[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-22 Thread Dianne Hackborn
Anything that requires root access to install an application is in no way
how Android is designed to work.

First you really need to separate developer restrictions from user
restrictions.  Whether or not a phone allows root access is ultimately a
decision of the manufacturer, but generally for Android our preference is
for users to have that kind of control of their phone.

For what applications can do, however, yes we do have a lot of control over
them, and that is very deliberate and not going to change.  Giving the user
trust that some random app they download from the market is not going to
wreak havoc with their device is a basic goal of Android, and we think it is
key to having a strong, robust, and open application environment.

On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 2:09 AM, Marcio Alexandroni  wrote:

>  >> I thought part of the point of the AOSP was that you could use those
> apps as bases for your own development. (I can go digging for more
> website/marketing/etc quotes if you really want, but..)
>
>  Ok, perhaps we should move this discussion to android-discuss but as it
> started and continued here...
>
>
>
> What it seems is that **Android** is based exactly on this idea but device
> manufacturers don't want developers to do it, so if it does not happen that
> a manufacturer sells an open device like dev phone to people in general,
> Android will continue being a very good idea. Not that you can't jailbreak
> your device, I did it and it works fine, but users in general won't do it.
>
>
>
> I've been working with PalmOS and Windows Mobile for years and I still feel
> uncomfortable with the manu security issues on the OS and surprised with the
> "you can't". In these operating systems, it's up to the user to decide what
> is going to happen with his device and the worst case if a terrible
> developer does something mad, you can always hard reset the device and you
> are up and running again.
>
>
>
> I hope the future versions bring us your President's statement "Yes, we
> can" (do what we developers want to do).
>
>
>
> Marcio Alexandroni.
>
>
>  --
>
> *From:* android-developers@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> android-develop...@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Disconnect
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 21, 2009 18:08
> *To:* android-developers@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* [android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android
> built-in applications
>
>
>
> I don't understand why taking the AOSP launcher, for example, and modifying
> it is "simply not correct" but writing one from scratch is..?
>
> I thought part of the point of the AOSP was that you could use those apps
> as bases for your own development. (I can go digging for more
> website/marketing/etc quotes if you really want, but..)
>
>  On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Romain Guy  wrote:
>
>
> Replacing a core application is achieved using intent filters. This is
> how you can replace Home with your own application or replace Browser
> with your own web browser, et.
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Disconnect 
> wrote:
> > I thought one of the core tenants of Android was that developers could
> > write, and end users could install, apps that replaced the default apps.
> > (Such as k9 and k9sms.)
> >
> > Is this not, in fact, true? (And please don't try to claim that sms/mms
> > isn't a core feature of a mobile phone OS. And both of those projects
> are,
> > from the start, forks of the AOSP applications.)
> >
> > Looking at the Android page (http://code.google.com/android/) I see:
> >
> > Any app on the mobile device can be replaced or extended -- even core
> > components such as the dialer or home.
> >
> > ..the dialer has already been hashed over (at best, you can make
> > non-emergency calls, but you cannot in fact "replace or extend" the
> dialer
> > completely.) Are you now saying that the entire statement is false?
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Dianne Hackborn 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes in this case probably what is desired is changing the package name,
> >> though that wasn't explicitly requested.  But in Android that is how you
> >> install an alternative version of an app -- by installing a -different-
> app
> >> with the same public capabilities (handling the same intents etc) as the
> >> built-in app.  Then the user is free to decide when and where they want
> to
> >> use that new app, if at all.
> >>
> >> For the desire to just install a custom version of a built-in app that
> has
> >> t

[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-22 Thread Dianne Hackborn
You just have an application with the same activities etc that support the
same actions.  Then the system will let the user pick your app when it is
appropriate.

On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Anonymous Anonymous <
firewallbr...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi Romain,
>
> How this can be achieved using intent filter? Can you please show an
> example assuming IM.apk?
>
> Thanks in Advance
> Steve
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 1:34 AM, Romain Guy  wrote:
>
>>
>> Replacing a core application is achieved using intent filters. This is
>> how you can replace Home with your own application or replace Browser
>> with your own web browser, et.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Disconnect 
>> wrote:
>> > I thought one of the core tenants of Android was that developers could
>> > write, and end users could install, apps that replaced the default apps.
>> > (Such as k9 and k9sms.)
>> >
>> > Is this not, in fact, true? (And please don't try to claim that sms/mms
>> > isn't a core feature of a mobile phone OS. And both of those projects
>> are,
>> > from the start, forks of the AOSP applications.)
>> >
>> > Looking at the Android page (http://code.google.com/android/) I see:
>> >
>> > Any app on the mobile device can be replaced or extended -- even core
>> > components such as the dialer or home.
>> >
>> > ..the dialer has already been hashed over (at best, you can make
>> > non-emergency calls, but you cannot in fact "replace or extend" the
>> dialer
>> > completely.) Are you now saying that the entire statement is false?
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Dianne Hackborn 
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Yes in this case probably what is desired is changing the package name,
>> >> though that wasn't explicitly requested.  But in Android that is how
>> you
>> >> install an alternative version of an app -- by installing a -different-
>> app
>> >> with the same public capabilities (handling the same intents etc) as
>> the
>> >> built-in app.  Then the user is free to decide when and where they want
>> to
>> >> use that new app, if at all.
>> >>
>> >> For the desire to just install a custom version of a built-in app that
>> has
>> >> the same name, and is thus treated as a new version, of the built-in
>> app,
>> >> the basic answer is:
>> >>
>> >> - In the current platform, it is not possible to install an UPDATE (key
>> >> word) to a built-in application in to the data partition; updates can
>> only
>> >> be done by replacing the app in /system.
>> >> - In Cupcake we will have this facility, HOWEVER:
>> >>   1. You still must be able to sign the app with the same certificate
>> as
>> >> the version in the system partition.  If you can't, you can't update
>> it.
>> >> Only the original author of an application can create new versions of
>> their
>> >> own applications.  You won't be able to do this with any of the
>> built-in
>> >> apps, because HTC and Google own the various certificates.
>> >>   2. It simply is not correct to install a your own update to one of
>> the
>> >> system apps (contacts, calendar, etc) because those are part of the
>> open
>> >> source platform and the company who made the phone you are installing
>> it on
>> >> could have customized that app in significant ways.  Your "update"
>> could
>> >> actually be a regression, or completely incompatible with how the
>> built-in
>> >> app stores its data.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Disconnect 
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> ..android-platform covers building apps with the sdk?  Thats new.
>> >>>
>> >>> I think he's looking for info on changing package names so that he can
>> >>> replace the default apps. (I don't have that info handy, sorry..)
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Andrew Stadler 
>> >>> wrote:
>> 
>>  Wrong list.  Please see android-platform, which covers topics such as
>>  this.
>> 
>>  http://source.android.com/discuss for more information.
>> 
>> 
>>  On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Gerald  wrote:
>>  >
>>  > Hi,
>>  > I want to customize some built-in applications on android, for
>> example
>>  > Launcher or Contacts, etc.
>>  > I've downloaded the source code and compile it by eclipse
>>  > successfully.
>>  > But when I tried to run it, a signing error comes:
>>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:27 - Launcher] Installing Launcher.apk...
>>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:35 - Launcher] Application already exists.
>>  > Attempting to re-install instead...
>>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Re-installation failed due to
>>  > different application signatures.
>>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] You must perform a full uninstall
>> of
>>  > the application. WARNING: This will remove the application data!
>>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Please execute 'adb uninstall
>>  > com.android.launcher' in a shell.
>>  >
>>  > I followed above instruction: adb uninstall com.android.launcher,
>> but
>>  > it

[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-22 Thread Anonymous Anonymous
Hi Romain,

How this can be achieved using intent filter? Can you please show an example
assuming IM.apk?

Thanks in Advance
Steve

On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 1:34 AM, Romain Guy  wrote:

>
> Replacing a core application is achieved using intent filters. This is
> how you can replace Home with your own application or replace Browser
> with your own web browser, et.
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Disconnect 
> wrote:
> > I thought one of the core tenants of Android was that developers could
> > write, and end users could install, apps that replaced the default apps.
> > (Such as k9 and k9sms.)
> >
> > Is this not, in fact, true? (And please don't try to claim that sms/mms
> > isn't a core feature of a mobile phone OS. And both of those projects
> are,
> > from the start, forks of the AOSP applications.)
> >
> > Looking at the Android page (http://code.google.com/android/) I see:
> >
> > Any app on the mobile device can be replaced or extended -- even core
> > components such as the dialer or home.
> >
> > ..the dialer has already been hashed over (at best, you can make
> > non-emergency calls, but you cannot in fact "replace or extend" the
> dialer
> > completely.) Are you now saying that the entire statement is false?
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Dianne Hackborn 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes in this case probably what is desired is changing the package name,
> >> though that wasn't explicitly requested.  But in Android that is how you
> >> install an alternative version of an app -- by installing a -different-
> app
> >> with the same public capabilities (handling the same intents etc) as the
> >> built-in app.  Then the user is free to decide when and where they want
> to
> >> use that new app, if at all.
> >>
> >> For the desire to just install a custom version of a built-in app that
> has
> >> the same name, and is thus treated as a new version, of the built-in
> app,
> >> the basic answer is:
> >>
> >> - In the current platform, it is not possible to install an UPDATE (key
> >> word) to a built-in application in to the data partition; updates can
> only
> >> be done by replacing the app in /system.
> >> - In Cupcake we will have this facility, HOWEVER:
> >>   1. You still must be able to sign the app with the same certificate as
> >> the version in the system partition.  If you can't, you can't update it.
> >> Only the original author of an application can create new versions of
> their
> >> own applications.  You won't be able to do this with any of the built-in
> >> apps, because HTC and Google own the various certificates.
> >>   2. It simply is not correct to install a your own update to one of the
> >> system apps (contacts, calendar, etc) because those are part of the open
> >> source platform and the company who made the phone you are installing it
> on
> >> could have customized that app in significant ways.  Your "update" could
> >> actually be a regression, or completely incompatible with how the
> built-in
> >> app stores its data.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Disconnect 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> ..android-platform covers building apps with the sdk?  Thats new.
> >>>
> >>> I think he's looking for info on changing package names so that he can
> >>> replace the default apps. (I don't have that info handy, sorry..)
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Andrew Stadler 
> >>> wrote:
> 
>  Wrong list.  Please see android-platform, which covers topics such as
>  this.
> 
>  http://source.android.com/discuss for more information.
> 
> 
>  On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Gerald  wrote:
>  >
>  > Hi,
>  > I want to customize some built-in applications on android, for
> example
>  > Launcher or Contacts, etc.
>  > I've downloaded the source code and compile it by eclipse
>  > successfully.
>  > But when I tried to run it, a signing error comes:
>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:27 - Launcher] Installing Launcher.apk...
>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:35 - Launcher] Application already exists.
>  > Attempting to re-install instead...
>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Re-installation failed due to
>  > different application signatures.
>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] You must perform a full uninstall
> of
>  > the application. WARNING: This will remove the application data!
>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Please execute 'adb uninstall
>  > com.android.launcher' in a shell.
>  >
>  > I followed above instruction: adb uninstall com.android.launcher,
> but
>  > it failed (Can't remove the application).
>  > The official document only provides "How to sign a new application",
>  > but it's not usable in my case.
>  >
>  > Does anyone know how to do it?
>  > Thank you very much
>  >
>  > Gerald
>  >
>  > >
>  >
> 
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Dianne Hackborn
> >> Android framework engineer
> >> 

