# [5.0.0](https://github.com/revanced/revanced-patcher/compare/v4.5.0...v5.0.0) (2022-09-21)
### Bug Fixes
* **tests:** access `patternScanResult` through `scanResult` ([76676fb](76676fb567))
* refactor!: move utility methods from `MethodFingerprintUtils` `MethodFingerprint` ([d802ef8](d802ef844e))
* feat(fingerprint)!: `StringsScanResult` for `MethodFingerprint` ([3813e28](3813e28ac2))
### BREAKING CHANGES
* Imports will have to be updated from `MethodFingerprintUtils` to `MethodFingerprint.Companion`.
Signed-off-by: oSumAtrIX <johan.melkonyan1@web.de>
* `MethodFingerprint` now has a field for `MethodFingerprintScanResult`. `MethodFingerprintScanResult` now holds the previous field `MethodFingerprint.patternScanResult`.
Signed-off-by: oSumAtrIX <johan.melkonyan1@web.de>
BREAKING CHANGE: Imports will have to be updated from `MethodFingerprintUtils` to `MethodFingerprint.Companion`.
Signed-off-by: oSumAtrIX <johan.melkonyan1@web.de>
BREAKING CHANGE: `MethodFingerprint` now has a field for `MethodFingerprintScanResult`. `MethodFingerprintScanResult` now holds the previous field `MethodFingerprint.patternScanResult`.
Signed-off-by: oSumAtrIX <johan.melkonyan1@web.de>
Removed a lot of the type mess. There's still some duplicated code PatchOption.kt, but I'm afraid there's nothing I can do about that. It's not a big deal anyway.
# [4.0.0](https://github.com/revanced/revanced-patcher/compare/v3.5.1...v4.0.0) (2022-09-07)
### Code Refactoring
* Improve Patch Options ([6b909c1](6b909c1ee6))
### BREAKING CHANGES
* Options has been moved from Patch to a new interface called OptionsContainer and are now handled entirely different. Make sure to check the examples to understand how it works.
It's so much better now. Really happy with the current system.
BREAKING CHANGE: Options has been moved from Patch to a new interface called OptionsContainer and are now handled entirely different. Make sure to check the examples to understand how it works.
BREAKING CHANGE: Patch options now use the PatchOptions registry class instead of an Iterable. This change requires modifications to existing patches using this API.
BREAKING-CHANGE: DependencyType.SOFT has now been removed after it was deprecated. There is no direct replacement for this. Please look into Patch Options instead, which supersedes this.
Old methods have been marked as deprecated, and will be removed in the future.
- ResourceData.kt was made an Iterable<File>, and the forEach method was removed in favor of Kotlin's forEach function. (no modifications required)
- The resolve method was deprecated in favor of a new operator getter function, which can be either called using get(path) or data[path]. This keeps backwards compatibility with the old get method.
- The getXmlEditor method was deprecated in favor of the new xmlEditor variable, which is a XmlFileHolder which has an operator getter which acts like an array. This is syntactically better.
Important to note that your issue may have already been reported before. Please check for existing issues [here](https://github.com/revanced/revanced-patcher/labels/bug).
- type: dropdown
attributes:
label: Type
options:
- Crash
- Cosmetic
- Other
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
attributes:
label: Bug description
description: How did you find the bug? Any additional details that might help?
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
attributes:
label: Steps to reproduce
description: Add the steps to reproduce this bug including your environment.
placeholder: Step 1. Download some files. Step 2. ...
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
attributes:
label: Relevant log output
description: Please copy and paste any relevant log output. This will be automatically formatted into code, so no need for backticks.
render: shell
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
attributes:
label: Screenshots or videos
description: Add screenshots or videos that show the bug here.
placeholder: Drag and drop the screenshots/videos into this box.
validations:
required: false
- type: textarea
attributes:
label: Solution
description: If applicable, add a possible solution.
validations:
required: false
- type: textarea
attributes:
label: Additional context
description: Add additional context here.
validations:
required: false
- type: checkboxes
id: acknowledgements
attributes:
label: Acknowledgements
description: Your issue will be closed if you haven't done these steps.
options:
- label: I have searched the existing issues and this is a new and no duplicate or related to another open issue.
required: true
- label: I have written a short but informative title.
required: true
- label: I filled out all of the requested information in this issue properly.
Do not submit requests for patches here. Please submit them [here](https://github.com/orgs/revanced/discussions/categories/patches) instead.
Important to note that your feature request may have already been made before. Please check for existing feature requests [here](https://github.com/revanced/revanced-patcher/labels/feature-request).
- type: dropdown
attributes:
label: Type
options:
- Functionality
- Cosmetic
- Other
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
attributes:
label: Issue
description: What is the current problem. Why does it require a feature request?
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
attributes:
label: Feature
description: Describe your feature in detail. How does it solve the issue?
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
attributes:
label: Motivation
description: Why should your feature should be considered?
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
attributes:
label: Additional context
description: Add additional context here.
validations:
required: false
- type: checkboxes
id: acknowledgements
attributes:
label: Acknowledgements
description: Your issue will be closed if you haven't done these steps.
options:
- label: I have searched the existing issues and this is a new and no duplicate or related to another open issue.
required: true
- label: I have written a short but informative title.
required: true
- label: I filled out all of the requested information in this issue properly.
val MethodSignature.version get() = javaClass.recursiveAnnotation(Version::class)?.version ?: "0.0.1"
val MethodSignature.description get() = javaClass.recursiveAnnotation(Description::class)?.description
val MethodSignature.compatiblePackages get() = javaClass.recursiveAnnotation(Compatibility::class)?.compatiblePackages
val MethodSignature.matchingMethod get() = javaClass.recursiveAnnotation(MatchingMethod::class)
val MethodSignature.fuzzyPatternScanMethod get() = javaClass.recursiveAnnotation(FuzzyPatternScanMethod::class)
val MethodSignature.fuzzyThreshold get() = fuzzyPatternScanMethod?.threshold ?: 0
val MethodFingerprint.version get() = javaClass.recursiveAnnotation(Version::class)?.version ?: "0.0.1"
val MethodFingerprint.description get() = javaClass.recursiveAnnotation(Description::class)?.description
val MethodFingerprint.compatiblePackages get() = javaClass.recursiveAnnotation(Compatibility::class)?.compatiblePackages
val MethodFingerprint.matchingMethod get() = javaClass.recursiveAnnotation(app.revanced.patcher.fingerprint.method.annotation.MatchingMethod::class)
val MethodFingerprint.fuzzyPatternScanMethod get() = javaClass.recursiveAnnotation(app.revanced.patcher.fingerprint.method.annotation.FuzzyPatternScanMethod::class)
val MethodFingerprint.fuzzyScanThreshold get() = fuzzyPatternScanMethod?.threshold ?: 0
* Can either be a [ResourcePatch] or a [BytecodePatch].
* If it implements [Closeable], it will be closed after all patches have been executed.
* Closing will be done in reverse execution order.
*/
abstract class Patch<out T : Data> {
/**
* The main function of the [Patch] which the patcher will call.
*/
abstract fun execute(data: @UnsafeVariance T): PatchResult
}
abstract class OptionsContainer {
/**
* A list of [PatchOption]s.
* @see PatchOptions
*/
@Suppress("MemberVisibilityCanBePrivate")
val options = PatchOptions()
protected fun <T> option(opt: PatchOption<T>): PatchOption<T> {
options.register(opt)
return opt
}
}
Some files were not shown because too many files have changed in this diff
Show More
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.