flexercised  escribió Only by doing this: http://www.saumitrabhave.com/2011/10/removing-unwanted-languages-from-you.html By doing what? That link unfortunately doesn't work anymore. Sorry for resurrecting this old thread, but I'm having the same issue. I can't add "th" (Thai) to <supportedLanguages></supportedLanguages>, but only in Android. In iOS it accepts that language just fine. ... View more

As far as I know these problems were fixed with the latest build of AIR 29 and with AIR 30, which fixed other issues as well. Have you tried AIR 30 SDK? Download Adobe AIR SDK ... View more

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Alexander+Metelsky  wrote I think it's better to say - app has to be signed withing xcode or near-xcode tools. Recently I've gotten IPA without warnings packaged by Adobe AIR 29 and resigned by fastlane (I think fastlane using codesign tool at background) something like fastlane sigh resign test.ipa --signing_identity "iPhone Distribution: FOO (BAR)" -p "distribution.mobileprovision" Could you explain this line? What is "sigh"? The "iPhone Distribution: " part is a literal string? What do you put in "FOO (BAR)"? Also, how did you install "fastlane"? I tried to install it using "brew", but I cannot get it past the message "Could not find fastlane in current directory. Make sure to have your fastlane configuration files inside a folder called "fastlane". Would you like to set fastlane up? (y/n):" (entering "y" does nothing, apparently) ... View more

https://forums.adobe.com/people/App+runner+KG  wrote you are right. this issue exists also with High Sierra. We tested it. This warning exists since Apple released the Update of Xcode to Version 9.3.1 Does that mean that if I don't upgrade my Xcode to 9.3.1 or higher I won't have this problem? ... View more

Thanks for your replies, Flipline! I hope someone from Adobe can explain things clearly... BTW, how does AIR not supporting 32-bit affects Android apps? Surely there must be LOTS of 32-bit ARM Android devices, right? Or maybe 32-bit support for Android still hasn't been dropped? ... View more

Flipline  wrote From what I've seen in Apple's policies and Q&A, they want you to only change MinimumOSVersion to 11 in order to limit it to iOS 11 devices, and to not change UIRequiredDeviceCapabilties at all in the process.  Like you said, iOS 11 only runs on arm64 devices anyway so you're effectively limiting it, but by Apple's policies you can't explicitly change your device requirements, only that minimum iOS version. But that doesn't make sense. Why change "MinimumOSVersion" to 11 but still indicate that your app requires a device with "armv7" capabilities when iOS 11 doesn't actually support that capability? (it only supports "arm64" devices). If Apple really requires that, it doesn't make sense at all. Even if Apple's policies say you can't explicitly change your device requirements, they also say that "developers who wish to issue updates, but remove device support" can "target a newer version of iOS that requires a newer device". Wouldn't that be an exception to the aforementioned rule of not being able to remove device support in an update? ... View more

I see. BTW, thank you for all your informative posts, Flipline! You're really helpful. There should be more people like you in these forums! Just one question for you: You say that Apple will reject any iOS 11 update because AIR 30 sets the "UIRequiredDeviceCapabilities" attribute to "arm64" and Apple explicitly says "Important: Do not modify the UIRequiredDeviceCapabilities info.plist key when requiring a newer iOS version". But if that's the case, how can anybody update ANY hybrid iOS app (even native Swift or Objective C apps) to iOS 11? I'm asking this because iOS 11 requires "arm64" devices anyway (it doesn't work in "armv7"), and I don't think Apple will forbid ALL iOS developers from updating their previously hybrid apps to iOS 11 (requiring them to create new apps with different app bundle identifiers), won't it? Also, Apple says that you can remove device support if you "target a newer version of iOS that requires a newer device". Wouldn't that be an exception to the "Do not modify the UIRequiredDeviceCapabilities info.plist key when requiring a newer iOS version" rule? Thank you for your comments. ... View more

Flipline  escribió One outstanding issue with AIR 29 I'm seeing is Apple rejecting apps in AIR 29 that don't include NSLocationAlwaysUsageDescription and NSLocationWhenInUseUsageDescription keys.  Yes, we can include the keys ourselves ourselves for now with a nonsense description of "Required by Adobe SDK for some reason".  That's a temporary solution (maybe for weeks? months?), and Apple reviewers will eventually crack down and want to know why Adobe is accessing location APIs when our apps aren't using them, and will require the API access to be removed from the app instead of just adding a bogus text string as a reason.  I'm sure Adobe will eventually fix it for AIR 30, but AIR 29 will be left as-is. For one of our own apps we squeaked by with an update on March 28th before this new restriction went into affect on April 1st, but AIR 29.0.0.122 builds have been hit with this rejection since then. Well, on April 12th we uploaded to the App Store an app update compiled with AIR 29.0.0.122 without including any of those keys and it was approved, so you never know. Probably the person reviewing the app didn't notice. But still, it's a problem with AIR 29 that should be fixed. ... View more

zwetan_uk  wrote Sorry, my bad, I'm used to talk to professional software developers, I guess, with that crowd, I need to explains things in a more obvious dumb-proofed way. Well, you're not being so "professional" by showing this annoying condescendent attitude towards us as if you were the only one who knows what you're talking about. Who do you think you are to talk to us like that? That's more childish than professional if you ask me. Chill down with your attitude. zwetan_uk​  wrote Apple clearly announced their transition to support only 64-bit devices and apps That slide you show here is just announcing they will only support 64-bit applications on Mac OS X, not iOS! They've never stated that 64-bit apps for iOS won't be able to have a 32-bit version included in the same package as well (they never said they won't allow hybrid apps). zwetan_uk  wrote What happen to 32-bit apps ? they need to be updated to either hybrid (32-bit + 64-bit) apps or 64-bit only apps, if they are not updated they will be removed from the app store That's true, but no one said they wanted Adobe to support 32-bit only apps, but hybrid 64/32-bit apps. Adobe AIR 29 is already supporting hybrid apps since 2015. We're not even asking for new implementations. We just want them not to drop the hybrid compatibility so fast! Especially because the main reason cited by Adobe for that is MacOS X, not iOS. As several people have already pointed out, even the latest version of Apple's official Xcode IDE compiles iOS apps as hybrid 64/32-bit apps by default! If Apple were dropping hybrid iOS apps, why would they still support it in the latest Xcode, and BY DEFAULT at that!! zwetan_uk  escribió What happen to 32-bit devices ? they will not get any updates as they are not supported anymore by Apple The fact that the devices themselves won't get any iOS operating system updates (because they can't get the 64-bit only iOS 11) doesn't mean they won't get app updates. They will be able to get app updates as long as Xcode supports iOS 10 and 32-bit apps, and it still does. If Xcode supports it, Adobe AIR can support it too. Remember that iOS 10 works in the iPhone 5, iPhone 5C, iPad 4 and iPad Mini. All those devices are 32-bit, and Apple will still support iOS 10 for some time, including in Xcode. zwetan_uk  escribió As of today, what is the market share of those unsupported 32-bit devices? about 6% If you don't offer some sources for that figure, I'll have to call bs. You are constantly ignoring all previous posts in this thread which point out that it's more like 24% of devices which are still on iOS 10 or earlier (most of them probably because they can't upgrade because they are 32-bit only). And this figure is backed by Apple themselves! See: App Store - Support - Apple Developer Just add the "iOS 10" figure plus the "Earlier" figure. zwetan_uk  escribió It is useless to keep supporting hybrid (32-bit + 64-bit) apps Why? Because Apple only allow 64-bit devices to get app updates This is obviously false! Users with 32-bit devices can still get hybrid app updates. Apple just forbids 32-bit only apps, not hybrid 32/64-bit apps. zwetan_uk  escribió Is it possible to update an hybrid (32-bit + 64-bit) app to 64-bit only? Yes, see Apple Technical Q&A QA1623 you just need to define the minimum "iOS Deployment Target" to iOS 9 This is just wrong! Apple won't let you to update a hybrid app to a 64-bit app if you set your "iOS Deployment Target" to iOS 9, because then iOS 9 users wouldn't be able to update your iOS 9 app even if they saw the update on the app store! You can't support less devices in an app update for iOS versions your app supports. It even says that in the very same page you cited!!! You can't drop support for 32-bit devices in an update unless you target iOS 11, which is the only iOS version which doesn't support 32-bit devices (iOS 10 still does). If you target iOS 11, then your 64-bit only app will indeed be able to be updated over the previous hybrid one, but if it targets an earlier iOS version, it won't be accepted. So, yes, you can update a hybrid 32/64-bit app to 64-bit only, but only if targeting iOS 11.
 
