On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 12:43 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
> One followup question: Do we know for sure that Installer 2.7 fixed up > the RSL versions? I am not seeing any code that does that. Could I have > deleted it by accident? > > Only for osmf, that too only after we started supporting OSMF 2.0. There is a method called getFlexVersionBuildString() that reads the flex-sdk-description.xml and returns the version and build number. This gets appended to the osmf.swf file name. Thanks, Om > I'll try it myself tomorrow. > > -Alex > > On 3/15/14 12:36 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > > >On 3/14/14 11:04 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > > > >>Hi, > >> > >>> I'm not sure what "Latest SDK" means. Is that the nightly? Did you > >>> install it into Documents/ApacheFlexDevelopGit? > >>Latest develop branch. > >Sorry, I'm still confused. If it is the latest develop branch, how is the > >installer involved? > > > >> > >>> What were you running when you got this error? Ant on some build.xml? > >>> Which one? > >>ant in the air_for_ant directory. > >I was about to guess that. The README for the installer says you have to > >specify AIR_HOME when building ant_on_air, was it set to some older > >version of AIR SDK? It won't pick the AIR SDK out of the SDK specified by > >FLEX_HOME. So if you specify AIR_HOME as an AIR 4.0 SDK and then the > >build works then this is not an installer issue. > > > >However, I did notice the README is not quite correct. The ant_on_air > >build does not use FLEX_HOME_WIN and FLEX_HOME_MAC, the installer build > >does. I will fix the README. It looks like the README is not in the > >source package. Did we fix a README issue for the SDK or Installer once > >without doing another RC or is another RC required? > > > >> > >>> Crap. I guess I did not understand how this part of the install was > >>> supposed to work. This is a bug in the install script for 4.12, not > >>>the > >>> installer. > >>This only happens when you use the new installer - so that basically > >>means we can release the new installer until we fix the config file and > >>release 4.12.1. > >> > >>There should be a way to make them independent of each other and avoid > >>this - any ideas? > >They are independent. Other than downloading the binary package, > >verifying the MD5, and uncompressing, the rest of the install > >responsibilities are in the package, not the installer. I suspect if you > >actually use Ant to run the installer.xml you'll have the same problem. I > >know the temptation is to change the installer, but if we ever get the > >installer out there, we'll be glad in the future that (hopefully) any > >other SDK or FlexJS install issue can be fixed in the SDK and FlexJS > >installer.xmls so we only vote on one package and not try to coordinate > >two votes and two packages in the future. > > > >> > >>>> -Issue with 4.11 RSL in flex-config.xml > >>> More details please? > >>As discussed before that are incorrect and have 0 as the build number. > >Rats, looks like I missed that before. I'll have a look in my morning. > > > >Thanks, > >-Alex > > > >
