Rollo62

library\lib\arm64-v8a lib\arm64-v8a a So what you think the issue is, the missing library, or the added .a ? I think the library\lib should be right to be pointing to lib only, or do you expect the folder library ? The added .a should be not OK, maybe there is just a "\" or "/" missing or too many in the options setting, be aware that also the options settings exist for ALL, DEBUG, RELEASE, x32/x64, which could differ. I've added a kind of debug mode in my apps, where I can list and check all the available the local filles and folders, maybe that helps to get clear when comparing where are the differences after installation on the different phones. Does the libraries have same name for x32 and x64 ? Maybe that causes the bundle or the OS to ignore it ? But it should work with same name under different folder, I would assume too.

Do you have a simple test app, to be able to verify that it doesn't deploy ? Did you add the deployment manually in the deploymment manager (I remember there is also an automatic addition somewhere for default libraries, but SSL shouldn't be in there) ?

The RestDebugger should be in source code, under \Embarcadero\Studio\20.0\source\data\rest\restdebugger\ Maybe you can spot a difference between Rio and Sydney sources, but I doublt that there were any changes ? Have no Rio on hand, so I cant check. But also possible that the underlying REST components have changed.

Have you copied the missing files from Rio to Sydney, or did you add them manually ? What is the difference, did you made a diff of the files ? When using RestDebugger, you can also paste to pure TEXT editor, which should give all the components in textual format, would be interesting to see the difference in export from Rio and Sydney as Textfile.

Great, I will check that

I like the mustache notation {{}} a lot, is it possible to make this compatible (at least a bit), to Mustache ? (Naive approach: Maybe its just replacimg "<%" "%>" by "{{" "}}" ) ?

Hi there, the PlayStore take now more than 7 days in the status "wird überprüft (in review)". Google has changed recently their complete PlayStore to a newer version, and is also asking for additional permissions/explanations, in my case why to use location in background mode. Then you have to answer a few questions, and provide a link with a video that, which explains why to use that permission. The PlayConsole already notes that review might take longer these days, but from Google I never had too much hazzle in the reveiw process. Thats why I'm not sure if >7 days is usual now, or if I should carefully ask the support whats going on ? How is your experience, is this the "new normal" now ?

Yes, thats the usual time: 00:30 to 1:00, not much more. It was the first time I've got 8 days, never that much even in a manual review. I assume its a 2-level process 1. automated review: 30-60 min. and, if there is any issue 2. manual review (this can take longer these days, as noted on the Android page)

I would put one step of decoupling between the event and the processing, since the data maybe fired from external system, and I never trust that the thread or timing is correctly decoupled under all circumstances (maybe you call that paranoic ). I usually do like this: procedure TForm1.LocationSensor1LocationChanged(Sender: TObject; const AOldLocation, ANewLocation: TLocationCoord2D); var LDecSeparator: String; LNewLocation : TLocationCoord2D; begin LNewLocation := ANewLocation; TThread.ForceQueue( //<== Ensure that the UI is touched only from UI thread nil, procedure begin LDecSeparator := FormatSettings.DecimalSeparator; FormatSettings.DecimalSeparator := '.'; // Show current location ListBoxItemLatitude.ItemData.Detail := Format('%2.6f', [ LNewLocation.Latitude ]); ListBoxItemLongitude.ItemData.Detail := Format('%2.6f', [ LNewLocation.Longitude ]); end ); end;

30 what, days I've got 8 days now, never took so long before. And this time they want even changes

I like to speak a word for System.Messaging, which I extended to some kind of thread safety too. This seems a good base for me, and works very stable in main UI and threads also, if you took the right measures to secure it. To use System.Messaging as a base makes sense to me, because its a System unit and also the FMX messaging system is build on top of this, thats why I assume is has to be well tested and maintained. Nonetheless I like to see new libraries, which can do it much better too.

To add another solution, I have used this here., from Zacherl in the German DP, and separated this into separate 32- and 64-Bit units, and reworked a little. So far I have not yet worked with 64-Bit, so I cannot say its working there, or not. But I remember I put this into some unit tests, and was OK, I'm not sure ....

The links are already some years old, while background and permissions is a moving target on mobile. Maybe you should check out the latest Kastri repo, from Dave Nottage, which is IMHO most up-to-date.