 If you target iOS 10, you HAVE to upload a hybrid 64-bit/32-bit app to be able to be accepted as an update. And of course you will want to target iOS 10. It's not that old: iOS 11 came less than a year ago! And targeting iOS 10 you can reach users of iPhone 5, iPhone 5c, iPad 4 and iPad Mini, which are on iOS 10. Targeting iOS 9 (lowest iOS version currently supported by Adobe AIR) is interesting as well, because you can also reach users of iPad 3 and iPad 2, which are stuck on iOS 9. And this requires the update to be hybrid as well. Finally, you might have noticed that Josh Tynjala, the programming guru behind Feathers, one of the most important Adobe AIR libraries alongside Starling, has posted in this thread and he also thinks this is "a poor choice" in Adobe's part. Do you really think he doesn't know what he's doing either? (as you are so arrogantly and constantly saying in your posts about people who think different than you). Flipline​ nailed it in his latest post: Adobe should wait if only because AIR is the only framework dropping hybrid 64/32-bit apps altogether. All other important frameworks still do support hybrid apps. It's much easier to explain to a customer that Apple requires 64-bit only apps (when Apple finally does, which is NOT now), than explaining that some framework requires it (the customer won't even know what a framework is). Adobe puts us in a difficult position if they drop support for hybrid 32/64-bit apps before Apple really requires it, before everyone else making apps for the App Store! If they drop support for hybrid apps when Apple really requires it, it will NOT be that big of a deal, because then Apple is to "blame" and ALL app developers of the App Store will have to stop supporting 32-bit devices, instead of only Adobe AIR developers, which is the problem here. Also, when Apple really requires developers to drop support for 32-bit devices and hybrid apps, which probably won't happen until next year, users will have probably updated their devices or won't be as upset about having to buy a new device because those devices will be older. So, if Adobe still supports hybrid iOS apps in AIR 30 everyone wins. ... View more

zwetan_uk  wrote No, if you to try to submit a 32-bit only app (either new or update) on the app store, it will be rejected, plain and simple. But let's try with images as it seems you don't understand text Well, this last sentence proves you are just trolling and being rude to people for no reason! EVERYONE here is explaining to you in detail that Apple will still allow for quite some time 64+32 bit hybrid apps, but you keep on insisting that Apple doesn't allow 32-bit only apps, which NOBODY has asked for! We're all just asking Adobe to keep support for hybrid (64+32 bit) apps, NOT 32-BIT ONLY apps! So if you're really not trolling it's YOU the one not "understanding text" as you put it. So, please stop insisting on this, and if you really feel like trolling and wasting other people's time, then go somewhere else. Here we are app developers trying to get work done and we don't have time for futile discussions like this one. ... View more

ASWC  wrote It's the case also for us but keep in mind the users with those old device cannot update to the latest Ios and that means it's not just your apps they can't use/update anymore it's really any app. So while Apple policies are arguable (they obviously want to force people to buy new stuff) they also follow up but blocking the os update on old device. So what that means for your apps (and ours, and any other company) is that Apple will be the one blocking apps update/install on those old device and your users can't really blame you for this. Now Ipad 2 for sure is out and maybe IPad 3 but mini and 4 should be fine I think. I'm sure not that long ago most of your customers (and ours) were on IPad 1 so we'll survive .... This problem is NOT the same as iOS not supporting older devices. In that case it's Apple's fault and nothing can be done about it. But in this case Apple is perfectly supporting 32-bit apps and they will support them for quite some time still, as there are a lot of 32-bit only devices, and no, the iPad Mini is not "fine" with 64-bit apps as you say, because it's actually a 32-bit device as well with the very same old hardware as the iPad 2. It was already an outdated device when it came out, but no one noticed because Apple ;-). As others have already pointed out, all other multiplatform frameworks support 32-bit apps. It's only Adobe AIR not supporting it. Also, Apple doesn't allow an existing hybrid 64-bit/32-bit app in the App Store to only support 64-bit in a future update! That means that ALL existing AIR apps won't be able to be updated AT ALL! (AIR 29 apps were always compiled as hybrid 64/32 apps). This doesn't make sense. We should open an issue in Adobe AIR's bug tracker to explain this issue to the developers of AIR SDK. Especially because this arbitrary decision of dropping support for 32-bit was caused by a problem with Mac OS X, which is an entirely different platform! They should only drop 32-bit support in Mac OS X, but NOT in iOS! ... View more

