-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Upgrade NDK to version 9d #57
Comments
Hi @lamerman , |
@ernestmc , You can get more information here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24818902/running-a-native-library-on-android-l-error-only-position-independent-executab/26422855#26422855 In short starting from android-16 it's not possible to run not position independent executables. Currently you are compiling for android-14 and you cannot run the compiled executables on modern devices >= android 4.1. What is proposed to update the NDK version. Then the one who compiles ROS for android will be free to choose the target platform from 9 to 19. Currently it's not possible, he can choose only up to 14 because of 8e NDK restriction. So the user will be to compile with more recent android target no matter what for. For me it's position independent executables, but it's not the main point here. The main is to update NDK if we can, without a lot of effort. |
I opened the pull request #58 with the NDK version upgrade |
Thanks for your explanation! |
…-debug-symbols Patch android.toolchain.cmake to build without debug symbols
I upgraded NDK to version 9d locally to be able to build position independent executables (PIE). As I understood they are supported starting from android-16. The version of NDK (8e) that is currently used supports only <= android-14. The NDK 9d supports platforms from android-9 to android-19 and we still can build everything: boost, etc...
I tried it already and it works. It compiles and I can run produced binaries like rosbag/record on modern android devices without errors.
What do you think about changing the NDK version? I could help with the small patch actually.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: