So, let me start off by saying that I have searched, read and spent time trying to understand this... but still don't. Which answers why I'm posting this question.
First, what exactly is the reason that an AOSP rom is being developed and a Vanilla Froyo ROM is being developed?
Is the AOSP rom the important one here? Does the working AOSP rom with working kernel mean that we would have 2.2, 2.3.... and so on supported regardless of Samsung?
I understand that Samsung has not supported tremendously up to this point, I understand 2.2 has not been released for the CDMA version yet, and I understand the code they have released is "crappy." When I hear everyone talk about the great work the devs are doing, are they referring to mainly working on the AOSP? If this rom is built, will we be able to just keep developing it for the new versions of Android?
Sorta like in Back to the future when they break off the real timeline and go into the alternate 1985?
Samsungs Android - 2.1, 2.2.... EOL
Dev's Android - 2.1, AOSP, 2.2, 2.3?
Is this how it works? Basically just trying to understand what needs to happen for the Fascinate to get to at least 2.3... not WHEN or even IF it'll get to 2.3.
Thanks
AOSP means Android Open Source Platform.
It's a version of Android built entirely from sources provided by Google. It's completely Vanilla and comes with zero customer or manufacturer customizations. It's easily root-able, and able to be customized completely by the user if desired.
AOSP ROMs are desirable because they tend to be a bit faster and lighter due to their lack of crapification.
AOSP builds are only distributed in their complete and compiled form by Google for their developer handsets (Currently the Nexus One and Nexus S), and not by any carrier or manufacturer.
Okay, I appreciate that definition... I think I've gotten what AOSP is exactly... but I guess my question is does AOSP have any involvement in a future for this phone if Samsung decides to close its doors. Is a working AOSP, radio, kernel... whatever basically devs developing a future of this phone parallel to whatever Samsung does for it?
Like, I see from other threads that the ROM for Froyo and Gingerbread isn't necessarily the problem, its the radio and the RIL? If that is the case, what needs to happen for everything to figured out and for us to have a bright future for the Fascinate? Samsung has to release code for the RIL and radio? Are we SOL without Samsung helping here or will the devs definitely figure something out to get 2.2, 2.3... and so on for the Fascinate?
Bwangster12 said:
Okay, I appreciate that definition... I think I've gotten what AOSP is exactly... but I guess my question is does AOSP have any involvement in a future for this phone if Samsung decides to close its doors. Is a working AOSP, radio, kernel... whatever basically devs developing a future of this phone parallel to whatever Samsung does for it?
Like, I see from other threads that the ROM for Froyo and Gingerbread isn't necessarily the problem, its the radio and the RIL? If that is the case, what needs to happen for everything to figured out and for us to have a bright future for the Fascinate? Samsung has to release code for the RIL and radio? Are we SOL without Samsung helping here or will the devs definitely figure something out to get 2.2, 2.3... and so on for the Fascinate?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's kinda like building an office park, or strip mall or something. You toss up the basic vanilla buildings, and when it's finally done, companies move in and tweak it how they deem fit.
With a working ASOP build, it'll remove some of the shackles of Samsungs bs code.
So... the AOSP build IS THE KEY here? I understand it isn't working yet, but if the devs get AOSP working, does that mean we will get a 2.2, 2.3 and so on regardless of what is released by Samsung?
I'm just trying to figure out what is happening to keep the G1, Droid, Droid 2... supported by ROMs like Cyanogenmod and others, that hasn't happened yet for the Samsung Fascinate.
I'd like to get the Fascinate, but am sorta waiting because I don't wanna be stuck with a phone for the next 2 years that will max out at MAYBE 2.2 if we are lucky.
I don't know where to start with your confusion.
Samsung has not given 2.2 to us. This means that we do not have froyo...
The RIL is an interface layer between the os and the radio. I'm not too sure about it, but anyways...
The developers are working around the fact that samsung has not given further tools that they need to get froyo ported over. Currently they are working on a 1.6 RIL to get froyo working. On another note, vanilla aosp is a good thing because it gives developers more freedom to customize the roms. It also allows for them to be able to port over other roms.
I really don't understand your confusion. If you want a better explanation , I recommend getting on irc.
If I were you, I'd wait. Next gen phones are coming from vzw in the next few months which will essentially blow the existing tech soon.
