[frknkrc44]

It is an initial attempt and needs testing.

[JingMatrix]

I heard that your motivation is to solve the compatibily with modules such as PlayStrong.

These modules are using Xposed API 100, and a related bug is fixed in ed1f61d.

Please also refer to #466 (comment)

[frknkrc44]

@JingMatrix No, my target was not PlayStrong module. I just tried to adapt the current API with all of new methods without killing the old version support. You can see it in the code, I didn't touched to anything about SELinux etc. and only tried to follow the new API requirements.

[fatalcoder524]

Sorry for the confusion guys!

This commit actually has 3 fixes:
ThePedroo@986abf9

1. Support for new API.
2. Fix Read-Write Issue when using Remote Files api.
3. Update selinux policy of files on boot.

2-3 Fixes the Play strong issue and 1 actually is the PR submitted by @frknkrc44 to support new APIs for modules like Hyper ceiler new versions (Not sure of this claim though).

The PR here has nothing to do with Play Strong compatibility and is a standalone PR.

[JingMatrix]

@frknkrc44 oh, sorry, I must have closed this by accident (mis-click on the phone). When I get some time on adapting the upstream changes, I will tell you.

[JingMatrix]

@frknkrc44 Your implements of APIs invokeOriginalMethod and invokeSpecialMethod were correct, as explained in #533 .

Your handling of annotation removal is not a good solution arguable , see #534 .

However, the problem is the API change itself, not us.

[frknkrc44]

@JingMatrix I only want to say:

• It would be nice to keep the backwards compatibility, the API itself can change but people can want to use their old modules. That's why I tried to keep the old module support in this PR.
• I was who did the research about this issue, spent time on it and tried to fix the issue without break anything. You kept this PR open for months, closed it without saying anything (you didn't even reached me to separate this PR into 2 pieces like you did), then wrote something about it happened accidentally, then you prepared your own code without credit my work.

[JingMatrix]

Okay, I will credit you for the part we are using the same solution.

[JingMatrix]

@frknkrc44 1. The pull-request was closed by accident, probably a mis-click.
2. Initially, I plan to do the implementation during the refactor, but few users have urged me to implement it earlier. I did my own implementations step by step last night, by checking the libxposed upstream repo commit by commit. You are right that I should credit you at the first two commits. I appologize for this, and has no intention to ignore your contribution.

[frknkrc44]

@JingMatrix Thanks for force-push after crediting me, and I accept your apologize.