[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-22 Thread Marcio Alexandroni
>> I thought part of the point of the AOSP was that you could use those apps
as bases for your own development. (I can go digging for more
website/marketing/etc quotes if you really want, but..)



Ok, perhaps we should move this discussion to android-discuss but as it
started and continued here...

 

What it seems is that *Android* is based exactly on this idea but device
manufacturers don't want developers to do it, so if it does not happen that
a manufacturer sells an open device like dev phone to people in general,
Android will continue being a very good idea. Not that you can't jailbreak
your device, I did it and it works fine, but users in general won't do it.

 

I've been working with PalmOS and Windows Mobile for years and I still feel
uncomfortable with the manu security issues on the OS and surprised with the
"you can't". In these operating systems, it's up to the user to decide what
is going to happen with his device and the worst case if a terrible
developer does something mad, you can always hard reset the device and you
are up and running again.

 

I hope the future versions bring us your President's statement "Yes, we can"
(do what we developers want to do).

 

Marcio Alexandroni.

 

  _  

From: android-developers@googlegroups.com
[mailto:android-develop...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Disconnect
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 18:08
To: android-developers@googlegroups.com
Subject: [android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in
applications

 

I don't understand why taking the AOSP launcher, for example, and modifying
it is "simply not correct" but writing one from scratch is..?

I thought part of the point of the AOSP was that you could use those apps as
bases for your own development. (I can go digging for more
website/marketing/etc quotes if you really want, but..)



On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Romain Guy  wrote:


Replacing a core application is achieved using intent filters. This is
how you can replace Home with your own application or replace Browser
with your own web browser, et.


On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Disconnect 
wrote:
> I thought one of the core tenants of Android was that developers could
> write, and end users could install, apps that replaced the default apps.
> (Such as k9 and k9sms.)
>
> Is this not, in fact, true? (And please don't try to claim that sms/mms
> isn't a core feature of a mobile phone OS. And both of those projects are,
> from the start, forks of the AOSP applications.)
>
> Looking at the Android page (http://code.google.com/android/) I see:
>
> Any app on the mobile device can be replaced or extended -- even core
> components such as the dialer or home.
>
> ..the dialer has already been hashed over (at best, you can make
> non-emergency calls, but you cannot in fact "replace or extend" the dialer
> completely.) Are you now saying that the entire statement is false?
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Dianne Hackborn 
> wrote:
>>
>> Yes in this case probably what is desired is changing the package name,
>> though that wasn't explicitly requested.  But in Android that is how you
>> install an alternative version of an app -- by installing a -different-
app
>> with the same public capabilities (handling the same intents etc) as the
>> built-in app.  Then the user is free to decide when and where they want
to
>> use that new app, if at all.
>>
>> For the desire to just install a custom version of a built-in app that
has
>> the same name, and is thus treated as a new version, of the built-in app,
>> the basic answer is:
>>
>> - In the current platform, it is not possible to install an UPDATE (key
>> word) to a built-in application in to the data partition; updates can
only
>> be done by replacing the app in /system.
>> - In Cupcake we will have this facility, HOWEVER:
>>   1. You still must be able to sign the app with the same certificate as
>> the version in the system partition.  If you can't, you can't update it.
>> Only the original author of an application can create new versions of
their
>> own applications.  You won't be able to do this with any of the built-in
>> apps, because HTC and Google own the various certificates.
>>   2. It simply is not correct to install a your own update to one of the
>> system apps (contacts, calendar, etc) because those are part of the open
>> source platform and the company who made the phone you are installing it
on
>> could have customized that app in significant ways.  Your "update" could
>> actually be a regression, or completely incompatible with how the
built-in
>> app stores its data.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 

[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-21 Thread Dianne Hackborn
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Jean-Baptiste Queru wrote:

> It's not that easy, because aapt assumes that the android package name
> is also the source code package name. At the very least you need a
> custom post-processing step to move the generated R file into the
> proper source code package, and none of the standard Android build
> tools support that.


Yes, better tools to help with this would be nice.

