burton miller wrote: > these solutions will not work for me. > > i have a 4.5mb database, which i do not want to duplicate by copying > it out of the apk and into a directory. > > copying it from the web could potentially be very slow as well. > > i can't believe that there is not a better solution to this extremely > common situation. many, many apps will need to come with a pre- > populated database.
If you were to write a Windows application, and you were to distribute a pre-populated database, you would bundle the database in the application installer (.EXE, .MSI) and would install it to your targeted location. If the user elected to hold onto the application installer, you would have the same scenario as with Android and the APK: two copies of the database (master in the installer, working copy outside it). If you were to write a Linux application, and you were to distribute a pre-populated database, you would bundle the database in the application package (RPM, DEB, etc.) and would install it to your targeted location. If the user elected to hold onto the application package, you would have the same scenario as with Android and the APK: two copies of the database (master in the package, working copy outside it). If you were to write a desktop Java application, and you were to distribute a pre-populated database, you *might* bundle the database in the JAR and would copy it to your targeted location on first run. That way, you can still have an "executable JAR". Here, again, you would have the same scenario as with Android and the APK: two copies of the database (master in the JAR, working copy outside it). So, it's not like the Android model is singularly unusual. It's not optimal, particularly for the tiny number of applications shipping large databases with their apps, but it's not preposterous, either. Now, don't get me wrong. It'd be nice if there were a higher-order packaging option beyond the APK -- something that could bundle and install one or more APKs plus other files (e.g., databases), after which the meta-package could get deleted. This would solve a bunch of problems, not the least of which could be the issue of APK dependencies (e.g., Application X requires Remote Service Y, which might already be installed via some other app). However, I'm not terribly shocked that it's not in Android 1.0r1. At some point, somebody will have the itch for this sort of thing and will scratch it, whether that "somebody" is on the core Android team or working outside of it. -- Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy) http://commonsware.com Android Training on the Ranch! -- Mar 16-20, 2009 http://www.bignerdranch.com/schedule.shtml --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
