sorry, I have a problem
----------------------------------------
target Java: Camera (out/target/common/obj/APPS/Camera_intermediates/
classes)
packages/apps/Camera/src/com/android/camera/ui/GLRootView.java:41:
cannot access javax.microedition.khronos.egl.EGLConfig
bad class file: javax/microedition/khronos/egl/EGLConfig.class(javax/
microedition/khronos/egl:EGLConfig.class)
unable to access file: corrupted zip file
Please remove or make sure it appears in the correct subdirectory of
the classpath.
import javax.microedition.khronos.egl.EGLConfig;
^
make: *** [out/target/common/obj/APPS/Camera_intermediates/classes-
full-debug.jar] Error 41
--------------------------------------------------
Can anyone help me?
On 12月22日, 上午3時44分, G2 <grego...@gentil.com> wrote:
> Correct for the first part. I forget to mention it.
>
> For the second point, I actually started to do the same but when I saw
> a lot of "-m64" reference everywhere, I considered the sed as a little
> bit more "dangerous" (even if you do -name *.mk). Imagine that you
> have a file named *-m64* and it's called in an Android.mk file...
>
> Thanks for the contribution!
>
> Grégoire
>
> On Dec 20, 6:21 pm, Hemanth <hemanth....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> > The patch below is nice!
>
> > Some additional information.
> > 1. we have to comment out the error statement in main.mk(just added
> > for the sake of being complete).
> > build/core/main.mk:80
> > $(warning
> > ************************************************************)
> > -$(error stop)
> > +#$(error stop)
>
> > 2. I use a slightly different way to change the flags. It's not better
> > or worse, just an alternative.
> > I think clearsilver code is not updated so frequently, so the patch
> > should be enough. But I tend to keep misplacing the patch file.
> > Running the below command is slower, but it ignores possible line
> > number changes.
>
> > In ANDROID_ROOT:
> > $find . -name '*.mk' | xargs sed -i 's/-m64//g'
>
> > On Dec 21, 4:01 am, G2 <grego...@gentil.com> wrote:
>
> > > The following patch works for me in order to compile Gingerbread on a
> > > 32-bit machine:
>
> > > --- a/external/clearsilver/java-jni/Android.mk 2010-12-20
> > > 09:30:02.379792000 -0800
> > > +++ b/external/clearsilver/java-jni/Android.mk 2010-12-20
> > > 02:20:58.871792000 -0800
> > > @@ -34,8 +34,8 @@
> > > LOCAL_CFLAGS += -fPIC
>
> > > # This forces a 64-bit build for Java6
> > > -LOCAL_CFLAGS += -m64
> > > -LOCAL_LDFLAGS += -m64
> > > +#LOCAL_CFLAGS += -m64
> > > +#LOCAL_LDFLAGS += -m64
>
> > > LOCAL_NO_DEFAULT_COMPILER_FLAGS := true
>
> > > --- a/external/clearsilver/cgi/Android.mk 2010-12-20
> > > 09:30:11.115792000 -0800
> > > +++ b/external/clearsilver/cgi/Android.mk 2010-12-20
> > > 02:24:39.711792000 -0800
> > > @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@
> > > LOCAL_CFLAGS := -fPIC
>
> > > # This forces a 64-bit build for Java6
> > > -LOCAL_CFLAGS += -m64
> > > -LOCAL_LDFLAGS += -m64
> > > +#LOCAL_CFLAGS += -m64
> > > +#LOCAL_LDFLAGS += -m64
>
> > > LOCAL_NO_DEFAULT_COMPILER_FLAGS := true
>
> > > --- a/external/clearsilver/cs/Android.mk 2010-12-20
> > > 09:30:20.419792000
> > > -0800
> > > +++ b/external/clearsilver/cs/Android.mk 2010-12-20
> > > 02:24:48.375792001
> > > -0800
> > > @@ -9,8 +9,8 @@
> > > LOCAL_CFLAGS := -fPIC
>
> > > # This forces a 64-bit build for Java6
> > > -LOCAL_CFLAGS += -m64
> > > -LOCAL_LDFLAGS += -m64
> > > +#LOCAL_CFLAGS += -m64
> > > +#LOCAL_LDFLAGS += -m64
>
> > > LOCAL_NO_DEFAULT_COMPILER_FLAGS := true
>
> > > --- a/external/clearsilver/util/Android.mk 2010-12-20
> > > 09:32:13.415792001 -0800
> > > +++ b/external/clearsilver/util/Android.mk 2010-12-20
> > > 02:24:56.767792001 -0800
> > > @@ -18,8 +18,8 @@
> > > LOCAL_CFLAGS := -fPIC
>
> > > # This forces a 64-bit build for Java6
> > > -LOCAL_CFLAGS += -m64
> > > -LOCAL_LDFLAGS += -m64
> > > +#LOCAL_CFLAGS += -m64
> > > +#LOCAL_LDFLAGS += -m64
>
> > > LOCAL_NO_DEFAULT_COMPILER_FLAGS := true
>
> > > Grégoire
>
> > > On Dec 20, 12:35 am, G2 <grego...@gentil.com> wrote:
>
> > > > At least, it's successfully compiling on a 64-bit machine. Good work
> > > > Google!
>
> > > > Hopefully, there will be less pain for a full upgrade compared to
> > > > eclair->froyo as the jump doesn't seem to be as high on the backend
> > > > side...
>
> > > > Grégoire
>
> > > > On Dec 19, 8:38 pm, G2 <grego...@gentil.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > And no need to try to bypass the rule! You really need a 64-bit
> > > > > machine,
>
> > > > > Grégoire
>
> > > > > On Dec 19, 8:37 pm, G2 <grego...@gentil.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > ===========================================
> > > > > > PLATFORM_VERSION_CODENAME=REL
> > > > > > PLATFORM_VERSION=2.3.1
> > > > > > TARGET_PRODUCT=generic
> > > > > > TARGET_BUILD_VARIANT=eng
> > > > > > TARGET_SIMULATOR=
> > > > > > TARGET_BUILD_TYPE=release
> > > > > > TARGET_BUILD_APPS=
> > > > > > TARGET_ARCH=arm
> > > > > > HOST_ARCH=x86
> > > > > > HOST_OS=linux
> > > > > > HOST_BUILD_TYPE=release
> > > > > > BUILD_ID=GINGERBREAD
> > > > > > ============================================
> > > > > > Checking build tools versions...
> > > > > > build/core/main.mk:76:
> > > > > > ************************************************************
> > > > > > build/core/main.mk:77: You are attempting to build on a 32-bit
> > > > > > system.
> > > > > > build/core/main.mk:78: Only 64-bit build environments are supported
> > > > > > beyond froyo/2.2.
> > > > > > build/core/main.mk:79:
> > > > > > ************************************************************
> > > > > > build/core/main.mk:80: *** stop. Stop.
>
> > > > > > Does Google have a partnership with Intel to force everybody to
> > > > > > upgrade their machine? ;-) :-(
>
> > > > > > Grégoire
--
unsubscribe: android-porting+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
website: http://groups.google.com/group/android-porting
