“4.3”

Same here. Can`t solve it. Getting this problem during the upload to ITC after a successful build. A collegue of mine can upload the exact same app but gets than an email with the following help:Invalid Binary Architecture - iOS 3.0 introduced support for multiple binary architectures. If your binary is built for multiple architectures, your Info.plist must have a MinimumOSVersion key with a value of at least 3.0. Additionally, if your app is intended to support earlier iPhone and iPod touch models, your app must contain at least an armv6 binary; thin armv7-only binaries will not be accepted unless the armv7required device capability is also present in the Info.plist UIRequiredDeviceCapabilities key or the MinimumOSVersion key has a value of 4.3 or higher.- our deployment targets are iOS 11 and watchOS 4- the Build Setting Valid Architectures for iOS is arm64- the Build Setting Valid Architectures for watchOS is arm64_32 armv7kIn the iOS info.plist we have in the Required device capabilities with arm

I am having the same issue. In swift trying to run on a Series 2 GPS watch running watchOS 4.3.I get this on load:dyld: Symbol not found: _OBJC_CLASS_$_CLKFullColorImageProviderAll the compications have images in the xcassests.

Excellent points raised. I believe that the problem with 4.3 rule is that Apple does not evaluate at what point the difference in content justifies the existence of a separate app.We are developing theory test apps for the UK market and were contacted last year demanding some consolidation. We've been able to resolve it with Apple by removing all our paid apps from sale and instead using in-app purchases. I thought that it was a great solution as it indeed reduced the number of apps while allowing us to keep one app per each vehicle category (Car, Motorcycle, etc.) Recently, we've been contacted by App Review, and they now demand that we make further consolidations.From a marketing point of view, further consolidation makes no sense. Users are accustomed to seeing learning materials being separated by a vehicle category and would be puzzled if such a real-life model did not exist on the App Store. Imagine if you search for Motorcycle Theory Test and all you see are a list of Driving Theory Tests.The

4.3 spam is problem for us too,we developed a new innocative app but they insist on 4.3 spam.We ask which app is dublicate, they dont reply yet. We appeal but still waiting review board.What should we do?Thanks

I have a lot of problems with this tool as well. It's extremely misleading and doesn't really help you align yourself any closer to the latest hls authoring guidelines. What I find even more annoying is that Apple's official examples, although, a bit contrived, all have Must fix issues and a handful of Should fix issues. Apple's hls examples should not return any validation issues with their own tool. I mean what's up with their IDRs? Do they know something we don't know? They should really just pull this tool until their own streams can pass. It's great for pulling the metadata into a formatted table, but if they can't follow their own spec themselves this tool just sends developers down an unnecessary rabbit hole It would be nice if they also added a bit more verbosity to their issues, even link back to their own guidelines doc. Apple's official exampleshttps://developer.apple.com/streaming/examples/HLS Validation ReportStream type: VODhttps://devstreaming-cdn.apple.com/videos/streaming/examples/bipbop_adv_