Fixes#517.
The problem was that again, only the `vercode`s of apks were being
compared to see if they were the same, rather than `vercode` and `id`.
The result is that some new apks will incorrectly be asked to execute
an `UPDATE` query rather than an `INSERT`. As such, they don't end
up in our database at all because the `UPDATE` will not run against
any row at all.
Correctly purge removed apks.
There were two bugs in this code that have been fixed. Both were
introduced while moving to a lower memory consumption version of
the repo updater for #324.
They were found while investigating #517, although I'm not confident
that they are to do with the specific problem in that issue. It is
possible, because it is part of the code to do with purging apks
from the database, but I'd like to do further investigations into
the code before declaring that this is actually related to that issue.
In the mean time, this includes important fixes, and should probably
go out in an alpha once merged.
The first is that for each app which is updated by a particular repo,
it was not correctly asking the question: "Which apks belonging to
this apk, and provided by this repo, are no longer provided by this
repo?". It was accidentally only comparing the version number of
existing apks in the DB and new apks from the index. This ensures
that the apks being checked to see if they need to be removed or
not are those with the same package name AND the same version code
(provided by the same repo).
The second bug is that when it was persisting a set of apps + apks
to the database, it would ask for existing apks already in the
database for these apps. In this case, there was a bug where of
the 50 apps being persisted, it would only retrieve the first of
these 50 apps from the database to decide if it needed to be
cleaned up or not. Now, it correctly retrieves data from the DB
belonging to all 50 apps.
See merge request !181
There were two bugs in this code that have been fixed. Both were
introduced while moving to a lower memory consumption version of
the repo updater.
The first is that for each app which is updated by a particular repo,
it was not correctly asking the question: "Which apks belonging to
this apk, and provided by this repo, are no longer provided by this
repo?". It was accidentally only comparing the version number of
existing apks in the DB and new apks from the index. This ensures
that the apks being checked to see if they need to be removed or
not are those with the same package name AND the same version code
(provided by the same repo).
The second bug is that when it was persisting a set of apps + apks
to the database, it would ask for existing apks already in the
database for these apps. In this case, there was a bug where of
the 50 apps being persisted, it would only retrieve the first of
these 50 apps from the database to decide if it needed to be
cleaned up or not. Now, it correctly retrieves data from the DB
belonging to all 50 apps.
Add HTTP Basic Authentication to ApkDownloader
In order to download protected files, the APKDownloader must be able to supply HTTP Basic Authentication headers to the server.
See merge request !178
Translators:
Ajeje Brazorf Sardinian
Green Lunar Hebrew
Ldm Public French
lucnsy Chinese (China)
Massimiliano Caniparoli Italian
Mladen Pejaković Serbian
naofum Japanese
Nordlenningen Norwegian Bokmål
Sérgio Marques Portuguese (Portugal)
Tobias Bannert German
Vdragon, Ｖ字龍 Chinese (Taiwan)
Search as the user types
Fixes#323.
This does away with the separate `SearchResult` and instead applies the search to the currently viewed tab on the main screen (Available, Installed, Updates). When filtering the Available list, it filters the currently selected category.
Note however that there are still times when the old style `SearchDialog` will be shown over the top of the action bar rather than the `SearchView` within the action bar. These times include:
* When a user with a hardware keyboard starts typing from the main screen.
* On older devices with a "search" hardware button.
* Probably some other cases (I think when there is not enough screen real estate, but haven't seen that happen).
In cases where this dialog is shown, filtering the lists as you type does not seem to be an option. I tried to figure out how to do that, but failed. If someone else figures it out, that would be great. However, when the search is submitted, it will hide the `SearchDialog` and populate the `SearchView`, focus it, and apply the search appropriately.
There is a script in the `F-Droid/tools/` subdirectory which will consecutively send various intents to F-Droid relating to search. This includes Play, market, Amazon search links. For good measure, I also made it send intents to do with viewing app details. This should probably be made into a proper instrumented test at some point, but I didn't have the time to figure out how to do that. Maybe a project for future @pserwylo.
One unknown is the performance implications. There is no problems on my Nexus 4 with Android 5.0. My Chinese/ebay/$30/Android 2.3.4 device seems good enough too.
See merge request !177
The system's are sometimes wrong, e.g. unexpected names. This also helps
our support across different Android versions without having to worry as
much about the system's language support.
Fixes#503.
Translators:
Dario Tordoni Italian
Elia Argentieri Italian
Enol Puente Asturian
halcyonest Korean
M2ck French
relan Russian
Tobias Bannert German
Дмитрий Михирев Russian
In addition, added a @Nullable constraint on the categorySpinner
and a null guard when resuming the fragment to handle possible
null cases (though I don't think there will be any).
This caused the entire list view to e animated when navigating
back to the Available tab. Tried switching the `animateLayoutChanged=true`
to a child view only containing the category spinner, but this is not how
the animation handling works. It needs to animate both the thing being
hidden/shown, and also the next sibling of that thing to work properly.
Thus, moving the spinner to its own child and leaving the list didn't work.
Speed up "Saving Application Details" part of repo update
Fixes 506.
This does the thing mentioned in 506 (renaming temp table, rather than copying data). In the process, I also identified that the temp tables were missing key indexes which slowed the process down. This fix took the update time from ~100 seconds to ~60 seconds on my Nexus 4.
Below are a couple of log cats from before and after the change (this logging is not part of this MR, it was just for diagnosing the problem).
*Before change:*
```
AppProvider D Calculating whether apps are compatible, based on whether any of their apks are compatible
D Update compatible flags took 20244ms
D Calculating suggested versions for all apps which specify an upstream version code.
D Update suggested from upstream took 17808ms
D Calculating suggested versions for all apps which don't specify an upstream version code.
D Update suggested from latest took 129ms
AppProvider D Update icon URLs took 7879ms
UpdateService I Updating repo(s) complete, took 104 seconds to complete.
```
*After change:*
```
AppProvider D Calculating whether apps are compatible, based on whether any of their apks are compatible
D Update compatible flags took 1047ms
D Calculating suggested versions for all apps which specify an upstream version code.
D Update suggested from upstream took 601ms
D Calculating suggested versions for all apps which don't specify an upstream version code.
D Update suggested from latest took 136ms
D Update icon URLs took 887ms
UpdateService I Updating repo(s) complete, took 63 seconds to complete.
```
See merge request !179
The idnexes which are added are for those columns which
are used to calculate information such as latest upstream version.
These queries use subqueries which seemed to be adversely
impacted by the lack of indexes.
In total, reduced update time on test device from just over 100 seconds
to just over 60 seconds.
This requires renaming the old app/apk tables to be deleted and
the temp ones to be renamed. This is done in a transaction to
ensure we always have at least `fdroid_app` and `fdroid_apk`.
Well, two transactions, one for renaming the `fdroid_app` table
and one for `fdroid_apk`.
Translators:
agilob Polish
Ajeje Brazorf Sardinian
Alberto Moshpirit Spanish
Daniil Stryukov Ukrainian
Enol Puente Asturian
Jaroslav Lichtblau Czech
Ldm Public French
lucnsy Chinese (China)
Marcelo Santana Portuguese (Brazil)
Mladen Pejaković Serbian
naofum Japanese
relan Russian
Fix 324 : Out of memory errors while updating repos.
Fixes#324, but in the process makes the updater take a lot longer. My benchmarks tell me that an update which used to take approx 30 seconds on my Nexus 4 now takes about 50-55 seconds. This is because it first inserts the apps into the database (in a temp table) and then subsequently copies that table to the actual table. This means there is a lot more disk access than before.
I'm open for discussion on whether this tradeoff is worth it - however I'll caution that there is always going to be a tradeoff between faster and more memory vs slower and less memory. This is the case with all software, and perhaps more so with memory constrained devices such as phones. Also, as the repo index grows (until perhaps we are able to extract the app descriptions in the future), this will become more of an issue.
I'd also like this to be CR'ed properly before merging, because it changes some important code around the repo updater. It is important because security, and it is also important because it is the main thing that F-Droid needs to do (get a list of apps to show the user).
See merge request !173
Translators:
ageru French
Ajeje Brazorf Sardinian
Alberto Moshpirit Spanish
enolp Asturian
Ldm Public French
lucnsy Chinese (China)
Mladen Pejaković Serbian
naofum Japanese