The basic point of the package name is this: it provides a unique identity
for an application under a particular author's control.  It does not make
any sense for someone to go and modify an application in the open-source
platform and make it available with the same package name, because what you
have done is created a -fork- and it needs a new identity.  The existing
system app will continue to evolve, and your own fork will continue to
evolve, and there is no way to ensure they are compatible.  And further, as
I said, the apps that are available as part of the platform code are really
owned by the manufacturer of the device they are running on (using the
platform code as a base), so there is simply no way you can know that your
version of the app forked off of some version of the platform will be able
to actually replace the version built into a piece of hardware based on
possibly some other version of the platform with who knows what
customization done by the hardware manufacturer.

So the way one replaces components is to create a -new- application that
supplies the same features to the system as the built-in application, so the
system can let the user pick which one to use where appropriate, use the
built-in one where the replacement didn't actually happen to provide some
functionality it has, etc.

This is actually an -intrinsic- part of the claim about third parties being
able to replace applications, in that it is done in such a way that it can
be controlled and avoid breaking things on whatever device the replacement
is being installed on.


> On top of that, you've got to pray that the application you're working
> with only uses SDK-accessible permissions.


The vast majority of applications built into the system use normal
application permissions.  As we have already gone over numerous times, yes
there are some parts of the UI that are more intimately tied with the system
(in-call screen, lock screen, settings) and not so easy to extract at this
point.  That doesn't invalidate the general philosophy nor the extensive
architecture in place to support that philosophy.

-- 
Dianne Hackborn
Android framework engineer
hack...@android.com

Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to
provide private support.  All such questions should be posted on public
forums, where I and others can see and answer them.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
android-developers-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-21 Thread Jean-Baptiste Queru

It's not that easy, because aapt assumes that the android package name
is also the source code package name. At the very least you need a
custom post-processing step to move the generated R file into the
proper source code package, and none of the standard Android build
tools support that.

On top of that, you've got to pray that the application you're working
with only uses SDK-accessible permissions.

JBQ

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Romain Guy  wrote:
>
>> I don't understand why taking the AOSP launcher, for example, and modifying
>> it is "simply not correct" but writing one from scratch is..?
>
> You can, Dianne just said that you need to change its package name to
> avoid conflicting with the system apps. That's all. That's what K9
> does with Email. So take the launcher, modify it and install it but
> change its package name.
>
>>
>> I thought part of the point of the AOSP was that you could use those apps as
>> bases for your own development. (I can go digging for more
>> website/marketing/etc quotes if you really want, but..)
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Romain Guy  wrote:
>>>
>>> Replacing a core application is achieved using intent filters. This is
>>> how you can replace Home with your own application or replace Browser
>>> with your own web browser, et.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Disconnect 
>>> wrote:
>>> > I thought one of the core tenants of Android was that developers could
>>> > write, and end users could install, apps that replaced the default apps.
>>> > (Such as k9 and k9sms.)
>>> >
>>> > Is this not, in fact, true? (And please don't try to claim that sms/mms
>>> > isn't a core feature of a mobile phone OS. And both of those projects
>>> > are,
>>> > from the start, forks of the AOSP applications.)
>>> >
>>> > Looking at the Android page (http://code.google.com/android/) I see:
>>> >
>>> > Any app on the mobile device can be replaced or extended -- even core
>>> > components such as the dialer or home.
>>> >
>>> > ..the dialer has already been hashed over (at best, you can make
>>> > non-emergency calls, but you cannot in fact "replace or extend" the
>>> > dialer
>>> > completely.) Are you now saying that the entire statement is false?
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Dianne Hackborn 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Yes in this case probably what is desired is changing the package name,
>>> >> though that wasn't explicitly requested.  But in Android that is how
>>> >> you
>>> >> install an alternative version of an app -- by installing a -different-
>>> >> app
>>> >> with the same public capabilities (handling the same intents etc) as
>>> >> the
>>> >> built-in app.  Then the user is free to decide when and where they want
>>> >> to
>>> >> use that new app, if at all.
>>> >>
>>> >> For the desire to just install a custom version of a built-in app that
>>> >> has
>>> >> the same name, and is thus treated as a new version, of the built-in
>>> >> app,
>>> >> the basic answer is:
>>> >>
>>> >> - In the current platform, it is not possible to install an UPDATE (key
>>> >> word) to a built-in application in to the data partition; updates can
>>> >> only
>>> >> be done by replacing the app in /system.
>>> >> - In Cupcake we will have this facility, HOWEVER:
>>> >>   1. You still must be able to sign the app with the same certificate
>>> >> as
>>> >> the version in the system partition.  If you can't, you can't update
>>> >> it.
>>> >> Only the original author of an application can create new versions of
>>> >> their
>>> >> own applications.  You won't be able to do this with any of the
>>> >> built-in
>>> >> apps, because HTC and Google own the various certificates.
>>> >>   2. It simply is not correct to install a your own update to one of
>>> >> the
>>> >> system apps (contacts, calendar, etc) because those are part of the
>>> >> open
>>> >> source platform and the company who made the phone you are installing
>>> >> it on
>>> >> could have customized that app in significant ways.  Your "update"
>>> >> could
>>> >> actually be a regression, or completely incompatible with how the
>>> >> built-in
>>> >> app stores its data.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Disconnect 
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> ..android-platform covers building apps with the sdk?  Thats new.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I think he's looking for info on changing package names so that he can
>>> >>> replace the default apps. (I don't have that info handy, sorry..)
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Andrew Stadler 
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>  Wrong list.  Please see android-platform, which covers topics such as
>>>  this.
>>> 
>>>  http://source.android.com/discuss for more information.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Gerald  wrote:
>>>  >
>>>  > Hi,
>>>  > I want to customize some built-in applications on android, for
>>>  > example
>>>  > Launcher or Contacts, etc.
>>>  > I've downl

[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-21 Thread Romain Guy

> I don't understand why taking the AOSP launcher, for example, and modifying
> it is "simply not correct" but writing one from scratch is..?

You can, Dianne just said that you need to change its package name to
avoid conflicting with the system apps. That's all. That's what K9
does with Email. So take the launcher, modify it and install it but
change its package name.

>
> I thought part of the point of the AOSP was that you could use those apps as
> bases for your own development. (I can go digging for more
> website/marketing/etc quotes if you really want, but..)
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Romain Guy  wrote:
>>
>> Replacing a core application is achieved using intent filters. This is
>> how you can replace Home with your own application or replace Browser
>> with your own web browser, et.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Disconnect 
>> wrote:
>> > I thought one of the core tenants of Android was that developers could
>> > write, and end users could install, apps that replaced the default apps.
>> > (Such as k9 and k9sms.)
>> >
>> > Is this not, in fact, true? (And please don't try to claim that sms/mms
>> > isn't a core feature of a mobile phone OS. And both of those projects
>> > are,
>> > from the start, forks of the AOSP applications.)
>> >
>> > Looking at the Android page (http://code.google.com/android/) I see:
>> >
>> > Any app on the mobile device can be replaced or extended -- even core
>> > components such as the dialer or home.
>> >
>> > ..the dialer has already been hashed over (at best, you can make
>> > non-emergency calls, but you cannot in fact "replace or extend" the
>> > dialer
>> > completely.) Are you now saying that the entire statement is false?
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Dianne Hackborn 
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Yes in this case probably what is desired is changing the package name,
>> >> though that wasn't explicitly requested.  But in Android that is how
>> >> you
>> >> install an alternative version of an app -- by installing a -different-
>> >> app
>> >> with the same public capabilities (handling the same intents etc) as
>> >> the
>> >> built-in app.  Then the user is free to decide when and where they want
>> >> to
>> >> use that new app, if at all.
>> >>
>> >> For the desire to just install a custom version of a built-in app that
>> >> has
>> >> the same name, and is thus treated as a new version, of the built-in
>> >> app,
>> >> the basic answer is:
>> >>
>> >> - In the current platform, it is not possible to install an UPDATE (key
>> >> word) to a built-in application in to the data partition; updates can
>> >> only
>> >> be done by replacing the app in /system.
>> >> - In Cupcake we will have this facility, HOWEVER:
>> >>   1. You still must be able to sign the app with the same certificate
>> >> as
>> >> the version in the system partition.  If you can't, you can't update
>> >> it.
>> >> Only the original author of an application can create new versions of
>> >> their
>> >> own applications.  You won't be able to do this with any of the
>> >> built-in
>> >> apps, because HTC and Google own the various certificates.
>> >>   2. It simply is not correct to install a your own update to one of
>> >> the
>> >> system apps (contacts, calendar, etc) because those are part of the
>> >> open
>> >> source platform and the company who made the phone you are installing
>> >> it on
>> >> could have customized that app in significant ways.  Your "update"
>> >> could
>> >> actually be a regression, or completely incompatible with how the
>> >> built-in
>> >> app stores its data.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Disconnect 
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> ..android-platform covers building apps with the sdk?  Thats new.
>> >>>
>> >>> I think he's looking for info on changing package names so that he can
>> >>> replace the default apps. (I don't have that info handy, sorry..)
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Andrew Stadler 
>> >>> wrote:
>> 
>>  Wrong list.  Please see android-platform, which covers topics such as
>>  this.
>> 
>>  http://source.android.com/discuss for more information.
>> 
>> 
>>  On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Gerald  wrote:
>>  >
>>  > Hi,
>>  > I want to customize some built-in applications on android, for
>>  > example
>>  > Launcher or Contacts, etc.
>>  > I've downloaded the source code and compile it by eclipse
>>  > successfully.
>>  > But when I tried to run it, a signing error comes:
>>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:27 - Launcher] Installing Launcher.apk...
>>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:35 - Launcher] Application already exists.
>>  > Attempting to re-install instead...
>>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Re-installation failed due to
>>  > different application signatures.
>>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] You must perform a full uninstall
>>  > of
>>  > the application. WARNING: This will remove the 

[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-21 Thread Disconnect
I don't understand why taking the AOSP launcher, for example, and modifying
it is "simply not correct" but writing one from scratch is..?

I thought part of the point of the AOSP was that you could use those apps as
bases for your own development. (I can go digging for more
website/marketing/etc quotes if you really want, but..)


