Notice (2018-05-24): bugzilla.xamarin.com is now in
Please join us on
Visual Studio Developer Community and in the
Mono organizations on
GitHub to continue tracking issues. Bugzilla will remain
available for reference in read-only mode. We will continue to work
on open Bugzilla bugs, copy them to the new locations
as needed for follow-up, and add the new items under Related
Our sincere thanks to everyone who has contributed on this bug
tracker over the years. Thanks also for your understanding as we
make these adjustments and improvements for the future.
Please create a new report on
Developer Community or GitHub with
your current version information, steps to reproduce, and relevant error
messages or log files if you are hitting an issue that looks similar to
this resolved bug and you do not yet see a matching new report.
Created attachment 24212 [details]
Project (redacted) and Output.log
I'm regularly getting...
The "LinkAssemblies" task failed unexpectedly.
Mono.Linker.MarkException: Error processing method: 'Android.Views.View Xamarin.Forms.Platform.Android.TextCellRenderer::GetCellCore(Xamarin.Forms.Cell,Android.Views.View,Android.Views.ViewGroup,Android.Content.Context)' in assembly: 'Xamarin.Forms.Platform.Android.dll' ---> System.ArgumentNullException: Value cannot be null.
Parameter name: instruction
at Mono.Cecil.Cil.InstructionOffset..ctor(Instruction instruction)
at Mono.Cecil.Cil.CodeReader.ReadScope(ScopeDebugInformation scope)
I'm building ARM & x86 with ProGuard disabled and Linking set to "Sdk Assemblies Only". Works fine with Linking set to None and I can usually get the project to successfully build and deploy after Clean Solution, but not when rebuilding. However, I've never been able to successfully Archive because that seems to kick off two builds, and the 2nd one always fails.
Visual Studio 2017 - 15.3.0 Preview 7.1
Xamarin - 4.7.0827 (ddd8750)
Xamarin.Android SDK - 188.8.131.52 (3e66e8e)
Nuget packages: (see attached)
Xamarin Forms - 184.108.40.2066-pre6
Output log: (see attached)
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 58711 ***