I am trying to make a custom cookie manager app for chrome, but the "cookies" permission in the manifest.json file gets me this warning
'cookies' is only allowed for extensions and legacy packaged apps...`
My app can't be an extension instead because I also want access to "filesystem" and maybe "usb".
This is not the first time I need extension APIs for an app or vice versa. Is there any way to make an app that can use extension APIs or the other way round?
You could develop an extension as a dependency for your app. It's not ideal since it requires the user to install two items but it should work. You can implement message passing between your app and the extension to call the needed APIs.
Related
I am looking for some guidance on implementing the Windows File Activation API with my Flutter App, that is, a user able to open a file associated with my App and have that file path passed to my app instance on startup and during runtime if the user opens a file whilst the app is already started.
I have found the following link from Microsoft that details how to achieve this within a UWP Application. However I have no been able to implement it completely with my limited knowledge of C++.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/uwp/launch-resume/handle-file-activation
It seems that the File Activation API relies on the WinRT API. Is this already bundled with the Flutter runner project or does this need to be imported separately?
To hook into the File Activation API, I need to create a class that is derived from the Application class, Is it possible to achieve this whilst still having a reference to the Platform Channels provided so that the events can be passed into the Dart code?
Is it even a valid approach to use the WinRT API's or is there another API I have missed?
We are porting our Chrome extension to Edge and our extension already has an extension ID that our native messaging applications rely on.
In Chrome you have control over the id of the newly created extension by including the "key.pem" file in the first upload of the extension package. But that is not working in the Edge Store, it seems to always create a new extension ID.
Is there a way to force the store to use our existing extension ID?
Is your native message application rely on chrome.runtime.connectNative application?
If yes, I suggest you set allowedorigins to "extension://[Microsoft-Catalog-extensionID]" in your native messaging host manifest file.
So I think you have to use Microsoft-Catalog-extensionID and you can't use that existing extension Id.
I go this information in the documentation.
If your Extension exchanges messages with a native application using
chrome.runtime.connectNative API, ensure that you set allowedorigins
to "extension://[Microsoft-Catalog-extensionID]" in your native
messaging host manifest file. This enables the app to identify the
Extension.
Reference:
Port Chrome Extension To Microsoft (Chromium) Edge
According to https://developers.google.com/web/fundamentals/web-app-manifest/ having an app manifest file gives mobile users a better experience with my site by allowing them to add it to their home screen and giving it some special launching properties from there. Do any of these benefits apply to desktop users, especially those who do not chose to add a shortcut to my site to their desktop?
The main use of manifest files is to allow site developers better control over how their sites behave when added to and launched from non-browser environments. If users don't install the app outside of the browser, a manifest doesn't do much on desktop or mobile.
The case for implementing a manifest file is not about desktop vs mobile. It's about if you expect/want users to use the app outside the browser.
I want to create an Azure Resource Group template which includes the new api app resource. I say new since api apps have changed: App Service API Apps - What's changed
.
I tried this Create a Logic App plus API app using a template . Note: I don't want to create a logic app but this example also includes an api app. When I run this example I get a message: There is a new version of API Apps. Click here to learn more. So this is not the correct example. I can't find a better example.
Note: when I simply add "kind: apiapp" to the "Microsoft.Web/sites" resource, no apiapp is deployed, I also don't get an error.
So my question is how to create a new api with Azure Resource Templates.
I contacted MS for this, they helped me and now it's fixed. Their answer:
Have you installed the new Azure SDK version 2.8.2.1? In that release (actually in 2.8.1 and beyond) we added “Export ARM Template” capability to the provisioning UI. So when you go to publish, then click the New button, you can export your ARM template. That way you’d be able to see exactly the right syntax for creating an API App.
So in VS create a web application, publish it to app service, check api app and then click the export button and you get the correct json.
See also:
https://feedback.azure.com/forums/223579-azure-portal/suggestions/7163577-ability-to-export-a-resource-group-as-a-template
This is on Mac 10.8
I have written Google Chrome Extension and a Native Messaging executable which communicates with the Chrome Extension using Native Messaging. All works fine with my Proof of Concept as part of development.
Issue is that now I want to get it deployed.
I have my in house installer which by which I need to create a com.my_company.my_product.json manifest file inside of this /Library/Google/Chrome/NativeMessagingHosts directory which cannot be accessed unless I ask for the password of the admin user.
I am doing this port as part of migration of NPPlugin to Chrome Extension Native messaging communication which will replace the NPPlugin. NPPlugin can be accessed from both /Library as well as ~/Library which does not require sudo permissions.
Why does the manifest file need to be at root /Library level ad not user ~/library level? If so how can we get this installed on a Mac without bothering the user with admin password which the user will obviously be less likely to share.
If anyone has a solution, the Native Executable is a C++ program that can use Mac API calls.
Your understanding is correct. The Chromium team is investigating user directories as an additional option. Ensuring continuing security is the primary concern. I'll update this answer when there's more to report. (Update 6/1/2014: see Rob W.'s comment to this answer)