James Hamilton
James Hamilton
Hi @unoexperto ! Great that you tracked down the problem! Indeed, it seems that ProGuard does not support Zip64 - first time I have seen someone come across this limitation!...
Your rules are very broad, could this be the reason? Do you need to keep everything in the `com.bitparticles` package? ``` -keep class com.bitparticles.** { ; ; } ``` You...
Hi @unoexperto ! We've added zip64 support in ProGuardCORE, it's not yet in ProGuard but here's a build that you could test: [proguard.zip](https://github.com/Guardsquare/proguard-core/files/7871893/proguard.zip)
Currently there's not a parameter for this, but I've tagged it as a possible enhancement for the future.
Hi @jlennox, thanks for the report! Are you able to share some minimal version of the mapping that causes the problem? Maybe you could search & replace sensitive names? Maybe...
Hi @a-reznic! thanks for the report! Do you still have the problem with the latest ProGuard 7.1.0-beta1? https://github.com/Guardsquare/proguard/releases/tag/v7.1.0-beta1
Strange, seems to be a bug in the JDK!
Hi @xxDark ! Thanks for the report! Do you still get the same error regarding `dup2_x1` with the latest version? Or a different error? Could you compile ProGuard with[ `DEBUG`...
you can email it to me: james [dot] hamilton [at] guardsquare [dot] com
Hi @xxDark ! Sorry for the delay, I was looking into your log. As you pointed out already, there is an unsupported instruction in the evaluation shrinker. But actually, this...