Flipline  wrote does this mean ad hoc provisioning will not be fixed in AIR 29, and will be left broken as-is?  With AIR 30 dropping support for 32-bit/universal apps, I have a feeling many developers will need to remain with AIR 29 so we can keep supporting our customers, and with ad hoc provisioning broken there's not an easy way to do that now. Your best bet for now is using AIR 29.0.0.112 for ad-hoc testing and AIR 29.0.0.122 for App Store releases. Unfortunately AIR 29.0.0.112 is not available at Adobe's AIR SDK Archive site (Find and download archived versions of Adobe AIR SDK ). It seems they stopped archiving AIR SDK versions at AIR 25. If you need AIR 29.0.0.112 SDK I can upload it somewhere so you can get it. Best regards. ... View more

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Amrita+Gangwani  wrote Hi, Starting macOS 10.13.4, an alert message could be seen when trying to run 32-bit software. As per the Apple's document 32-bit app compatibility with macOS High Sierra 10.13.4 - Apple Support , 32-bit software will not be compatible with macOS in the future. The decision to remove packaging of 32-bit iOS applications has been made keeping in mind the future possibilities. Thanks! So this change was made because of Mac OS X? Well, the problem for all of us is not Mac OS X but iOS! Dropping support for 32-bit means users of iPad 2, 3, 4, iPad Mini and iPhone 5, 5C and older won't be able to use apps compiled with AIR 30. AIR 29 and older compiled iOS apps with BOTH 64-bit and 32-bit versions inside the IPA package. As long as 64-bit is supported, there's nothing wrong with having the 32-bit version in the IPA as well for older devices. It doesn't impair the 64-bit version in any way and Apple is currently allowing this just fine. So please add 32-bit compatibility back to iOS builds, so both 64-bit and 32-bit are included inside the IPA. There's no problem if you want to keep Mac OS X 64-bit only. Most Mac computers are 64-bit already so it's not a problem, but that's not the case with iPads (2, 3, 4, Mini). So, even if you drop 32-bit support for Mac OS X, please do keep 32-bit support for iOS! Apple still allows it as long as a 64-bit version is included in the IPA alongside the 32-bit one, which AIR 29 already did. You say "The decision to remove packaging of 32-bit iOS applications has been made keeping in mind the future possibilities". In that case you could make AIR 30 compile for 64-bit only by default, but let us add an optional "legacy" argument to adt so it can compile both in 64-bit and 32-bit if needed. What do you think? ... View more

But that news peterf19399894  wrote More a question for Apple than Adobe Apple made some announcements back in Jan 2017 The future of iOS is 64-bit only: Apple to stop support of 32-bit apps | Macworld https://9to5mac.com/2017/01/31/ios-10-3-beta-32-bit-app-warning/ But those news you're quoting are about Apple not allowing 32-bit only apps. Currently apps compiled with AIR 29 are both 64-bit and 32-bit compatible (the IPA contains both versions so each device uses the version it needs). As long as 64-bit is supported, there's nothing wrong with having the 32-bit version in the IPA as well for older devices. It doesn't impair the 64-bit version in any way and Apple is currently allowing this just fine. So why drop support for 32-bit so suddenly? ... View more

Thank you for the new AIR 30 release, but why was 32-bit support dropped?! Lots of people still use iPad 2, 3, 4 and Mini. Most of our customers are still on iPad 2! This change leaves A LOT of users out. Will we have to be stuck on AIR 29 for years to come? ... View more

Flipline  wrote Whoa, this labs beta release also drops support for universal 32-bit/64-bit iOS apps and is just 64-bit only from now on.  That's a huge change, all of our customers still using an iPad 2, iPad 3, iPad 4, iPad Mini won't be able to download our app updates or new apps anymore since those only work when a 32-bit version is included in the app. Why was 32-bit support dropped?? Lots of people still use iPad 2, 3 and 4. Most of our customers are still on iPad 2! This change leaves A LOT of users out. Will we have to be stuck on AIR 29 for years to come? ... View more

sashir82552880  wrote niestudio​  OMA2k​  chris.campbell  We use AppBlade for adhoc devices testing so I created a build with 122 did the signature change and uploaded the build to AppBlade and completed the testing. My question is which build do I upload to App Store the one without signature change or the one with signature change? You don't need to change the signature for an "ipa-app-store" build. You can upload it with the Entitlements block so you can test with TestFlight, and then, when you're done, submit for review that very same build you just tested. ... View more

I think the right location is the "bin" folder (the same place where the "xxx-app.xml" file is located). Doesn't Flash Builder have a place to specify additional assets, anyway? ... View more

parveenk82525062​ : As far as I know, you can't do it both ways, so you either: Compile for Testflight with the beta-reports-active entitlement set to true. You can't install through ad-hoc distribution doing this.           - or - Compile for ad-hoc distribution without any Entitlements block at all. You can't upload to iTunes Connect / TestFlight doing this. So I don't understand what's the issue you're having. What are you trying to achieve that would need both ad-hoc AND beta-reports-active set to true? ... View more

I think just unzipping the AIR SDK over your Apache Flex SDK, overwriting some of its files should be enough (make a backup first just in case you need the previous version or it doesn't work for some reason) ... View more

Hello foofook. Could you please explain what does this code you posted exactly do? What are those "Required by Adobe SDK" strings for? <key>NSLocationAlwaysUsageDescription</key><string>Required by Adobe SDK</string><key>NSLocationWhenInUseUsageDescription</key><string>Required by Adobe SDK</string> Thank you! ... View more

I see. Thank you for your reply, JulianDMG​ In that case, is there an issue created in Adobe's Bug Tracker to let them know there is a bug in AIR 29.0.0.122 which makes it wrongly add an "Entitlements" block when compiling as ad-hoc? ... View more

Flipline​ : If the latest AIR adds the entitlements block even if you don't add it yourself, does it work if you explicitly add an entitlements block with the opposite values? (i.e: with "beta-reports-active" set to false instead of true). Does it still override the values you specify? ... View more

Flashmonkey500​ : You CAN test even if you can't use ad-hoc. After uploading to iTunes Connect, you can use the "TestFlight" tab to setup that version as a test version, then download it into your iOS device using the TestFlight app (official Apple app). Once your testing is done, you can submit that same version of the IPA without reuploading, from iTunes Connect. witekgolden​ : You have to remove the whole <Entitlements></Entitlements> block so ad-hoc mode works again. If you want to test in TestFlight, then you have to restore that block back in its place. ... View more

I think the best command to check the build of AIR 29 would be: strings MyApp.app/MyApp | grep -F 29.0.0 That way you only get strings with dot, not comma. ... View more

Hello. I've checked my approved IPA using the instructions you provided and I have NOT found any "PowerSources" string inside the "strings.txt" file created using the "strings" tool ("strings Payload/Xxxxxxx.app/Xxxxxxx >strings.txt"). niestudio : Are you sure you're using the correct version of AIR? (remember not all versions of AIR 29 contain the fix, it has to be AIR 29 Build 122). The text you underline in red in your screenshot just says "29.0" but it doesn't specify which build. Please check the settings in your IDE (Flash Builder, apparently) and make sure to use AIR 29 Build 122, currently publicly available: Download Adobe AIR SDK ... View more

My app was approved with AIR 29 Build 122 after having been rejected with a previous build of AIR 29. Could you please tell me how to get those strings from the compiled IPA? ... View more

Hello gameduchy. What did Apple tell you after informing them of the APIs you found not including underscore being public APIs? Also, could you please describe how did you use oTool to get the APIs? Did you use your compiled IPA file or something else? All I get is: xxxxxxx.ipa: is not an object file How do you get the object files if the IPA is compiled with AIR's adt and not directly with Xcode? BTW, nm doesn't seem to work anymore after installing the latest Xcode. If I try to run it from the Terminal I get the message: /Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/bin/nm: a.out: No such file or directory. Best regards. ... View more