Android - Different Builds

[JJS]

Yes i believe it works so too as Mark says.


@BR make sure that for your next release, that when now your highest 
versioncode is 15 for x86-64

the armv7a starts with 16

that's why i showed you the sequence as example.

you need to increase the versioncodes but with the lowest versioncode 
for the lowest architecture, i did it too and had no problem

so like this for your sequence if your highest used VC is 15 then:

Build                    VC

arm v7a                16 ---->next time --->20---->next time--->24

arm64                    17---->next time--->21--->next time--->25

X86                        18--->next time--->22--->next time--->26

x86-64                  19--->next time--->23--->next time--->27


and so on, you see the 64 builds need to be higher vc then the 32bits


Op 14-6-2019 om 10:33 schreef Mark Waddingham via use-livecode:
> On 2019-06-14 00:41, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami via use-livecode wrote:
>> Aloha Jerry, I think I have done it correctly
>>
>> 1)
>>     I have the four builds in one release
>> 2)
>> Native platforms --      armeabi-v7a     - version code 14
>> Native platforms --     x86_64         - version code 9
>> Native platforms --  x86               - version code 8
>> Native platforms --     arm64-v8a     - version code 7
>>
>> I still get ERROR
>> =============
>> 1 message for APK 7
>> Fully shadowed APK
>>
>> Problem:
>> This APK will not be served to any users because it is completely
>
> I wonder if the reason this didn't work is because you have the 
> version code
> for armv7 > that for arm64...
>
> I suspect the play store will choose the highest version coded APK 
> that will
> run on the target device. As ARMv7 APKs will run on devices which can 
> run ARM64,
> it will choose the ARMv7 in preference (as it is version code 14, 
> which is greater
> than 7) and thus 'completely shadow' the ARM64 APK.
>
> Upshot: probably best to make sure ARM64 APKs have higher version code 
> than
> ARM7 ones (the same is true of x86-64 and x86 - but in that case 
> you've already
> got version-code-of(x86-64) > version-code-of(x86) which is why you 
> aren't getting
> a shadowed error for those)
>
> Warmest Regards,
>
> Mark.
>