Skip to content

[Android] Enable building CoreCLR for Android #111491

Closed

Description

@kotlarmilos

Activity

  1. added this to the 10.0.0 milestone on Jan 16, 2025
  2. dotnet-policy-service commented on Jan 16, 2025

    @dotnet-policy-service
    Contributor

    Tagging subscribers to 'arch-android': @vitek-karas, @simonrozsival, @steveisok, @akoeplinger
    See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

  3. dotnet-policy-service commented on Jan 16, 2025

    @dotnet-policy-service
    Contributor

    Tagging subscribers to this area: @hoyosjs
    See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

  4. steveisok commented on Jan 16, 2025

    @steveisok
    Member

    @kotlarmilos I added an item to track building Android on Windows. Current state is not going to work.

  5. akoeplinger commented on Jan 20, 2025

    @akoeplinger
    Member

    I have some changes on a branch somewhere that make building Android on Windows (using mono) almost work, I can upstream those.

  6. marked Build CoreCLR for Android #4296 as a duplicate of this issue on Jan 21, 2025
  7. filipnavara commented on Feb 3, 2025

    @filipnavara
    Member

    I have the arm32/x86 build fixes here: https://github.com/filipnavara/runtime/tree/android32. Didn't test the binaries yet but it builds.

  8. ivanpovazan commented on Feb 12, 2025

    @ivanpovazan
    Member

    Duplicates removed in: #112096

  9. modified the milestones: 10.0.0, 11.0.0 on Jul 23, 2025
  10. filipnavara commented on Mar 17, 2026

    @filipnavara
    Member

    Can I ask for adding the NativeAOT runtime pack for arm32 (and optionally x86)? There's already tracking item for CoreCLR and related issue (#111665). Last time I tried the packs themselves were buildable, there was just some issue building corehost tests. They were never added to the official build matrix, the same for the dotnet/android packs.

    We still encounter a large number of devices that are shipped with 32-bit Android despite running on 64-bit processors. Unfortunately this applies even to large manufacturers, such as the lower end of the Samsung Axx range. Our Play Store statistics show Galaxy A13 and Galaxy Tab A in multiple configurations account for ~30% of the ARM32 devices running our app.

    Should I file a separate issue? Should we track it along with CoreCLR?

  11. akoeplinger commented on Mar 17, 2026

    @akoeplinger
    Member

    @filipnavara yes please file a separate issue

  12. removed their assignment
    on Mar 26, 2026
  13. dotnet-policy-service commented on Apr 13, 2026

    @dotnet-policy-service
    Contributor

    Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/runtime-infrastructure
    See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

  14. kotlarmilos commented on Jul 22, 2026

    @kotlarmilos
    MemberAuthor

    Remaining issues are .NET12. Closing this tracking issue

  15. beedell-roke commented on Jul 22, 2026

    @beedell-roke

    Remaining issues are .NET12.

    @kotlarmilos, what does that mean?

  16. kotlarmilos commented on Jul 22, 2026

    @kotlarmilos
    MemberAuthor

    Remaining issues are .NET12.

    @kotlarmilos, what does that mean?

    We are still working on the remaining open issues, just targeting .NET 12. This tracking issue enabled building CoreCLR for Android in .NET 11.

  17. locked and limited conversation to collaborators on Aug 22, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions