Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.
I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!
It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.
Rules:
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
-Content should be Mildly infuriating.
-The Community !actuallyinfuriating has been born so that's where you should post the big stuff.
...
-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.
...
...
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.
Essentially the apps have same package name but different signatures and the app store that installed it should be the only one to recognize and update it.
But Google is likely trying this dark pattern to sway people away from F-Droid or alt stores by making users uninstall these apps and install it from the Google Play Store.
It's been going on for a while and is annoying af.
It's just cause it has the same package name and only checks the signature on attempt to install not cause Google has some alterior motive
Ulterior
Interior
Exterior
interior crocodile alligator i drive a chevrolet movie theater
Thx lol my grammar is ass even though it's the only language I speak haha
And, F-Droid shows apps that were installed from the Play Store.
Because they both use the same package names...
All the more reason to not complain when Google Play does it.
It's relatively new behaviour so they introduced it recently. And they need to fix it, but ignore it entirely...
Mismatched signatures have been discouraged since day one of Android. A mismatched signature is a sign that some one other than the original publisher built this package, and the user needs to be aware that it might be malicious.
That F-Droid went with this setup with mismatched signatures was always going to make their apks look suspicious.
You misunderstood the whole situation. The signatures are all fine. Google Play Store is trying to override an app installed from F-Droid. If the two stores had the same signature, the play store would be able to do this which would go completely counter to the user's choice (they installed from F-Droid for a reason). It's a good thing the signatures don't match, there's nothing suspicious about it.
It used to be that the play store just wouldn't show updates to apps that it wasn't actually able to update. They broke this behaviour.
No, it's not a good thing. The solution would be to use a different package name for the f droid version. That's what's supposed to be done. It's not the signature or Google that's causing the problem. It's that there are two packages with identical names that should not be identical.
The package name is the unique id. If you want to distribute multiple variants (like two versions with differing signatures) they should not have the same identifier. If they are not the same the id/package name should not be the same.
Having different package names would also prevent the Google play store from trying to update it.
Even if it's new behavior, there is really no reason to assume that this was done to evoke some dark pattern or other. It just shows that Google will not think about 3rd party stores when they do anything with their services and that is hardly news, is it? Besides: I kinda get it honestly. If they'd take all the stuff out there for android into account before they did anything, nothing would be done at all.
So the question becomes less why that's there, but more what stores like Samsung do to prevent this issue and if F-Droid can adapt the same behavior.
Samsung just says:
Can't auto update Installed from Google play store. And Can't auto update Installed from Aurora store.
You can easily see from what store an app has been installed in android.
Maybe that's true, but then:
I think you massively overestimate the amount of users that are a) affected by this b) reporting it When seeing the overall picture, this might mlbe a rather fringe issue in Google's eyes.
Furthermore, you might be exaggerating the impact as well. The "impact" is that an app update fails. That's it. That might be annoying, but isn't the grave and evil thing you make it out to be.
Besides, have you ever thought about that this stems from a rather bad practice on F-Droid/app developer side? They use the same package name for a software with a different signature. That's just not ideal to begin with. All packages with the same name should have the same signature for any given version of the package. That's how security works. If they don't follow that, how is a user/security software supposed to check if the signature is authentic or of the package was tampered with?
The, being F-Droid, need to fix this, yes. They really should.
Since I found out about F-Droid and Aurora Store, I'm actively dodging the Play Store. No one will ever make me use it. Ads, promos, junk everywhere! And their shitty way of updating.
How do I get F Droid?
either download the official APK from f-droid.org or use the NeoStore app which is a better client imho. from there its some simple setup and basically works like the play store.
Droid-ify is my personal favorite client. You can opt in to many other repos like IzzyOnDroid (pic below) It's also material design, which I like aha.
This is an f-droid problem. If they use the same package name, they need to use the same signature. That has been the case since long before f-droid existed.
They could just build apks with alternate package names and this wouldn't be an issue.
It's no problem, since you don't want 2 stores to update the same app.
It's a problem of trust. Differing signature is an indication of third party tampering. People shouldn't start to see difference in signatures as an ordinary occurrence. It should be an high alert event.
Nope.
Often versions on Play Store are slightly different (telemetry). Sometimes they even have different versioning.
Then, using a different package name should be a good solution, wouldn't it?
Yeah the worst part of it is that the version on Google Play is actually the older version.
They are shown on the update page for Google's benefits only. This is anti customer.
It's not though it's because the developers use the same package name for the f-droid and play store versions but when the play store checks the signature before installing it sees it doesn't match and it fails if the developers used different package names for play store and f-droid this would not be an issue
But Google is likely trying this dark pattern to sway people away from F-Droid or alt stores by making users uninstall these apps and install it from the Google Play Store.
No, it's the security measure. Anyone can use existing package ID. If the user installs a different app with the same package ID as the other, that new app just overwrites the old app and will have access to the sensitive data of it.
F-Droid apps are built and signed by the people at F-Droid. Apps from Google Play and GitHub are built and signed by the developers themselves. You can update Google Play apps from GitHub and vice versa. That's why I use Obtainium over F-Droid.
It shouldnt try to update a different signature app at the first place
Actually, I had it just the other way around. I had an app that had an old, orphaned version on F-Droid and a newer one on Play Store, so I installed the one from the Play store, but F-Droid desperately tried to update it constantly, always failing, always spamming me with messages about it
Why would anyone who actively chose to install F-droid, reinstall their apps as Play Store apps?
Jokes on them, I don't want them updating anything without my direct approval, and I don't insist on the most recent version of anything non critical. Idgaf about their bullshit
The same happens in reverse. It's the natural result of not naming the packages differently as a dev.
I don't care that it can't update these apps, since I use Obtainium. But, FFS, at least let users have an option to ignore or hide those apps.
I use F-Droid and i don't care that it can't update theese apps over google play. I can still use fdroid to update
Yes because they are signed with different keys
I have this happening on Sync for Lemmy. Every time I open it if there's an update available, with no way to tell Play to fuck off.