Hello,
sometimes I'm getting warnings from proguard ( … is not being kept as …, but remapped to …) and I always fix this problem by removing conflicting mappings from old mapping file. Is it possible to configure proguard to do this automatically - to ignore problematic mappings in old mapping file?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
My algorithm for mapping file conflict resolution is quite simple and it always worked fine for me. For each class with conflict I remove mapping of class including mapping of all class methods and fields.
Fixing mapping file manually is kind of boring, that's why I've implemented a filter, that removes conflicting mappings. I've submitted patch with the filter. The patch also adds -ignoreconflictingmappings option, that turns the filter on.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hello,
sometimes I'm getting warnings from proguard ( … is not being kept as …, but remapped to …) and I always fix this problem by removing conflicting mappings from old mapping file. Is it possible to configure proguard to do this automatically - to ignore problematic mappings in old mapping file?
There is no option that does this automatically. Removing mappings may break compatibility with the old code, so it's a bit tricky.
Eric
My algorithm for mapping file conflict resolution is quite simple and it always worked fine for me. For each class with conflict I remove mapping of class including mapping of all class methods and fields.
Fixing mapping file manually is kind of boring, that's why I've implemented a filter, that removes conflicting mappings. I've submitted patch with the filter. The patch also adds -ignoreconflictingmappings option, that turns the filter on.