1. 技术文章
  2. Possible to use multiple authorities with FileProvider?

Possible to use multiple authorities with FileProvider?

由 瘦欲@ 提交于 2019-11-29 01:01:23

My solution to this problem has actually been to avoid relying on a single FileProvider parsing multiple authorities. While this doesn't directly address the question as stated, I'm posting it for posterity.

I updated my library to leverage an empty subclass of FileProvider, so that the library's updated manifest provider entry is now:

<provider
    android:name=".flow.email.screenshot.BugShakerFileProvider"
    android:authorities="${applicationId}.bugshaker.fileprovider"
    android:exported="false"
    android:grantUriPermissions="true">
    <meta-data
        android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
        android:resource="@xml/library_file_paths" />
</provider>

The merged manifest of an application that (1) uses a stock FileProvider and (2) consumes my library will now contain both of the entries shown below (no collision!):

<provider
    android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
    android:authorities="com.consuming.application.fileprovider"
    android:exported="false"
    android:grantUriPermissions="true" >
    <meta-data
        android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
        android:resource="@xml/application_file_paths" />
</provider>

<provider
    android:name="com.github.stkent.bugshaker.flow.email.screenshot.BugShakerFileProvider"
    android:authorities="com.consuming.application.bugshaker.fileprovider"
    android:exported="false"
    android:grantUriPermissions="true" >
    <meta-data
        android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
        android:resource="@xml/library_file_paths" />
</provider>

I didn't realize that this was a potential solution until a coworker pointed it out. My assumption had previously (and incorrectly) been that all FileProviders in the manifest must set

android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"

but a quick check of the documentation revealed my error:

The name of the class that implements the content provider, a subclass of ContentProvider. This should be a fully qualified class name (such as, "com.example.project.TransportationProvider"). [...]

i also face this issue and use this approach to resolve it. like i have a library image picker which use file provider and also my app use a file provider when i build my app conflict accur.

my file provide is 

<provider
            android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
            android:authorities="org.contentarcadeapps.photoeditor.fileprovider"
            android:exported="false"
            android:grantUriPermissions="true">
            <meta-data
                android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
                android:resource="@xml/file_paths"/>
        </provider>

change this to

<provider
            android:name="android.support.v4.content.FileProvider"
            android:authorities="org.contentarcadeapps.photoeditor.fileprovider"
            android:exported="false"
            android:grantUriPermissions="true"
            tools:replace="android:authorities">
            <meta-data
                android:name="android.support.FILE_PROVIDER_PATHS"
                android:resource="@xml/file_paths"
                tools:replace="android:resource"/>
        </provider>
标签
android
android-manifest
android-contentprovider
manifest-merging
易学教程内所有资源均来自网络或用户发布的内容，如有违反法律规定的内容欢迎反馈！
该文章没有解决你所遇到的问题?点击提问,说说你的问题,让更多的人一起探讨吧!