all lists on lists.proxmox.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Shan Shaji" <s.shaji@proxmox.com>
To: "Tim Marx" <t.marx@proxmox.com>,
	"Proxmox VE development discussion" <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
	"Thomas Lamprecht" <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
	"Dominik Csapak" <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH pve_flutter_frontend v1] chore: update `compileSdkVersion` to 35 and `targetSdkVersion` to 36
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:52:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DB32LSDX32GX.I6FDRRUW588Z@noor> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1893456957.1437.1751555908572@webmail.proxmox.com>

Guys, I am sorry it's my mistake. The targetSdkVersion version 
should be <= compileSdkVersion [0] version. Since the biometric_storage 
plugin uses compileSdkVersion 35 i will update the 
targetSdkVersion to 35 and will create another patch. 

[0] - https://developer.android.com/build#android_sdk_settings

On Thu Jul 3, 2025 at 5:18 PM CEST, Tim Marx wrote:
> I think you are misinterpreting that Thomas, I meant what I said before.
>
> The post Dominik referenced is right here, it definitely says that you should not have a higher targetSdkVersion, that is due the the Gradle build process and how they determine runtime compatibility for release builds and debug builds.
> https://medium.com/androiddevelopers/picking-your-compilesdkversion-minsdkversion-targetsdkversion-a098a0341ebd
>
> In the comments it is iterated again:
> https://medium.com/@ianhlake/libraries-that-you-are-including-as-aars-or-remote-dependencies-from-maven-repositories-are-ca6cd7dd96ec
>
> It does not make sense to me to have a higher target, you can't test that if you compile against a lower SDK.
>
> > Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> hat am 03.07.2025 16:56 CEST geschrieben:
> > 
> >  
> > Am 03.07.25 um 16:45 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
> > > On 7/3/25 16:25, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> > >> Am 03.07.25 um 16:03 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
> > >>> LGTM, and built + tested fine here,
> > >>> but maybe someone else also wants to take a look too... (@thomas?)
> > >>>
> > >>> Does it even make sense to set the targetSdkVersion higher than the compiled one?
> > >>
> > >> Yeah, that can be fine, the targetSdkVersion basically denotes what (API)
> > >> version one tested the App against and signals Android that it doesn't need
> > >> to enable any backward compat handling as long as the Android (API) version
> > >> is equal or lower than the provided targetSdkVersion.
> > >>
> > >> Such compat handling could e.g. be w.r.t. App permissions, if there are
> > >> newer more granular one, or the default set got reduced it might break older
> > >> apps, so that is only enabled if the app signals that it supports it,
> > >> naturally with some time window to not allow uploading an app (update) to
> > >> avoid that this can be misused.
> > >>
> > >> The compileSdkVersion is the API the app is compiled against and thus
> > >> one can only actively use newer APIs if one increases this. Most of the time
> > >> one want's to have those two in sync, but it's fine if the targetSdkVersion
> > >> gets higher, it just cannot be lower than the compiled one.
> > > 
> > > sorry to continue this, but there is something I don't really understand here
> > > (not that I want to say you're wrong, just wanting to understand)
> > > 
> > > how can my 'target sdk version' be higher than my 'compiled sdk version' ?
> > > 
> > > in that, how can i target sdks that are newer than the one i compile against?
> > > wouldn't that mean that the old sdk (e.g. 35 in our case) must have
> > > knowledge about the next version ?
> > 
> > Do not take the word "target" literally here, it should be interpreted as
> > "tested" and is for forward compat, as the article (and my prev. reply)
> > agrees upon.
> > 
> > > 
> > > e.g i found an article[0] about those versions (not sure how good or representative it is)
> > > 
> > > that explicitely says:
> > > 
> > > ---
> > > If you made it through the bolded notes, you’ll notice a relationship between the three values:
> > > 
> > > minSdkVersion <= targetSdkVersion <= compileSdkVersion
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > which would mean that my target version can't be higher than my compile version...
> > 
> > That seems rather wrong, especially if one reads the explanation text
> > which gets it right. Cannot really make sense to be able to use newer
> > APIs thanks to a higher compileSdkVersion – which value is not recorded
> > in the resulting apk/appbundle – but then tell android that it's only
> > compatible with older ones.
> > 
> > The other direction, being compiled with an older SDK (API) really
> > doesn't mean that ones app runs perfectly fine on a newer android, thus it
> > can target the newer android without raising the compiled SDK version.
> > 
> > > that said, the app built successfully with these values, and I noticed no problem
> > > with either android 15 and 16 (in an emulator...)
> > 
> > There really shouldn't be any, the article is quite good but that
> > conclusion you quote is IMO where it got the summary wrong.
> > 
> > 
> > > 0: 
> > > https://medium.com/androiddevelopers/picking-your-compilesdkversion-minsdkversion-targetsdkversion-a098a0341ebd
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > pve-devel mailing list
> > pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
> > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel



_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2025-07-04  6:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-07-02  9:10 Shan Shaji
2025-07-03 14:03 ` Dominik Csapak
2025-07-03 14:20   ` Tim Marx
2025-07-03 14:28     ` Thomas Lamprecht
2025-07-03 14:25   ` Thomas Lamprecht
2025-07-03 14:45     ` Dominik Csapak
2025-07-03 14:56       ` Thomas Lamprecht
2025-07-03 15:18         ` Tim Marx
2025-07-04  6:52           ` Shan Shaji [this message]
2025-07-04  8:53           ` Thomas Lamprecht
2025-07-04 11:15             ` Shan Shaji
2025-07-07  9:51               ` Shan Shaji
2025-07-03 14:36 ` [pve-devel] applied: " Thomas Lamprecht

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=DB32LSDX32GX.I6FDRRUW588Z@noor \
    --to=s.shaji@proxmox.com \
    --cc=d.csapak@proxmox.com \
    --cc=pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com \
    --cc=t.lamprecht@proxmox.com \
    --cc=t.marx@proxmox.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.
Service provided by Proxmox Server Solutions GmbH | Privacy | Legal