You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 26, 2023. It is now read-only.
Repository navigation
This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 26, 2023. It is now read-only.
Weird Google Play "Invalid Package File" error #903
So, I have been working on an app for a very long time (before 3.0) and because I was using the Otto library I had to use the 3.0 SNAPSHOT.
It's all fine and the snapshot works great, and the app was released with the snapshot build. No worries, everything was working perfectly, so there was no concern about releasing a build with the snapshot.
So, I was working on an update for the app, and noticed that AA 3.0.1 had been released, so I figured I'd upgrade my snapshot to the official release.
Once again everything seemed to be working fine, so the update was released to the public.
After a day or so I started to receive feedback from some users complaining about "Invalid package file" when trying to download and install the update (both clean install, and as update).
Did some searching and found out that Google had previously fixed a Google Play error causing this specific error (back in august 2013 i believe). I did some more digging but nothing really turned up.
For a day or two I assumed that this was an error related to Google Play (faulty download, whatever), but I finally came across a device that had the same error. So I tried to debug it and see if LogCat could give me anything useful.
1362-1391/? E/PackageManager﹕ Package com.company.foo has mismatched uid: 10108 on disk, 10113 in settings
22989-22989/? E/dalvikvm﹕ LinearAlloc exceeded capacity (5242880), last=2272
22989-22989/? E/dalvikvm﹕ VM aborting
1259-1259/? E/installd﹕ dexopt failed on '/data/dalvik-cache/data@app@com.company.foo-1.apk@classes.dex' res = 11
Do you remember the commit hash or date of your SNAPSHOT build so we can dig in our side ?
I've never seen this error before, do you know if the device is running a custom rom or whatever special ?
Also, could you give me a short list of annotations you're using (just to have a sublist of processor on which I should dig ) ?
However, this issue seems to be thrown when dalvik tries to resolve multiple interface inheritance. I'm just thinking that since 3.0, generated classes looks like this :
Good to know.. Sadly, we can't do anything about this. You'll have to change a little your class design. Please tell us the solution you'll implement, for the records :)
Activity
DayS commentedon Feb 3, 2014
A strange issue indeed..
Do you remember the commit hash or date of your SNAPSHOT build so we can dig in our side ?
I've never seen this error before, do you know if the device is running a custom rom or whatever special ?
Also, could you give me a short list of annotations you're using (just to have a sublist of processor on which I should dig ) ?
davidjorgensen commentedon Feb 3, 2014
I updated from 2.7.1 to 3.0-SNAPSHOT on June 26th.
I am using
@eApplication
@EActivity
@efragment
@eservice
@eviewgroup
@ebean (and @bean)
@AfterInject
@Afterviews
@click
@ItemClick
@OnActivityResult (on activity)
@ViewById
@UiThread
@background
@SharedPref (with @DefaultBoolean)
Thats pretty much it i think.
Thanks champ.. :)
DayS commentedon Feb 3, 2014
I don't see anything special here.
However, this issue seems to be thrown when dalvik tries to resolve multiple interface inheritance. I'm just thinking that since 3.0, generated classes looks like this :
But it's only 2 interfaces...
Do you have any enhanced class with multiple interfaces ? If so, could you give us the class signature ?
davidjorgensen commentedon Feb 4, 2014
Thanks for looking into it.
yes, i do have some crazy ones.
DayS commentedon Feb 4, 2014
Good to know.. Sadly, we can't do anything about this. You'll have to change a little your class design. Please tell us the solution you'll implement, for the records :)
I'll add a section about this in the FAQ page.
davidjorgensen commentedon Feb 4, 2014
Roger that..
I actually wasn't expecting a solution per se, but more just as information or a general "warning".
Thanks for looking into it