxx is not translated in "af" (Afrikaans), "am" (Amharic), "ar" (Arabic), "az" (Azerbaijani), "az-AZ" (Azerbaijani: Azerbaijan), "be" (Belarusian), "bg" (Bulgarian), "ca" (Catalan), [...], "zh-TW" (Chinese: Taiwan), "zu" (Zulu) [MissingTranslation]
The majority of the reported languages are those supported by a 3rd-party module included in my project, and it now seems to define the supported languages for the entire project, giving me this kind of error for all strings that are not translated into above languages. Before upgrading to Gradle 3.3 this was not causing any problems.
I considered the following solutions:
Remove surplus translations from other modules. I want to avoid that because those modules are external and needlessly altering them would really hurt maintainability of my project.
Disable the "incomplete translation" Lint inspection - the most common suggestion for similar questions on SO. This is sub-optimal because I want to be made aware of translations that are missing in my code (working so far). Besides that, disabling the check does not get rid of the error.
Define the supported configurations in build.gradle as described in this answer. I like this option (specifying languages instead of relying on translations available in the modules), but it also does something strange: I'm getting missing-translation errors for strings that are marked translatable = false.
For now, I'm downgrading again to the previous Gradle version. But what is the best apporach for fixing these build errors?
Hoping that there might have been corrections since I posted this question a few months ago, I checked the situation.
It seems that the issues were introduced with the Gradle plugin 2.3.0 and not Gradle 3.3 itself as I suggested in the question. Downgrading the plugin avoids the errors but can hardly be a long-term solution.
I found that option 3 in the question is the best way to handle it: add this to the app's build.gradle:
android {
defaultConfig {
...
resConfigs "en", "fr"
}
}
This is described in Googles documentation and, as mentioned, also in this answer. It removes all unnecessary resources - and the warnings/errors along with them.
Quoting the documentation:
The Gradle resource shrinker removes only resources that are not referenced by your app code, which means it will not remove alternative resources for different device configurations. If necessary, you can use the Android Gradle plugin's resConfigs property to remove alternative resource files that your app does not need.
For example, if you are using a library that includes language
resources (such as AppCompat or Google Play Services), then your APK
includes all translated language strings for the messages in those
libraries whether the rest of your app is translated to the same
languages or not. If you'd like to keep only the languages that your
app officially supports, you can specify those languages using the
resConfig property. Any resources for languages not specified are
removed.
The "false positives" (missing translation error for a non-translatable string) I got were for strings that were defined in more than one module. Renaming the strings or providing translations for them solved the problem. This, too, seems to be introduced with Gradle plugin 2.3.0.
In build.gradle add below code
lintOptions {
disable 'MissingTranslation'
}
I am trying to develop a simple project in Pharo, and I would like to add its dependencies in Metacello. My project depends on Glamour, Roassal and XMLSupport.
A way to cleanly install my project is to install the dependencies by hand first. Following the book Deep into Pharo one can do
Gofer new
smalltalkhubUser: 'Moose' project: 'Glamour';
package: 'ConfigurationOfGlamour';
load.
(Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfGlamour) perform: #loadDefault.
Gofer new smalltalkhubUser: 'ObjectProfile'
project: 'Roassal';
package: 'ConfigurationOfRoassal';
load.
(Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfRoassal) load.
Gofer new
squeaksource: 'XMLSupport';
package: 'ConfigurationOfXMLSupport';
load.
(Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfXMLSupport) perform: #loadDefault.
and then my project will work fine.
I have tried to create a ConfigurationOfMyProject using the Versionner, and I have added Glamour, Roassal and XMLSupport as dependencies, using the version that are currently installed in my image (2.6-snapshot, 1.430 and 1.2.1 respectively).
The problem is that I am not able to load my project using Metacello in a fresh image. The project loads fine, but whenever I try to load my classes I get method missing errors in Glamour. Moreover, it is apparent that something is different, because even the world menu has different entries.
I have tried other combinations of versions, including using the stable Glamour (2.1) but I have obtained more errors, including not even being able to open the project in the Versioner (it complains about a missing Roassal name).
What is the correct way to add these dependencies cleanly?
First of all I want to highlight that if configuration is in class ConfigurationOf<proj-name> you can load it as using #configuration message:
Gofer new
smalltalkhubUser: 'Moose' project: 'Glamour';
configuration;
load.
(Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfGlamour) perform: #loadDefault.
A I don't see your project, I can just suggest you to write configuration by hand. There is an easy tutorial called Dead simple intro to Metacello.
According to your description it should be something like:
baseline01: spec
<version: '0.1'>
spec for: #common do: [
spec blessing: #release.
spec repository: 'your repo url'.
spec
package: 'YourPackage' with: [
spec requires: #('Glamour' 'Roassal' 'XMLSupport') ].
"also maybe you have a couple of packages that depend on different projects"
spec project: 'Glamour' with: [
spec
className: 'ConfigurationOf Glamour';
repository: 'http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Moose/Glamour/main';
version: #'2.6-snapshot' ].
spec project: 'Roassal' with: [
spec
className: 'ConfigurationOfRoassal';
repository: 'http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/ObjectProfile/Roassal/main';
version: #'1.430' ].
"and same for XMLSupport" ].
Also you can try to load #development versions, as I have an impression that projects like Roassal and Glamour have very outdated stable versions. Also please note that Roassal2 is actively developed and will replace original Roassal in Moose platform, maybe you want to consider using it.
I would seriously discourage writing configs by hand - that is the assembly code of Metacello ;) Unless you are working on cross-Smalltalk-platform projects with platform-specific code (e.g. code for Pharo 1.4 vs Squeak 4.5) - an area which hasn't been explored yet, Versionner is the tool for you. I have written dozens of configs with it and have yet to run into a roadblock.