On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Romain Guy  wrote:

>
> Replacing a core application is achieved using intent filters. This is
> how you can replace Home with your own application or replace Browser
> with your own web browser, et.
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Disconnect 
> wrote:
> > I thought one of the core tenants of Android was that developers could
> > write, and end users could install, apps that replaced the default apps.
> > (Such as k9 and k9sms.)
> >
> > Is this not, in fact, true? (And please don't try to claim that sms/mms
> > isn't a core feature of a mobile phone OS. And both of those projects
> are,
> > from the start, forks of the AOSP applications.)
> >
> > Looking at the Android page (http://code.google.com/android/) I see:
> >
> > Any app on the mobile device can be replaced or extended -- even core
> > components such as the dialer or home.
> >
> > ..the dialer has already been hashed over (at best, you can make
> > non-emergency calls, but you cannot in fact "replace or extend" the
> dialer
> > completely.) Are you now saying that the entire statement is false?
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Dianne Hackborn 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes in this case probably what is desired is changing the package name,
> >> though that wasn't explicitly requested.  But in Android that is how you
> >> install an alternative version of an app -- by installing a -different-
> app
> >> with the same public capabilities (handling the same intents etc) as the
> >> built-in app.  Then the user is free to decide when and where they want
> to
> >> use that new app, if at all.
> >>
> >> For the desire to just install a custom version of a built-in app that
> has
> >> the same name, and is thus treated as a new version, of the built-in
> app,
> >> the basic answer is:
> >>
> >> - In the current platform, it is not possible to install an UPDATE (key
> >> word) to a built-in application in to the data partition; updates can
> only
> >> be done by replacing the app in /system.
> >> - In Cupcake we will have this facility, HOWEVER:
> >>   1. You still must be able to sign the app with the same certificate as
> >> the version in the system partition.  If you can't, you can't update it.
> >> Only the original author of an application can create new versions of
> their
> >> own applications.  You won't be able to do this with any of the built-in
> >> apps, because HTC and Google own the various certificates.
> >>   2. It simply is not correct to install a your own update to one of the
> >> system apps (contacts, calendar, etc) because those are part of the open
> >> source platform and the company who made the phone you are installing it
> on
> >> could have customized that app in significant ways.  Your "update" could
> >> actually be a regression, or completely incompatible with how the
> built-in
> >> app stores its data.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Disconnect 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> ..android-platform covers building apps with the sdk?  Thats new.
> >>>
> >>> I think he's looking for info on changing package names so that he can
> >>> replace the default apps. (I don't have that info handy, sorry..)
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Andrew Stadler 
> >>> wrote:
> 
>  Wrong list.  Please see android-platform, which covers topics such as
>  this.
> 
>  http://source.android.com/discuss for more information.
> 
> 
>  On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Gerald  wrote:
>  >
>  > Hi,
>  > I want to customize some built-in applications on android, for
> example
>  > Launcher or Contacts, etc.
>  > I've downloaded the source code and compile it by eclipse
>  > successfully.
>  > But when I tried to run it, a signing error comes:
>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:27 - Launcher] Installing Launcher.apk...
>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:35 - Launcher] Application already exists.
>  > Attempting to re-install instead...
>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Re-installation failed due to
>  > different application signatures.
>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] You must perform a full uninstall
> of
>  > the application. WARNING: This will remove the application data!
>  > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Please execute 'adb uninstall
>  > com.android.launcher' in a shell.
>  >
>  > I followed above instruction: adb uninstall com.android.launcher,
> but
>  > it failed (Can't remove the application).
>  > The official document only provides "How to sign a new application",
>  > but it's not usable in my case.
>  >
>  > Does anyone know how to do

[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-21 Thread Romain Guy

Replacing a core application is achieved using intent filters. This is
how you can replace Home with your own application or replace Browser
with your own web browser, et.

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Disconnect  wrote:
> I thought one of the core tenants of Android was that developers could
> write, and end users could install, apps that replaced the default apps.
> (Such as k9 and k9sms.)
>
> Is this not, in fact, true? (And please don't try to claim that sms/mms
> isn't a core feature of a mobile phone OS. And both of those projects are,
> from the start, forks of the AOSP applications.)
>
> Looking at the Android page (http://code.google.com/android/) I see:
>
> Any app on the mobile device can be replaced or extended -- even core
> components such as the dialer or home.
>
> ..the dialer has already been hashed over (at best, you can make
> non-emergency calls, but you cannot in fact "replace or extend" the dialer
> completely.) Are you now saying that the entire statement is false?
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Dianne Hackborn 
> wrote:
>>
>> Yes in this case probably what is desired is changing the package name,
>> though that wasn't explicitly requested.  But in Android that is how you
>> install an alternative version of an app -- by installing a -different- app
>> with the same public capabilities (handling the same intents etc) as the
>> built-in app.  Then the user is free to decide when and where they want to
>> use that new app, if at all.
>>
>> For the desire to just install a custom version of a built-in app that has
>> the same name, and is thus treated as a new version, of the built-in app,
>> the basic answer is:
>>
>> - In the current platform, it is not possible to install an UPDATE (key
>> word) to a built-in application in to the data partition; updates can only
>> be done by replacing the app in /system.
>> - In Cupcake we will have this facility, HOWEVER:
>>   1. You still must be able to sign the app with the same certificate as
>> the version in the system partition.  If you can't, you can't update it.
>> Only the original author of an application can create new versions of their
>> own applications.  You won't be able to do this with any of the built-in
>> apps, because HTC and Google own the various certificates.
>>   2. It simply is not correct to install a your own update to one of the
>> system apps (contacts, calendar, etc) because those are part of the open
>> source platform and the company who made the phone you are installing it on
>> could have customized that app in significant ways.  Your "update" could
>> actually be a regression, or completely incompatible with how the built-in
>> app stores its data.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Disconnect 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> ..android-platform covers building apps with the sdk?  Thats new.
>>>
>>> I think he's looking for info on changing package names so that he can
>>> replace the default apps. (I don't have that info handy, sorry..)
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Andrew Stadler 
>>> wrote:

 Wrong list.  Please see android-platform, which covers topics such as
 this.

 http://source.android.com/discuss for more information.