@Felix Berto Castillo G. Thanks for the link. How got you rid of this warning, by increasing the API level to 29 ? What if I don't want to increase that, have you tried the 2nd option ? Where do I get a " ReTrace mapping file" for an FMX app ? Is there maybe a minimal or empty file that I could include in the deployment to get rid of that warning ? Some more links: http://buildTypes { release { minifyEnabled true proguardFiles getDefaultProguardFile('proguard-android-optimize.txt'), 'proguard-rules.pro' } } https://blog.mindorks.com/applying-proguard-in-an-android-application https://medium.com/@sagar.s.rao/d-obfuscating-google-play-store-crashes-logs-android-5b0a3c50da95 https://stackoverrun.com/de/q/10664775 https://www.codegrepper.com/code-examples/delphi/How+to+create+a+proguard+file+in+android+studio+flutter https://forum.unity.com/threads/need-help-with-2-warnings-on-the-google-play-console.923267/

Hug the trees

Well, than I have to look into OrangeUI soon

Great, that looks awesome. I think you draw your scene by yourself at low level, or you use a kind of game engine. From my tests unfortunately I got crashes right away, had no time to discover deeper yet. I'm afraid this is because I use FMX controls, also with some kind of animations active, but nothing very sspecial. My guess is, that there were some differences in handling those animations. Again I think I have to rebuild a test app from ground up, to check that behaviour.

procedure Tform.OnGeocodeReverseEvent(const Address: TCivicAddress); begin end; You should consider that this event is triggered by separate hardware, and it may or may not occur in the mai UI thread. I would decouple the results, and use TThread.ForceQueue to ensure that main UI is vaild.

Whats the purpose of copying bitmap to a (linear) stream ? This sounds as its for saving to disk.

Hi there, I'm wondering if there are any general tests available, which were testing all kind of Delphis basic behaviour, from very basic (like basic data types size, behaviour, etc. ), to more complex classes tests (like JSON, DateTime, etc.) to some specific failue tests (like RSP12345, ...). The goal is to fastly find differences between different Delphi versions, different behaviours of the basic classes, behaviour of workarounds and fixes in different versions. I'm afraid that many people have written their very special tests, for special cases, but wouldn't it be interesting to have many general, Delphi-related tests too ? Maybe something like that is already there, at Github or elsewhere, something like the curated list for Unit-Tests, or even better: already a complete Delphi-Test.

@Anders Melander I recently saw this post from you, as a maintainer of the wonderful Graphics32 libary. https://en.delphipraxis.net/topic/4140-smooth-scaling-of-bitmaps/?do=findComment&comment=36266 So I hope that you and/or others might have more insights about the future of the Graphics32 project. I used it in the past very successfully, and would also nowadays bet on it, but the activity of this project is quite slow. Why is that, I cannot really understand ? I have seen attempts from ZhaoyiPeng, to bring Gr32 to FMX, but also this moves quite slow, or is stalled. I see effords from Angus Johnson, to push a new Image32 project. Is the Image32 based partly on Graphics32 technologie ( I'm afraid its not), or how does it fit all together ? I had no time to look into all that more deeply, but the Gr32 for FMX seems to be only a proof of concept, and many features still missing. My original though was that Gr32 is able to use different backends, so it might be possible to port this to FMX too. Since FMX makes use of GPU, I'm not really sure if Gr32 can beat this, but I think Gr32, on the other hand, has features that were not available in FMX right now, and still would make sense. Anyhow, beside FMX, for VCL this seems to be still the great choice for bitmap operations. So what is the status and the roadmap of this project ? Would be good to know. Is this lack of maintainers or lack of interested users ?

@Fr0sT.Brutal My second name is hope

Hi there, this is another chapter of my daily issues with Apple: Suddenly the update of IPA to AppStore of an formerly running app failed, when using the Transporter. I usually keep my Transporter open for days and weeks, maybe that causes sometimes an issue. From my research for this error I found a few possible reasons and solutions in the web, where I've tried to re-boot my VM first. Solution: 1. Just relaunch Transporter app, or quit and re-enter it again. (not tested, but sound reasonable). 2. Try completely shutting down your device and then turning it back on and trying. (I've tried this one). 3. Check the matching case of the SKU for new apps: E.g. "com.company.appName" wasn't accepted. If changed to "com.Company.AppName", matching the AppStore entry, it works. Sometimes solutions can be so easy, but I hardly see the easy one's very often 😥

Solution 2 worked for me, have you checked all the options 1-3, that I found in my research ? You can additionally try to clean the project and restart the Rx10.2 IDE. Since then the issue was gone.

Thanks, thats a fair goal, but wouldn't it have been better to start with a cleaned up GR32 branch then ? Maybe sometthing like Gr32 V2.0 (or 3.0) is still possible. So you would recommend Image32 over Graphics32 for new projects ? But at the moment I think its Angus project alone, and not sharing some parts with the community. That can be good to have a tough leader, avoid smearing out the core philosophies, but its also some kind of risk.