When you say you added them as dependencies, did you just add them as projects in the "Dependent projects" pane?
If so, you also have to specify which of your project's packages depend on them. To do this, you select the relevant package of your project on the "Packages" pane.
Now, click on the edit button with the pencil icon that just became enabled. In the dialog that appears, click the green + button and add the external projects of interest.
It looks like you are trying this in an old version of Pharo?
Roassal has been superseded by Roassal2, and the support for XML is on smalltalkhub, split into ConfigurationOfXMLWriter and ConfigurationOfXMLParser, both in PharoExtras.
If you load the right groups from Glamour you don't need to describe the dependencies on Roassal, as Glamour already depends on Roassal(2). That explains your cyclic dependency.
You have also run into the problem we've recently talk about on the pharo mailing lists
that #stable is not a usable symbolic version name. In the Seaside/Magritte/Grease projects we've changed to using #'release3.1' style symbolic version names. That ensures that there is less of a ripple effect when progressing stable.
Snapshot versions should never be a dependency, they just describe what is loaded at the moment, and are basically not upgradable.
[edit]
Metacello by default tries to be smart about not installing older versions over newer. This works pretty well as long as things are not moved to different packages. So it's a bit of bad luck there that you ended up with a non-working combination.
Metacello support complex workflows, and different smalltalk projects (need to) use different workflows. It often takes some time to reach consensus on the best way to do things.
Roassal does not depend on Glamour, but you can create the cycle in your own configuration :)
Packages were moved from squeaksource to ss3 and smalltalkhub because the server had had stability problems. More recently, those problems seem to have been fixed. The xml support was split as it was noted that a lot of applications actually don't need both writing and reading of xml.
Once you have a working configuration, it might be a good idea to build and test it on the continuous integration server of pharo: http://ci.inria.fr/pharo-contribution
If not your actually application, at least the open source parts as used by you. That way the Pharo, Glamour & Roassal teams can know if a change they make breaks something.
As far as I understand, "2" in "/lib/ld-linux.so.2" changes very rarely. There are old programs that can't work with new library and new programs that can't work with the old library. But they both refer to /lib/ld-linux.so.2, preventing installing both libraries.
BTW what are that version 'GLIBC_2.17' not found things? Why version is not in soname, but somewhere else?
Whenever a library is changed in a way that old programs do not work with the new version of the library this number is chaned. If old programs will still work with the newer library (and programs needing the new version will not cause a crash with the old library) there is no need to change the number because you can simply install the latest version of the library.
As far as I understand the "2" (it was "1" ten years ago) should not change any longer. The reason is simple:
The first version of "ld-linux.so.2" was written in a way that any version of "ld-linux.so.2" should work with any program using this file - maybe printing an error message when an older version of "ld-linux.so.2" is used.
This means: It is never necessary to install two different "ld-linux.so.2" files but it is enough to install the latest version of this file. You should not simply overwrite this file because it comes as a bundle with other files (e.g. "libc.so.6") that must have the same version.
In the "2" version of the loader .so files may contain a table of version numbers supported. So "libc.so.6", version GLIBC_2.16, may contain the information that "GLIBC_2.15" is also supported by this version of the library. (New versions should be backward compatible so this should be the case.)
Programs may contain a list of versions required (for example: a program requires libc.so.6 version "GLIBC_2.17"). The loader (ld-linux.so.2) checks if the library supports the version that is required by the program and refuses starting the program if not. In this case the error message form your question is printed by the loader.
the chrome extension
http://code.google.com/chrome/extensions/samples.html#5d81304a17cf7ac2887484f730fbd2b01e51e166
Doesn't work on chromium, I use chromium 13.0.782.107 and when loading the extension nothing happens .
My chromium version doesn't have an arrow icon next to the extension description with a link that opens the background console and I don't know how to open it.
Thanks a lot for helping
The manifest of the sample extension looks like:
...
"background": {
"scripts": ["sample.js"]
},
"manifest_version": 2
The new background notation was introduced in Chrome 18, and therefore not recognised in earlier versions. Additionally, manifest version 2 was also introduced in Chrome 18, so that key is also irrelevant.
I strongly recommend to upgrade Chromium to a recent version (current stable Chromium version is 21). If you can't do that, for some reason, the manifest file has to be corrected as follows:
Replace "background": {...} with "background_page": "sample.html"
Rename sample.js to sample.html, and surround the contents by <script> tags.
OSX 10.6
CoffeeScript 1.2.0
node.js v0.7.7-pre
I am seeing a deprecation notice every time I run the coffee command. The notice is this:
path.exists is deprecated. It is now called `fs.exists`.
I know that this is happening because node.js deprecated path.exists. See
https://github.com/joyent/node/pull/2587
I would think there would be a lot of info about this but all I can see is some indirect reference relating to a more serious issue saying it's not going to be 'fixed':
https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/issues/2113
Am I the only one having this problem? Does anyone have a suggestion on how I can make this go away?
https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/blob/master/lib/coffee-script/command.js#L323
There are references to path.exists in the coffeescript source code.
Note that that in node 0.6 (the current stable version) fs.exists is null so it's difficult to cleanly upgrade this.
We have an issue where the same source code doesn't work in both 0.6 and 0.7.
I would assume that we wait for 0.8 and then someone will upgrade coffeescript to use fs.exists and deprecate 0.6 support
When waiting for 0.8, on OSX you can temporary fix this issue by replacing all path.exists to fs.exists in file (if you install globally):
/opt/local/lib/node_modules/coffee-script/lib/coffee-script/command.js
Don't forget to use root access when editing.
This is a bit of a late answer, but there is a patching module meant to temporarily fix this problem until everyone has a chance to update there code.
https://github.com/SportZing/node-exists-patch
Couldn't you just change all the instances of that in the source code?