I would like to build an iOS app that includes some basic Git functionality. I basically only need pull, commit, and push capabilities. I'm new to iOS development so I am not aware of any frameworks or libraries that could provide these capabilities. I'm not sure if GitHub has an API for these features but that would suffice too.
Let me answer this old question with libgit2 library and their ObjectiveGit wrapper.
libgit2 is a portable, pure C implementation of the Git core methods provided as a re-entrant linkable library with a solid API, allowing you to write native speed custom Git applications in any language which supports C bindings.
ObjectiveGit provides Cocoa bindings to the libgit2 library. Even their licenses allow you to build closed-source software.
Found a random guide to making a commit with the API, no clue how accurate/useful it is.
GitHub API is available, details here : http://developer.github.com/
Related
There are set of related questions here, because I suspect I am asking the wrong question. The related questions may help someone discern what my fundamental misunderstanding is.
I have worked through:
https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/2.6/ref-manual/ref-manual.html
https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/2.6/dev-manual/dev-manual.html
https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/2.6/sdk-manual/sdk-manual.html
I'm looking for an single build environment from which I can use bitbake, and build a product for different target architectures.
This after all seems to be what the Yocto/OE holy grail is.
It seems like the most functional x86_64 environment is had from:
git clone git://git.yoctoproject.org/poky
It is more capable than the SDK's, but how do I cross-build this environment for another platform?
Is there an SDK that is as functional as this git clone'd environment? Meaning it has a working bitbake and I can cross-build bootable images for different targets?
Questions:
Why can't an SDK build an SDK? (e.g. http://downloads.yoctoproject.org/releases/yocto/yocto-2.6/buildtools/)
Why doesn't an SDK even include bitbake? (The ext SDK does, but doesn't like to add it to the path).
Why does an extensible SDK with properly sourced env (and bitbake added to the path) seem to prefer the distro-installed build tools instead of the ones in the SDK? (when using bitmake directly instead of devtool)
Why is an SDK apparently tied to build for a particular machine or architecture, and apparently unable to cross-build for different architectures? The process for building an SDK even wishes the final architecture to be specified in advance
What I'm used to is a build-sysroot with the cross-toolchain running under some sort of pseudo/proot/chroot with my sources mounted into it.
I realise that Yocto/bitbake does this under the hood, all the recipe caching seems great, the git clone checkout seems powerful, the devtool workflow seems great, but then it all falls down when I try to standardise generation of this environment, or make it cross-compile.
(I’m expecting to source the environment file from a target directory containing some local conf files to specialise the build, and then use bitbake to make the build)
What have I missed? - thanks for reading this far ;-)
SDK is such a generic word that in the context of yocto, it can be miss interpreted and so your question is legit.
Yocto is a wonderful tool to build completely custom images and can be adjusted at all level (bootloader, kernel, applications) based on source fetched online.
The SDK you can generate with yocto is as quoted from the documentation:
The Standard SDK provides a cross-development toolchain and libraries
tailored to the contents of a specific image.
Based on my small experience with Yocto, you use meta layers to create and customize your environment. When your environment is setup, you can generate an SDK to easily cross compile your aplicative programs for your target machine.
Yocto tool is way too powerful, heavy and complicated for developers who just focus on the aplicative part of a project. The SDK on the other side is perfect for that use but you can't change anything in the toolchain with it, you can only use it. If a bug or a patch needs to be applied in runtime libs for example, you need to regenerate the SDK and give this new versions to developers.
With that short explanations:
It is more capable than the SDK's, but how do I cross-build this
environment for another platform?
You need to customize your Yocto meta layers to change from a platform to another.
Is there an SDK that is as functional as this git clone'd environment?
Meaning it has a working bitbake and I can cross-build bootable images
for different targets?
No, i don't think so
Why can't an SDK build an SDK?
Because that's not the philosophy of the SDK, sdk is a generated toolchain for a specific image to cross compile your programs, no more.
Why doesn't an SDK even include bitbake?
Bitbake is a tool to parse yocto recipe (so meta layers) and so, there is no need to have this tool in the SDK
Why is an SDK apparently tied to build for a particular machine or
architecture, and apparently unable to cross-build for different
architectures? The process for building an SDK even wishes the final
architecture to be specified in advance
I think i already gave an answer to this question but, about the second part of your question. It is possible to be a little bit agile and start both the BSP and applications in parallel. Every week, you release a new SDK with BSP new changes an the toolchain is always up-to-date for developers (This is a very idealistic vision i admit)
Reading from https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/2.6.1/ref-manual/ref-manual.html#cross-development-toolchain
it seems that an SDK and eSDK are examples of a relocatable toolchain;
A relocatable toolchain used outside of BitBake by developers when
developing applications that will run on a targeted device.
This sentence particularly gives the game away:
You can also find more information on using the relocatable toolchain
in the Yocto Project Application Development and the Extensible
Software Development Kit (eSDK) manual.
SO I guess the git-clone-poky checkout which builds the SDK and eSDK is:
A toolchain only used by and within BitBake when building an image for a target architecture
No doubt I am interested in:
toolchain concepts as they apply to the Yocto Project
and should:
see the "Cross-Development Toolchain Generation" section in the Yocto
Project Overview and Concepts Manual https://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/2.6.1/overview-manual/overview-manual.html#cross-development-toolchain-generation
Certainly the first image makes it clear that the SDK is for building apps, not the image. I want to build the image (which of course may contain apps).
And so I may wish to make an SDK for other app builders, and incorporate their app into my sources and do the final build for them.
