Skip to content

Conversation

@sstone
Copy link
Member

@sstone sstone commented Oct 29, 2025

I have broken them during a recent update to the build scripts and they had been silently ignored on our CI, which can be seen when running gradlew connectedCheck --info, it will show: Skipping task ':jni:android:connectedCheck' as it has no actions.

To verify that the problem has been fixed, start en emulator and run gradlew connectedCheck, you will see:

Starting 41 tests on Pixel_3a(AVD) - 9

Finished 41 tests on Pixel_3a(AVD) - 9

Test resources are duplicated in src/androidInstrumentedTest/assets and src/commonTest/resources for now until we find a way to share them.

They had been silently ignored on our CI.
Test resources are duplicated in src/androidInstrumentedTest/assets and src/commonTest/resources for now until we find a way to share them.
This fixes `WARNING: D8: Unexpected error during rewriting of Kotlin metadata for class` when building the android library.
@sstone sstone mentioned this pull request Oct 29, 2025
@sstone sstone marked this pull request as ready for review November 3, 2025 09:22
@sstone
Copy link
Member Author

sstone commented Nov 3, 2025

There are no functional changes, and build changes are limited to Android. I've checked that the Android library is valid.

@sstone sstone requested a review from t-bast December 15, 2025 09:15
Copy link
Member

@t-bast t-bast left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, but I have no idea what side-effects those builds changes could have. I think that before merging this PR, we need to test it all the way to Phoenix to be completely safe?

Since ACINQ/bitcoin-kmp#169 also needs to be tested all the way to lightning-kmp and eclair, my recommendation would be:

  • update ACINQ/bitcoin-kmp#169 to use this SNAPSHOT version of secp256k1-kmp and test it locally
  • open a PR in lightning-kmp that uses the SNAPSHOT version of lightning-kmp from ACINQ/bitcoin-kmp#169
  • open a PR in bitcoin-lib to prepare a release matching ACINQ/bitcoin-kmp#169
  • open a PR in eclair using this SNAPSHOT version of bitcoin-lib
  • ideally, if Dominique is up for it, create a version of Phoenix that uses the SNAPSHOT version of lightning-kmp to verify that nothing weird happens?

At that point if everything works, we can merge all that chain of PRs and release everything. WDYT? Is this overkill?

@sstone
Copy link
Member Author

sstone commented Dec 16, 2025

LGTM, but I have no idea what side-effects those builds changes could have. I think that before merging this PR, we need to test it all the way to Phoenix to be completely safe?

Since ACINQ/bitcoin-kmp#169 also needs to be tested all the way to lightning-kmp and eclair, my recommendation would be:

  • update ACINQ/bitcoin-kmp#169 to use this SNAPSHOT version of secp256k1-kmp and test it locally
  • open a PR in lightning-kmp that uses the SNAPSHOT version of lightning-kmp from ACINQ/bitcoin-kmp#169
  • open a PR in bitcoin-lib to prepare a release matching ACINQ/bitcoin-kmp#169
  • open a PR in eclair using this SNAPSHOT version of bitcoin-lib
  • ideally, if Dominique is up for it, create a version of Phoenix that uses the SNAPSHOT version of lightning-kmp to verify that nothing weird happens?

At that point if everything works, we can merge all that chain of PRs and release everything. WDYT? Is this overkill?

Yes it makes sense to update ACINQ/bitcoin-kmp#169), I've opened relevant PRs.
Since this PR fixes android tests they now run on our CI on an emulator and can be run locally on a real device as well (which I did).

Copy link
Member

@t-bast t-bast left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, we can merge this and create a separate PR to set the version to 22.0 for a release 👍

@sstone sstone merged commit 441eeea into master Dec 17, 2025
6 checks passed
@sstone sstone deleted the snapshot/fix-android-tests branch December 17, 2025 09:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants