Database Users

Question to people that know a thing or two about development

I am curious why is this not possible to easily port ATT froyo rom to run on Vibrant (well if possible then probably not easy) ?
They are the same phones, same hardware, etc.....

kolyan said:
I am curious why is this not possible to easily port ATT froyo rom to run on Vibrant (well if possible then probably not easy) ?
They are the same phones, same hardware, etc.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One would think, however, FROYO does not run on a commodity operating system but instead requires a computationally distributed version of Fiddlefark Version 7.2.
We implemented out the partition table server in Simula-67, augmented with opportunistically independent extensions. Our experiments soon proved that instrumenting our Vibrants was more effective than distributing them, as previous work suggested. Along these same lines, we implemented our FROYO server in Depildoo, augmented with extremely exhaustive extensions. We note that other devs have tried and failed to enable this functionality.
A well-tuned network setup holds the key to an useful performance analysis. We executed a simulation on our Internet testbed to quantify O. N. Nehru's deployment of Captivate FROYO. Had we prototyped our Vibrants, as opposed to emulating it in middleware, we would have seen duplicated results. We removed 150GB/s of Wi-Fi throughput from our mobile telephones to better understand the effective NV-RAM speed.
We then removed more RAM from the KGB's 2-node cluster to consider our system. Next, we removed 3 RISC processors from our Vibrants to quantify the change of steganography.
In the end, we removed more optical drive space from our scale overlay network to disprove the independently relational nature of linear-time symmetries. The results were not promising.
End-users of Silonia development models, as applied to the Samsung Galaxy S, agree that unstable symmetries are an interesting new topic in the field of noisy FROYO lust theory, however, all research concludes that it is not possible.
I hope this clears things up.

kolyan said:
I am curious why is this not possible to easily port ATT froyo rom to run on Vibrant (well if possible then probably not easy) ?
They are the same phones, same hardware, etc.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe the lack of source code has something to do with it.

tjhart85 said:
Maybe the lack of source code has something to do with it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And that's about it.
Except for the radios, the two should be pretty interchangeable.

smutek said:
One would think, however, FROYO does not run on a commodity operating system but instead requires a computationally distributed version of Fiddlefark Version 7.2.
We implemented out the partition table server in Simula-67, augmented with opportunistically independent extensions. Our experiments soon proved that instrumenting our Vibrants was more effective than distributing them, as previous work suggested. Along these same lines, we implemented our FROYO server in Depildoo, augmented with extremely exhaustive extensions. We note that other devs have tried and failed to enable this functionality.
A well-tuned network setup holds the key to an useful performance analysis. We executed a simulation on our Internet testbed to quantify O. N. Nehru's deployment of Captivate FROYO. Had we prototyped our Vibrants, as opposed to emulating it in middleware, we would have seen duplicated results. We removed 150GB/s of Wi-Fi throughput from our mobile telephones to better understand the effective NV-RAM speed.
We then removed more RAM from the KGB's 2-node cluster to consider our system. Next, we removed 3 RISC processors from our Vibrants to quantify the change of steganography.
In the end, we removed more optical drive space from our scale overlay network to disprove the independently relational nature of linear-time symmetries. The results were not promising.
End-users of Silonia development models, as applied to the Samsung Galaxy S, agree that unstable symmetries are an interesting new topic in the field of noisy FROYO lust theory, however, all research concludes that it is not possible.
I hope this clears things up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lmao....best post of the day so far = )

+1 lmao
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

smutek said:
all research concludes that it is not possible.
I hope this clears things up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol. Mostly clear now but I could use some visuals, maybe some debug logs or something. Anyway keep up the good work.

and again Eugene..
look for Eugene_373 to have it done soon 2.1 AT&T rom ported that is .. lol

Petition for Samsung to be more open

Hi, a developer called pulser_g2 made this petition for Samsung to be more open and be a lot more developer friendly, this petition is for all Samsung android devices. So I thought I would post it here in the hope a few of you may consider singing it please
http://www.change.org/petitions/sam...t-achieve-full-potential-of-purchased-devices
Thank you

I don't see the point in signing this as SAMFIRMWARE already releases a bunch of firmwares for Samsung.
Sent from my GT-i9220 using Tapatalk

kotaro_14 said:
I don't see the point in signing this as SAMFIRMWARE already releases a bunch of firmwares for Samsung.
Sent from my GT-i9220 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's not what they're requesting
Samsung releases kernel sources but rest are not. This is the precise reason why CM crew is having trouble getting things like hardware codec support working like the stock rom
I think it's ok to demand full source to be released but i'm not sure if they can release the full source for things that they didn't produce (ie yamaha dac)

ph00ny said:
that's not what they're requesting
Samsung releases kernel sources but rest are not. This is the precise reason why CM crew is having trouble getting things like hardware codec support working like the stock rom
I think it's ok to demand full source to be released but i'm not sure if they can release the full source for things that they didn't produce (ie yamaha dac)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree - according to wikipedia the Android system is open source, so by definition all code should be available to all developers. I'm a bit of a noob to this, but my understanding is that as long as code is properly referenced, it can be re-used/improved etc.
Even something like sound and video drivers should be available to be used enhanced - it would make the system so much better. Voodoo Sound is a classic example of someone have to spend a heck of a lot of time tweaking and playing with a system until they find the right combination. How much better would our wonderful Note be if drivers, codecs and other fundamental kernel-related items were truly available to all?

Signed it
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium

[INFO] Linux kernel 3.3 released with merged Android code and more

Quoted from Engadget:
The latest refresh of the Linux kernel, 3.3, is now available, and the second release of 2012 brings with it the long-awaited merging of code from Google's little side project. While that is particularly interesting to developers looking to boot Android or run apps on the stock Linux kernel (FYI: optimized power management and other infrastructure that didn't make it this time will arrive in the next release, 3.4) and represents a resolution to the issues that kept the two apart for so long it's not the only new feature included. There are improvements to file systems like Btrfs, memory management, networking, security and much, much more. Hit the source link below for the full changelog or grab the code and from the usual locations and get your compile on directly.
Source: Engadget, Kernel Newbies, LKML.org
Any devs interested in developing a kernel based on this?
Based on what I read, this release would make it easier for us to compile the kernel as it brings merged Android code.

To me I'm thinking Google will Roll this out to the Nexus Line Up on the Next OTA... Perhaps the delay for the Nexus S if Due To This?
- Google

nice I hope so

iGoogleNexus said:
To me I'm thinking Google will Roll this out to the Nexus Line Up on the Next OTA... Perhaps the delay for the Nexus S if Due To This?
- Google
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt this is due to any delays regarding ota update, AFAIK, the Android devs at Google have all their own modules etc that they roll in to an update etc. This should however make projects like Ubuntu on Android etc easier.
Sent from my A500 using xda premium

glennkaonang said:
Quoted from Engadget:
The latest refresh of the Linux kernel, 3.3, is now available, and the second release of 2012 brings with it the long-awaited merging of code from Google's little side project. While that is particularly interesting to developers looking to boot Android or run apps on the stock Linux kernel (FYI: optimized power management and other infrastructure that didn't make it this time will arrive in the next release, 3.4) and represents a resolution to the issues that kept the two apart for so long it's not the only new feature included. There are improvements to file systems like Btrfs, memory management, networking, security and much, much more. Hit the source link below for the full changelog or grab the code and from the usual locations and get your compile on directly.
Source: Engadget, Kernel Newbies, LKML.org
Any devs interested in developing a kernel based on this?
Based on what I read, this release would make it easier for us to compile the kernel as it brings merged Android code.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have been porting Samsung drivers for Nexus S for some time till Linux 3.3 RC3..
Sorry, no fully working results yet due to many code improvements..
But the work is in progress.. I'll also try to write so Samsung to get the info about their plans and/or the results of porting this code to 3.3

novic_dev said:
I have been porting Samsung drivers for Nexus S for some time till Linux 3.3 RC3..
Sorry, no fully working results yet due to many code improvements..
But the work is in progress.. I'll also try to write so Samsung to get the info about their plans and/or the results of porting this code to 3.3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your hard work, man.
Anyway, after some readings, I think it's better for us to wait until 3.4 is released.
It is said that 3.4 will finish all the Android code merging process, with many fixes of course.
I'm no dev at all, so this is just a plain opinion from somewhat avid Android user
Sent from my Nexus S using xda premium

Cool

Compiling Android sources on the Pi

Hi Folks
Recently I helped Adam Outler get adb compiled for his Pi This was not as simpe as it first sounds because as we learnt adb on the host is subtlety different from the one compiled for the target and the AOSP source tree does not support compiling androids host tools for arm out of the box.
However You can add the armv6l host support by creating the file
Code:
<aosp source root>/build/core/combo/HOST_linux-armv6l.mk
The contents of which should look something like this
Code:
# Configuration for builds hosted on linux-armv6l.
# $(1): The file to check
define get-file-size
stat --format "%s" "$(1)" | tr -d '\n'
endef
HOST_SDK_TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX :=
ifneq (,$(strip $(wildcard $(HOST_SDK_TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX)/gcc)))
HOST_CC := $(HOST_SDK_TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX)/gcc
HOST_CXX := $(HOST_SDK_TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX)/g++
HOST_AR := $(HOST_SDK_TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX)/ar
endif # $(HOST_SDK_TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX)/gcc exists
HOST_GLOBAL_CFLAGS += -fPIC
HOST_GLOBAL_CFLAGS += -include $(call select-android-config-h,linux-x86)
HOST_GLOBAL_CFLAGS += -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=0
HOST_NO_UNDEFINED_LDFLAGS := -Wl,--no-undefined
You can now use the native pi toolchain to build with the aosp sources, at the very least you'll be able to compile the host tools such as fastboot , adb natively on the Pi. Whether you'll want to go about compiling a full android build using the Pi and whether that is even remotely sensible is a discussion for another day! :laugh:

Hey, thanks for your work on this. Sensible or not, it would be pretty cool to run an AOSP or even a CM build on your phone that was compiled on your Pi.
I tried compiling Boot2Gecko for my SGS2 on my Pi as well, but that kept dying about 6 hours into the build .
I got really lost (just learning all this stuff now), but learning it all while building a project you really like would be far more interesting that learning it while building "nano" or "Vim".

fewesttwo said:
Hey, thanks for your work on this. Sensible or not, it would be pretty cool to run an AOSP or even a CM build on your phone that was compiled on your Pi.
I tried compiling Boot2Gecko for my SGS2 on my Pi as well, but that kept dying about 6 hours into the build .
I got really lost (just learning all this stuff now), but learning it all while building a project you really like would be far more interesting that learning it while building "nano" or "Vim".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes or compile on the Pi for the Pi, If you want to try do that there's the beiginings of the other side, i.e armv6 target files on my github, It actually targets armv5te because that is already present as a valid target in the AOSP build system, a throwback to pre gingerbread and the HTC Dream ( G1 ) etc.
Thinking about it though, The build system may need a little more adding as I think only x86 based cross compilers will be currently selected for target compilation. I'm yet to get my Pi, there's currently a 6 week lead time on them and I'm thinking about holding out for the 512MB version. Until then it's QEmuPi for me!
The Android build system is pretty forgiving and will let you compile things piece-meal which is good because I don't think it would make it all the way to the end in one go no matter how many hours you give it.

Trevd, I asked JBQ on G+ and he said you should contact android-contrib for how to submit your work to be integrated to AOSP. . I'm pretty sure its a mailing list.

AdamOutler said:
Trevd, I asked JBQ on G+ and he said you should contact android-contrib for how to submit your work to be integrated to AOSP. . I'm pretty sure its a mailing list.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed, it's at https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!forum/android-contrib

AdamOutler said:
Trevd, I asked JBQ on G+ and he said you should contact android-contrib for how to submit your work to be integrated to AOSP. . I'm pretty sure its a mailing list.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi Adam, Thanks for that, I never really considered it, Last time I read, which admittedly was a long time ago now, they were a little more averse to submissions from the random punter. Maybe they've soften up, or maybe I've just made the whole thing up in my mind It would look alright on my c.v ( resume to you guys ) . However It's far from ready for that. There's some more tweaks to add to it, maybe commands like "make host" to just build the host platform would make sense on a device with limited resources like the Pi
pulser_g2 said:
Indeed, it's at https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!forum/android-contrib
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're the second person to do that to me! Someone drops a "google groups link bomb" on me and I lose an hour of my life reading all the posts, It's like low rent alien abduction! LOL :silly:

AdamOutler said:
Trevd, I asked JBQ on G+ and he said you should contact android-contrib for how to submit your work to be integrated to AOSP. . I'm pretty sure its a mailing list.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was bored waiting for my board so thought I ask if google want an hand, well more of a full arm than just an hand.
Me On Google Groups said:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/android-contrib/w5UWtdSTwSg
Hi
I've recently added linux-armv6l to the android build system as a HOST_ARCH so I could build adb natively on the raspberryPi. Is this something you would be interested in adding to the official build system?
Let me first explain why you wouldn't want to accept this.
1. Adam Outler from XDA-developers.com suggested I make this enquiry, Initially, I refrained, given the limited scope of the change I had make which focuses on armv6l specifically and although I would be Interesting to see just how long an AOSP build would take on the RasPi soley from a technical view, I don't think there would be anything to be gained from officially supporting such a device as I made the code publicly available through GitHub.
However upon further consideration this feature can have a much broarder appeal if it was changed to a more general linux-arm HOST_ARCH. Given Arms' current "March" into the server market plus the availability of higher end fast multicore processors such an addition may have a practical real-world application soon then rather than later.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I pointed out, Arm is getting more desktops now-a-days so they might do this one themselves
[EDIT] Here's the Big Man's Reply
JBQ From AOSP said:
I think we could consider it in principle.
However, I'm not convinced that building all of Android on an ARM host
will be practical any time soon. Because of that, I'd rather avoid
extensive changes much beyond adding HOST_linux-arm.mk. For now, I'll
also want to rely on the distribution's host compiler, to avoid having
to deal with the weight and licensing issues of prebuilt toolchains.
What scope do you have in mind?
BTW, I suggest that you wait until the source release of Android 4.2.
We've been tweaking the build system such that it's easier to control
what gets built, and that might be helpful in your case.
JBQ
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like a goer then. Because thats the only file I had to add to strart with..

[ZEN-KERNEL] 3.10-zen for nexus 9 - testers

Call me crazy but the best kernel for the nexus 6 is coming to the nexus 9, a device I don't have
Zen kernel is pretty sane and doesn't have changes like SuperMegaIOBlastFrequency5Million, but somehow it manages a bigger improvement than all those changes put together primarily through better CPU scheduling for the light-numa workloads of our mobile devices (in other words, BFS)
I have a BFS port from v461 (minus SMT nice )for 3.10 android/msm along with most of Alfred Chen's -gc branch includes as well.
Anyway, the effects are noticeable in the nexus 6 (no more google now launcher lag, no more big list lag, no more 3 second clear all recent delay, better power consumption through better frequency scaling by design of sticky tasks)
I think it will be just as good on the nexus 9, however I don't have one of these devices in my possession so I'm not gonna ask for people to buy me one instead I'm just going to ask for testers.
I'd like to see the effects of BFS on arm64 and I'm sure everybody else would like to see the benefits -zen kernel brings.
PM me if you would like a weekend build. I need at least 3 but the more the merrier.
Zen kernel for nexus 6
Thanks,
B

Also if you ask for a build tell me what ROM and existing kernel you are on if applicable.

Will you be getting a N9 in the future?
Sent From Capsule Corp.

Ace42 said:
Will you be getting a N9 in the future?
Sent From Capsule Corp.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably not, I graduate next month and plan on expanding my open source endeavors then but I'd like to support the nexus devices + 1 or 2 other flag ships with zen at all times.
People are happy over at N6, they were happy back on gnex and evo 4g I'm sure they will like nexus 9 version too
The custom kernel landscape has changed since the old days because there's less problems with new devices, but zen still finds a way
I'm really looking to change issues as I see them here. I don't want to bolster big names, give me money, this project is mine, etc. I want to bolster the community effort in a way that aids in learning, growth , etc. Zen is all about real kernel improvements. in time there is an app I've had on the shelf for 3 years with a brilliant framework among other things that I want to GPL-ize and release.

bbedward said:
Probably not, I graduate next month and plan on expanding my open source endeavors then but I'd like to support the nexus devices + 1 or 2 other flag ships with zen at all times.
People are happy over at N6, they were happy back on gnex and evo 4g I'm sure they will like nexus 9 version too
The custom kernel landscape has changed since the old days because there's less problems with new devices, but zen still finds a way
I'm really looking to change issues as I see them here. I don't want to bolster big names, give me money, this project is mine, etc. I want to bolster the community effort in a way that aids in learning, growth , etc. Zen is all about real kernel improvements. in time there is an app I've had on the shelf for 3 years with a brilliant framework among other things that I want to GPL-ize and release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At some point in time years ago I was a know nothing, figure out how to apply a patch, compile a kernel amateur. But through a great Linux, gentoo, arch , etc . community I have now become a proficient programmer, graduating with computer science + engineering degree in a few weeks.
the XDA community hasn't been about helping people learn or grow in any form. Its become a pit of protecting private property and don't take my work, don't ask dumb questions, just give up. I want to see more community efforts rather than private all mine type of stuff.

I've always wanted to develop a ROM or kernel, but the steps to just get Linux on my laptop is too much let alone driver support. If there was a simple way to use just windows 8 I would like to contribute to the N9 community.
Also I commend you for your studies, neither of those fields are easy from what I've heard. :good:

bbedward said:
At some point in time years ago I was a know nothing, figure out how to apply a patch, compile a kernel amateur. But through a great Linux, gentoo, arch , etc . community I have now become a proficient programmer, graduating with computer science + engineering degree in a few weeks.
the XDA community hasn't been about helping people learn or grow in any form. Its become a pit of protecting private property and don't take my work, don't ask dumb questions, just give up. I want to see more community efforts rather than private all mine type of stuff.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was like you a know nothing about kernels
I started kernel development knowing nothing
I still don't know much but, I'm learning slowly
Im vary interested in the source code
Also to test

Ace42 said:
I've always wanted to develop a ROM or kernel, but the steps to just get Linux on my laptop is too much let alone driver support. If there was a simple way to use just windows 8 I would like to contribute to the N9 community.
Also I commend you for your studies, neither of those fields are easy from what I've heard. :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, many linux distributions nowadays make it incredibly easy to get started though I'd venture to say most of them will work out of the box with your hardware.
USBhost said:
I was like you a know nothing about kernels
I started kernel development knowing nothing
I still don't know much but, I'm learning slowly
Im vary interested in the source code
Also to test
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably will have a test Friday, just going to use AnyKernel2 for the N9 probably (only replace fstab with f2fs support and no force encryption).
The N6 tree is here:
https://github.com/bbedward/ZenKernel_Shamu
The BFS branch is here (I split everything into individual branches on Zen):
https://github.com/bbedward/ZenKernel_Shamu/commits/sched_upstream_bfs_gc
Some of the stuff from my N6 kernel is a drop in for the N9 since they are both 3.10 based.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/uekphwlxvm2pya9/v3.10-zen0_anykernel_N9.zip?dl=0
Please make sure you have a backup plan if it doesn't work
It has almost identical to Zen-nexus 6 stuff:
- My sched_upstream_bfs_gc branch pretty much identical to the N6 kernel branch
- Not identical to the N6 branch because nvidia has a bunch of nonsense sched stat stuff I added into BFS also
- Fiops/BFQ in addition to the default stuff
- ext4 from v3.10.y stable
- newest f2fs
- usb fast charge support
- 2A charging
- fsync toggle
- upstream MM stuff from v3.10.y
- Several race condition fixes, memory leak fixes from upstream
- flar2 wake gesture support
- overclock support whatever elementalX has up to 2.5GHz
- USB fast charging
No idea if it works, please have a backup ready.
There's lots of compile warnings in the tegra kernel and I had to build myself an aarch64 compiler because I didn't have one.

bbedward said:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uekphwlxvm2pya9/v3.10-zen0_anykernel_N9.zip?dl=0
Please make sure you have a backup plan if it doesn't work
It has almost identical to Zen-nexus 6 stuff:
- My sched_upstream_bfs_gc branch pretty much identical to the N6 kernel branch
- Not identical to the N6 branch because nvidia has a bunch of nonsense sched stat stuff I added into BFS also
- Fiops/BFQ in addition to the default stuff
- ext4 from v3.10.y stable
- newest f2fs
- usb fast charge support
- 2A charging
- fsync toggle
- upstream MM stuff from v3.10.y
- Several race condition fixes, memory leak fixes from upstream
- flar2 wake gesture support
- overclock support whatever elementalX has up to 2.5GHz
- USB fast charging
No idea if it works, please have a backup ready.
There's lots of compile warnings in the tegra kernel and I had to build myself an aarch64 compiler because I didn't have one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Will test tomorrow
How did you update f2fs?

USBhost said:
Will test tomorrow
How did you update f2fs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will push the source up once I can later tonight. It's quite hefty so it will take awhile to push up the first time
The way I did everything is almost the exact same as the N6 kernel. Some nvidia garbage had to be implemented into BFS but that's it. And the device specifics like OC, 2A charging, etc.
https://github.com/bbedward/ZenKernel_Shamu/commits/f2fs_upstream
everything is exactly the same except the first f2fs commit "Sync with kernel/f2fs.git linux-3.10 branch"
There I basically just delete everything in fs/f2fs. copy/paste fs/f2fs from that branch, copy include/linux/f2fs* include/trace/events/f2fs (maybe? I forget where all the headers are exactly) and also update the Documentation/filesystem/f2fs.txt
The only reason I do that is because the f2fs/linux-3.10 branch is oddly based on linux-4.0. So simply merging or cherry picking won't work too well, and things like the msm and tegra kernel have different versions of f2fs already. So i just clear it all out and sync with that.
After that I pulled in all the newer commits from the f2fs/dev branch.

bbedward said:
I will push the source up once I can later tonight. It's quite hefty so it will take awhile to push up the first time
The way I did everything is almost the exact same as the N6 kernel. Some nvidia garbage had to be implemented into BFS but that's it. And the device specifics like OC, 2A charging, etc.
https://github.com/bbedward/ZenKernel_Shamu/commits/f2fs_upstream
everything is exactly the same except the first f2fs commit "Sync with kernel/f2fs.git linux-3.10 branch"
There I basically just delete everything in fs/f2fs. copy/paste fs/f2fs from that branch, copy include/linux/f2fs* include/trace/events/f2fs (maybe? I forget where all the headers are exactly) and also update the Documentation/filesystem/f2fs.txt
The only reason I do that is because the f2fs/linux-3.10 branch is oddly based on linux-4.0. So simply merging or cherry picking won't work too well, and things like the msm and tegra kernel have different versions of f2fs already. So i just clear it all out and sync with that.
After that I pulled in all the newer commits from the f2fs/dev branch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
O so thats how you did it
I was scratching my head with all the problems of cherry-picking I was having lol

Source is up:
https://github.com/bbedward/ZenKernel_Flounder
The real glory lives here:
https://github.com/bbedward/ZenKernel_Flounder/commits/sched_upstream_bfs_gc

bbedward said:
Source is up:
https://github.com/bbedward/ZenKernel_Flounder
The real glory lives here:
https://github.com/bbedward/ZenKernel_Flounder/commits/sched_upstream_bfs_gc
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks man

bbedward said:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uekphwlxvm2pya9/v3.10-zen0_anykernel_N9.zip?dl=0
Please make sure you have a backup plan if it doesn't work
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you provide a boot.img, to be used as in
Code:
fastboot boot boot.img
I tried with the zImage but that did not boot at all and I don't dare to flash it - yet

taronas said:
Could you provide a boot.img, to be used as in
Code:
fastboot boot boot.img
I tried with the zImage but that did not boot at all and I don't dare to flash it - yet
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you flash it through recovery? This is where it needs to be flashed.
I plan on only providing AnyKernel version for the N9 though, so it requires existing ramdisk.

Somebody has to be willing to try this for me. All you have to do dirty flash your ROM or flash another kernel if it doesn't work.

bbedward said:
Somebody has to be willing to try this for me. All you have to do dirty flash your ROM or flash another kernel if it doesn't work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Will do in a few hours
Ps I tryed what you did with f2fs
it built but data did not mount
I was encrypted also

Didn't boot for me. Tried on a 32gig encrypted n9, running cm12.1, wifi

dictionary said:
Didn't boot for me. Tried on a 32gig encrypted n9, running cm12.1, wifi
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe because CM12.1 is 5.1 based? This is all based on stock kernel.
I will look to see if there's compatibility issues.