Status Update
No update yet.
Comments
di...@google.com
Thanks for the report. I will route this to the appropriate internal team and update this when I hear back from them.
wb...@sentryware.com
di...@google.com
"2022-06-12 18:47:15.156 1841-4562/? W/PackageManager: Intent does not match component's intent filter: Intent { act=com.google.android.gms.wearable.BIND_LISTENER"
wb...@sentryware.com
di...@google.com
+1, can confirm it doesn't work on Android 13:=
2022-07-15 11:26:15.023 589-5347 PackageManager pid-589 W Intent does not match component's intent filter: Intent { act=com.google.android.gms.wearable.BIND_LISTENER cmp=xxx/xxx.WatchMessageReceiver }
2022-07-15 11:26:15.023 589-5347 PackageManager pid-589 W Access blocked: ComponentInfo{xxx/xxx.WatchMessageReceiver}
2022-07-15 11:26:15.023 589-5347 ActivityManager pid-589 W Unable to start service Intent { act=com.google.android.gms.wearable.BIND_LISTENER cmp=xxx/xxx.WatchMessageReceiver } U=0: not found
ra...@uipath.com
Note that I've been able to make it work by:
- Adding
<action android:name="com.google.android.gms.wearable.BIND_LISTENER" />in the intent filter - Removing
<data android:scheme="wear" android:host="*" />
But I feel like this is not something we should do
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
I'm really afraid Android 13 might get released as-is, breaking WearOS app communication 😨😨
si...@gmail.com
If you're not targeting API 33 you're not affected by the bug. So it's a big bug, and yes we of course expected more from Google, but you can always target the api level later when it's fixed.
But I agree this is kind of desperating that more than 1.5 month after the first report nothing has changed.
da...@dft.gov.uk
As an interim update on this issue: we've been already working on the fix that should be available by Android 13 release. The fix requires thorough testing, I'll keep this bug updated as soon as we have more to share. Thanks!
si...@gmail.com
@
Thank you for the update @
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
Android 13 is out today and we still have no patch unlike what you said a month ago
il...@gmail.com
ba...@gmail.com
This issues has been already given high priority (updated external priority on this bug to reflect internal status). The fix is on the way and going through the final rounds of testing, so the roll out is slated to next couple of weeks.
To reiterate what have been mentioned earlier on this bug: this issue affects only apps targeting Android 13, so the apps won't break unless you bump targetSDK version to 33. In case if you want to start working on app compatibility for Android 13 behaviour changes, you could use
cs...@google.com
- The report is 2 months old
- Google chose to release Android 13 with that bug
- There's no mention of this bug on the documentation so you can totally bump your targetSdk without noticing it
So thank you guys for working on this but it's still not a valid excuse for taking that long for such an important issue. Now that being said, let us know when a fix is available
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
am...@applovin.com
That must be some really intense testing as we are 10 days later and still nothing on sight. I don't want to be a P2 issue if that's what a P1 is.
Description
What you would like to accomplish:
We would like to be able to grant our project members access to only those files in a specific bucket with a specific file prefix (directory)
How this might work:
Where we can currently add members to bucket access (see attached image), we should also be able to optionally specify specific prefixes (directories) that the access applies to.
If applicable, reasons why alternative solutions are not sufficient:
We do not want to grant access to the entire bucket, nor do we want to deal with maintaining ACLs on every individual object. Using ACLs might be feasible if the Cloud Functions Cloud Storage trigger could be activated only for specific file prefixes- but is hardly optimal in its current state because it triggers to changes anywhere in the bucket.
Other information (workarounds you have tried, documentation consulted, etc):