 On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Gerald  wrote:
 >
 > Hi,
 > I want to customize some built-in applications on android, for example
 > Launcher or Contacts, etc.
 > I've downloaded the source code and compile it by eclipse
 > successfully.
 > But when I tried to run it, a signing error comes:
 > [2009-01-20 16:17:27 - Launcher] Installing Launcher.apk...
 > [2009-01-20 16:17:35 - Launcher] Application already exists.
 > Attempting to re-install instead...
 > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Re-installation failed due to
 > different application signatures.
 > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] You must perform a full uninstall of
 > the application. WARNING: This will remove the application data!
 > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Please execute 'adb uninstall
 > com.android.launcher' in a shell.
 >
 > I followed above instruction: adb uninstall com.android.launcher, but
 > it failed (Can't remove the application).
 > The official document only provides "How to sign a new application",
 > but it's not usable in my case.
 >
 > Does anyone know how to do it?
 > Thank you very much
 >
 > Gerald
 >
 > >
 >


>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dianne Hackborn
>> Android framework engineer
>> hack...@android.com
>>
>> Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to
>> provide private support.  All such questions should be posted on public
>> forums, where I and others can see and answer them.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> >
>



-- 
Romain Guy
Android framework engineer
romain...@android.com

Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time
to provide private support.  All such questions shoul

[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-21 Thread Disconnect
I thought one of the core tenants of Android was that developers could
write, and end users could install, apps that replaced the default apps.
(Such as k9 and k9sms.)

Is this not, in fact, true? (And please don't try to claim that sms/mms
isn't a core feature of a mobile phone OS. And both of those projects are,
from the start, forks of the AOSP applications.)

Looking at the Android page (http://code.google.com/android/) I see:

*Any app on the mobile device can be replaced or extended -- even core
components such as the dialer or home.*

..the dialer has already been hashed over (at best, you can make
non-emergency calls, but you cannot in fact "replace or extend" the dialer
completely.) Are you now saying that the entire statement is false?

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Dianne Hackborn wrote:

> Yes in this case probably what is desired is changing the package name,
> though that wasn't explicitly requested.  But in Android that is how you
> install an alternative version of an app -- by installing a -different- app
> with the same public capabilities (handling the same intents etc) as the
> built-in app.  Then the user is free to decide when and where they want to
> use that new app, if at all.
>
> For the desire to just install a custom version of a built-in app that has
> the same name, and is thus treated as a new version, of the built-in app,
> the basic answer is:
>
> - In the current platform, it is not possible to install an UPDATE (key
> word) to a built-in application in to the data partition; updates can only
> be done by replacing the app in /system.
> - In Cupcake we will have this facility, HOWEVER:
>   1. You still must be able to sign the app with the same certificate as
> the version in the system partition.  If you can't, you can't update it.
> Only the original author of an application can create new versions of their
> own applications.  You won't be able to do this with any of the built-in
> apps, because HTC and Google own the various certificates.
>   2. It simply is not correct to install a your own update to one of the
> system apps (contacts, calendar, etc) because those are part of the open
> source platform and the company who made the phone you are installing it on
> could have customized that app in significant ways.  Your "update" could
> actually be a regression, or completely incompatible with how the built-in
> app stores its data.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Disconnect wrote:
>
>> ..android-platform covers building apps with the sdk?  Thats new.
>>
>> I think he's looking for info on changing package names so that he can
>> replace the default apps. (I don't have that info handy, sorry..)
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Andrew Stadler wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Wrong list.  Please see android-platform, which covers topics such as
>>> this.
>>>
>>> http://source.android.com/discuss for more information.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Gerald  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> > I want to customize some built-in applications on android, for example
>>> > Launcher or Contacts, etc.
>>> > I've downloaded the source code and compile it by eclipse
>>> > successfully.
>>> > But when I tried to run it, a signing error comes:
>>> > [2009-01-20 16:17:27 - Launcher] Installing Launcher.apk...
>>> > [2009-01-20 16:17:35 - Launcher] Application already exists.
>>> > Attempting to re-install instead...
>>> > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Re-installation failed due to
>>> > different application signatures.
>>> > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] You must perform a full uninstall of
>>> > the application. WARNING: This will remove the application data!
>>> > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Please execute 'adb uninstall
>>> > com.android.launcher' in a shell.
>>> >
>>> > I followed above instruction: adb uninstall com.android.launcher, but
>>> > it failed (Can't remove the application).
>>> > The official document only provides "How to sign a new application",
>>> > but it's not usable in my case.
>>> >
>>> > Does anyone know how to do it?
>>> > Thank you very much
>>> >
>>> > Gerald
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Dianne Hackborn
> Android framework engineer
> hack...@android.com
>
> Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to
> provide private support.  All such questions should be posted on public
> forums, where I and others can see and answer them.
>
>
>
> >
>

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
android-developers-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-21 Thread Dianne Hackborn
Yes in this case probably what is desired is changing the package name,
though that wasn't explicitly requested.  But in Android that is how you
install an alternative version of an app -- by installing a -different- app
with the same public capabilities (handling the same intents etc) as the
built-in app.  Then the user is free to decide when and where they want to
use that new app, if at all.

