|
|
what is the diff between a .sis file and .sisx file
| Thu, 2008-03-06 07:10 | |
|
thanks in adavance. |
|
User login
|
|
| Thu, 2008-03-06 07:10 | |
|
thanks in adavance. |
|
Forum posts: 1233
By convention, a signed .sis file is named .sisx
Since all sis files need to be signed somehow to be installed on v9 symbian devices, they are all named .sisx
Has nothing to do with what is inside the sis.
A sis is just an installer package, could be installing anything, picture, sound, anything.. don't have to be an application.
Forum posts: 1242
I know that it does not matter much, but just for the record: This is not true for UIQ3 devices, at least for the current generation: Phones like the P990i and the P1i happily install sis files without any signing; they do not even require self-signing.
And I see this as a healthy dose of common sense: The increase in security by insisting on self-signing really is quite small and probably not worth the bother, if you ask me.
René Brunner
Forum posts: 21
so is it so that from 9.x any signed application will have .sisx file extension in s60.
Forum posts: 463
I quote Alh "By convention, a signed .sis file is named .sisx"
And to your answer..yes and no depending on who has created that file and how much he believes in that convention(Its possible to have a signed file with sis extention), I follow that convention of sis as unsigned and sisx as signed..makes my life easier to identify what file i need to sign with my devcert and what file i can just install to the device.