It may also be that the toolchain used for building an image can be run within the SDK so as to use the toolchain of the SDK rather than the host linux distro toolchain no, you can't
Recently added Firebase Storage and Authentication to my Unity project. I work on Windows, have a single Unity Pro License, and want to export my App for iOS, as I have done many times before in this dev process.
However, since the addition of Firebase, I'm told I apparently can't export my Firebase-Enabled Unity project for iOS without swapping Unity to an OSX device (which I don't have in comparable quality).
I've noticed a singular thread here where a supposed workaround was discussed, but can't seem to pull it off myself:
"The plugin that comes with firebase depends on cocoapods to handle
transient dependencies. If you look at the Assets ->
PlayServicesResolver -> IOSResolver -> Settings
You can configure it to generate the podfile but not do the remaining
steps." - from user johnb003, March 18th 2017.
Can't seem to find the configuration settings described here. Scoured the forums/communities for solutions, but no results elsewhere.
So, that said, any other Firebase user have a workaround for this issue? I adore the collective Google has put together with their product, but I can't really afford to invest in another Unity Pro License just for the sake of working off of my sub-standard Macbook. Thoughts?
Looks like there's a Google Github project, Unity JAR resolver, describing how the Unity Play Services Resolver works for each target platform.
The documentation is pretty extensive, and solutions are use-case specific, so I can't give you much help on specific podfile settings, but hopefully you can sift through it yourself.
i am new to Unity and i am try to understand plugins. I have got the difference between a managed plugin and a native plugin, but what is not very clear to me is:
what is the difference between a plugin and a dll? what should i expect to find in an sdk to make it usable in my unity project?
Thanks a lot
To expand on #Everts comment instead of just copying it into an answer, I'll go a little into details here
What is a plugin?
It's a somewhat vague word for a third-party library that is somehow integrated with the rest of your game. It means that it neither is officialy supported by Unity, nor is it a part of your core code. It can be "plugged" in or out without altering its internals, so it must provide some kind of API that can be used by the game code.
For example, you'll find many plugins that handle external services like ads, notifications, analytics etc. You'll also find a couple of developer-tools that can also be called plugins, like tile-based map editors and such.
Plugins come in many forms - DLL files are one example but some plugins actually provide full source code for easier use. And of course, other plugins will provide native code for different platforms, like Objective-C for iOS or .jars for Android.
So to answer your first question:
DLL is simply a pre-compiled source file that can be a part of a plugin
A plugin is a whole library that can consist of multiple files with different formats (.cs, .dll, .jar, .m etc)
What do you need to use an sdk?
First of all - documentation. Like I said before, and like you noticed yourself, not all plugins give you access to the source code. And unfortunately, not many sdks have extensive and developer-friendly documentations so it can be a tough task to actually understand how to use a given sdk.
Secondly - the code. Many sdks give you some kind of "drag & drop" library, a single folder with all the neccessary files inside that you simply add to your Unity projects. I've also seen sdks that use Unity packages that you have to import via Assets > Import Package > Custom Package.
Once you have the code and documentation it's time to integrate it with your game. I strongly recommend using an abstract lyer in your game as, in my experience, you often have to change sdks for various reasons and you don't want to rewrite your game logic every time. So I suggest encapsulating sdk-related code in a single class so that you have to change only one class in your code when switching from, say, one ad provider to another (and keep the old class in case you need to switch back).
So you basically need three things:
Documentation (either a readme file or an online documentation)
The code (precompiled or source)
A versatile integration
Currently I am trying to figure out how to use Cocoapods. Many blogs quoted that Cocoapods is the best dependency management tool at present.
However, I am also using Gradle plugin for building my application.
Now the question is, can Gradle do the same dependency management for my private files & libraries (.a files) as Cocoapods.
Long story short (Jan. 2015):
Gradle: build system + dependency management.
Cocoapods: dependency management for Xcode internal builds.
There is probably more to this (for others that want to start commenting "but Cocoapods can also.."), but for a start that summarises it.
If you are new to iOS and/or Xcode you should probably not use a mixture of Gradle and Xcode as it adds extra complexity to an already complex build environment. If you are familiar with Gradle and you also (!) have some knowledge of Xcode, then I would recommend to use Gradle. Advantage? You have full control over your builds and it saves you from messing around in endless Xcode build-config-dialogs. On top you gain access to other repositories (maybe not that interesting for you) AND you can script your builds in a cross-platform environment. I also use a non-MacOS build server (Linux+Jenkins) which is able to interpret Gradle-build scripts, which is another plus.
If you want access to a versioning system other than git, you also gain access to that... when I type the lines right here, I wonder why I ever built an app without Gradle :-). I have even more things that come to my mind, now that I think about it: mixed programming-language builds (Java/C#/objC...), unit-test integration that does not require Xcode, easy reuse of build configurations from project to project ... .
Cocoapods is pretty much tied to Xcode, since it generates Xcode project files. The problem with Xcode is that it works best when it's building the app, not some external build system. I suppose it's possible to make a Gradle plugin that uses Cocoapods repositories with Gradle's Objective-C support, but I haven't seen anything like that.
I'm aware of Cocoapods. However this isn't very useful for commercial use because we don't want to deliver source code.
We want to be able to deliver compiled libraries. But use them in our own (and client) projects, just like with Cocoapods. And just like maven does with jar files and the suchlike.
Is there anything which provides this (or similar) functionality. It seems very shortsighted of Apple not to include anything like this, or the ability to support anything like this, within XCode.
Thanks