For the desire to just install a custom version of a built-in app that has
the same name, and is thus treated as a new version, of the built-in app,
the basic answer is:

- In the current platform, it is not possible to install an UPDATE (key
word) to a built-in application in to the data partition; updates can only
be done by replacing the app in /system.
- In Cupcake we will have this facility, HOWEVER:
  1. You still must be able to sign the app with the same certificate as the
version in the system partition.  If you can't, you can't update it.  Only
the original author of an application can create new versions of their own
applications.  You won't be able to do this with any of the built-in apps,
because HTC and Google own the various certificates.
  2. It simply is not correct to install a your own update to one of the
system apps (contacts, calendar, etc) because those are part of the open
source platform and the company who made the phone you are installing it on
could have customized that app in significant ways.  Your "update" could
actually be a regression, or completely incompatible with how the built-in
app stores its data.



On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Disconnect  wrote:

> ..android-platform covers building apps with the sdk?  Thats new.
>
> I think he's looking for info on changing package names so that he can
> replace the default apps. (I don't have that info handy, sorry..)
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Andrew Stadler wrote:
>
>>
>> Wrong list.  Please see android-platform, which covers topics such as
>> this.
>>
>> http://source.android.com/discuss for more information.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Gerald  wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> > I want to customize some built-in applications on android, for example
>> > Launcher or Contacts, etc.
>> > I've downloaded the source code and compile it by eclipse
>> > successfully.
>> > But when I tried to run it, a signing error comes:
>> > [2009-01-20 16:17:27 - Launcher] Installing Launcher.apk...
>> > [2009-01-20 16:17:35 - Launcher] Application already exists.
>> > Attempting to re-install instead...
>> > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Re-installation failed due to
>> > different application signatures.
>> > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] You must perform a full uninstall of
>> > the application. WARNING: This will remove the application data!
>> > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Please execute 'adb uninstall
>> > com.android.launcher' in a shell.
>> >
>> > I followed above instruction: adb uninstall com.android.launcher, but
>> > it failed (Can't remove the application).
>> > The official document only provides "How to sign a new application",
>> > but it's not usable in my case.
>> >
>> > Does anyone know how to do it?
>> > Thank you very much
>> >
>> > Gerald
>> >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
> >
>


-- 
Dianne Hackborn
Android framework engineer
hack...@android.com

Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to
provide private support.  All such questions should be posted on public
forums, where I and others can see and answer them.

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
android-developers-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-21 Thread Disconnect
..android-platform covers building apps with the sdk?  Thats new.

I think he's looking for info on changing package names so that he can
replace the default apps. (I don't have that info handy, sorry..)

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Andrew Stadler  wrote:

>
> Wrong list.  Please see android-platform, which covers topics such as this.
>
> http://source.android.com/discuss for more information.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Gerald  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > I want to customize some built-in applications on android, for example
> > Launcher or Contacts, etc.
> > I've downloaded the source code and compile it by eclipse
> > successfully.
> > But when I tried to run it, a signing error comes:
> > [2009-01-20 16:17:27 - Launcher] Installing Launcher.apk...
> > [2009-01-20 16:17:35 - Launcher] Application already exists.
> > Attempting to re-install instead...
> > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Re-installation failed due to
> > different application signatures.
> > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] You must perform a full uninstall of
> > the application. WARNING: This will remove the application data!
> > [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Please execute 'adb uninstall
> > com.android.launcher' in a shell.
> >
> > I followed above instruction: adb uninstall com.android.launcher, but
> > it failed (Can't remove the application).
> > The official document only provides "How to sign a new application",
> > but it's not usable in my case.
> >
> > Does anyone know how to do it?
> > Thank you very much
> >
> > Gerald
> >
> > >
> >
>
> >
>

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
android-developers-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



[android-developers] Re: How to re-install & sign android built-in applications

2009-01-21 Thread Andrew Stadler

Wrong list.  Please see android-platform, which covers topics such as this.

http://source.android.com/discuss for more information.


On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Gerald  wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I want to customize some built-in applications on android, for example
> Launcher or Contacts, etc.
> I've downloaded the source code and compile it by eclipse
> successfully.
> But when I tried to run it, a signing error comes:
> [2009-01-20 16:17:27 - Launcher] Installing Launcher.apk...
> [2009-01-20 16:17:35 - Launcher] Application already exists.
> Attempting to re-install instead...
> [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Re-installation failed due to
> different application signatures.
> [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] You must perform a full uninstall of
> the application. WARNING: This will remove the application data!
> [2009-01-20 16:17:43 - Launcher] Please execute 'adb uninstall
> com.android.launcher' in a shell.
>
> I followed above instruction: adb uninstall com.android.launcher, but
> it failed (Can't remove the application).
> The official document only provides "How to sign a new application",
> but it's not usable in my case.
>
> Does anyone know how to do it?
> Thank you very much
>
> Gerald
>
> >
>

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Android Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
android-developers-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---