Bwangster12 said:
So... the AOSP build IS THE KEY here? I understand it isn't working yet, but if the devs get AOSP working, does that mean we will get a 2.2, 2.3 and so on regardless of what is released by Samsung?
I'm just trying to figure out what is happening to keep the G1, Droid, Droid 2... supported by ROMs like Cyanogenmod and others, that hasn't happened yet for the Samsung Fascinate.
I'd like to get the Fascinate, but am sorta waiting because I don't wanna be stuck with a phone for the next 2 years that will max out at MAYBE 2.2 if we are lucky.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Basically, that's the hope at least. If there are changes in say, 2.4 that require something that couldn't be hacked around with ASOP, we'll be stuck waiting for Samsung. But with a working ASOP, the groundwork is laid for updates to be ported over a bit more quickly by the devs.
Regardless of the future of this device, the Fascinate is one of the better Android handsets on the market. The screen is brilliant, it's the perfect size, and it's damn fast. The only thing that drags it down is the factory setup (although I personally think it's idiotic to ding the phone because of the inclusion of Bing like some people/reviewers have.)
I'm trying to understand what is going on instead of being one of the millions to ask about updates for this phone. I see phones like the droid series and read that they basically are being supported forever and then I see the Samsung Fascinate, and while I understand that the code is crappy/not released to community... I'm trying to figure out what needs to happen for it to be a supported device like the droids have been.
Bottom line, nothing at all is going to happen unless Samsung releases more than just a 2.2 update? If I see 2.2 drop like tomorrow, does that mean anything for a future, or is it just 2.2 update and we will just get devs releasing their versions of 2.2 roms?
RacerXFD said:
I really don't understand your confusion. If you want a better explanation , I recommend getting on irc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I read his questions as:
"Will a working ASOP build mean better developer support/faster developer released updates?"
I did skim them though.
RacerXFD said:
If I were you, I'd wait. Next gen phones are coming from vzw in the next few months which will essentially blow the existing tech soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a good point. There's an LTE Samsung handset coming out soon, so it might be worth holding out for a little.
Although the Fascinate is no slouch.
Pretty much what I am asking. Like of everything that could possibly happen, Samsung releasing 2.2, AOSP being finished, blah blah what is the key that a consumer should look for to say...
"Well, now the Fascinate has no negatives to it and I have no fear that in a year, we won't still be stuck on 2.1 or 2.2 because Samsung screwed us."
Doesn't necessarily seem like Samsung needs to do MUCH to future this phones life and turn over the keys to the devs (like HTC seemingly has done), but I'm trying to understand what that thing is they need to do. Release a newer kernel, RIL, 2.2 ROM, some code that magically allows devs to port over future roms eternally...
I don't think I care if the phone has LTE capability. I won't get LTE and a regular 3G phone is beyond enough for me. LTE is zero impact for me.
Bwangster12 said:
Pretty much what I am asking. Like of everything that could possibly happen, Samsung releasing 2.2, AOSP being finished, blah blah what is the key that a consumer should look for to say...
"Well, now the Fascinate has no negatives to it and I have no fear that in a year, we won't still be stuck on 2.1 or 2.2 because Samsung screwed us."
Doesn't necessarily seem like Samsung needs to do MUCH to future this phones life and turn over the keys to the devs, but I'm trying to understand what that thing is they need to do. Release a newer kernel, RIL, 2.2 ROM, some code that magically allows devs to port over future roms eternally...
I don't think I care if the phone has LTE capability. I won't get LTE and a regular 3G phone is beyond enough for me. LTE is zero impact for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What does SAMSUNG need to do? Release their source code, and not just incomplete parts of it.
Will that happen? I doubt it, but it might. Clearly the companies ears are perking up with all the yelling by the consumers.
What can we do in the meantime? Support the devs and wait for them to crank out a working ASOP build and Froyo.
Yes, would be nice to have a fully working AOSP build, and then Froyo... but they are seperate from each other right?
AOSP build is being done for 2.1? It can't just be magically updated to 2.2 can it? Does Froyo have to be officially released for them to update it to AOSP 2.2?
Basically... AOSP will only be updated to whatever version Samsung has released?
Bwangster12 said:
Yes, would be nice to have a fully working AOSP build, and then Froyo... but they are seperate from each other right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. Android Open Source Project means "Android" in general. It can be 2.1, 1.6, 2.3, whatever. The devs elected to start with 2.1.
AOSP build is being done for 2.1? It can't just be magically updated to 2.2 can it? Does Froyo have to be officially released for them to update it to AOSP 2.2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you've followed anything in the dev folders, clearly not. JT's "Vanilla" Froyo looks like an AOSP build.
Basically... AOSP will only be updated to whatever version Samsung has released?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. At least not our version.
Bwangster12 said:
Yes, would be nice to have a fully working AOSP build, and then Froyo... but they are seperate from each other right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's hard to answer your question because AOSP and Froyo refer to two completely different things, which can be the same or separate.
AOSP is basically Android, built from clean, unmodified source code directly from Google, without any changes by carriers or manufacturer.
Froyo is simply the 2.2 version of Android.
So, you can have Froyo that's modified by a carrier and/or manufacturer. This wouldn't be AOSP. And you can have Froyo, built directly from Google code. This would be AOSP. You can also have Eclair (Android 2.1), or any other version of Android that's AOSP or not AOSP depending on whether it was built directly from Google code, or modified by a carrier or manufacturer.
AOSP doesn't refer to a single, particular version of Android, but the state of the code that was used to compile whatever version you want to talk about.
Bwangster12 said:
AOSP build is being done for 2.1? It can't just be magically updated to 2.2 can it? Does Froyo have to be officially released for them to update it to AOSP 2.2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of the issue surrounds the kernel. When Google releases a new version of Android, it runs on a particular version of the kernel, which supports it's particular features. Manufacturers have to modify the kernel to support their particular hardware. So, since Samsung has only released source code for the kernel for Android 2.1, we're stuck on 2.1.
The versions of 2.2 from Kaos and JT are running on the Android 2.1 kernel that's been hacked to enable 2.2 to boot and run correctly. It works, but it's far, far from ideal. It doubles (if not more) the amount of work necessary to get 2.2 running, which is the reason for the rather slow pace of development.
So for your question, once Samsung releases 2.2 (the system and kernel), it'll be much easier to get an AOSP build of Android running, since the devs will only need to worry about the system instead of hacking together a kernel and RIL (radio interface layer) as well.
At least this is my understanding of the situation. I'm sure people with more knowledge and experience can correct me where I'm wrong, but I think this is the basic gist of it.
ChrisDDD said:
It's hard to answer your question because AOSP and Froyo refer to two completely different things, which can be the same or separate.
AOSP is basically Android, built from clean, unmodified source code directly from Google, without any changes by carriers or manufacturer.
Froyo is simply the 2.2 version of Android.
So, you can have Froyo that's modified by a carrier and/or manufacturer. This wouldn't be AOSP. And you can have Froyo, built directly from Google code. This would be AOSP. You can also have Eclair (Android 2.1), or any other version of Android that's AOSP or not AOSP depending on whether it was built directly from Google code, or modified by a carrier or manufacturer.
AOSP doesn't refer to a single, particular version of Android, but the state of the code that was used to compile whatever version you want to talk about.
A lot of the issue surrounds the kernel. When Google releases a new version of Android, it runs on a particular version of the kernel, which supports it's particular features. Manufacturers have to modify the kernel to support their particular hardware. So, since Samsung has only released source code for the kernel for Android 2.1, we're stuck on 2.1.
The versions of 2.2 from Kaos and JT are running on the Android 2.1 kernel that's been hacked to enable 2.2 to boot and run correctly. It works, but it's far, far from ideal. It doubles (if not more) the amount of work necessary to get 2.2 running, which is the reason for the rather slow pace of development.
So for your question, once Samsung releases 2.2 (the system and kernel), it'll be much easier to get an AOSP build of Android running, since the devs will only need to worry about the system instead of hacking together a kernel and RIL (radio interface layer) as well.
At least this is my understanding of the situation. I'm sure people with more knowledge and experience can correct me where I'm wrong, but I think this is the basic gist of it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, thank you for this answer... this makes sense to me.
So, have HTC and Motorola released newer kernels for the devs of roms like Cyanogemod to update their ROMs, despite HTC and Motorola not actually releasing newer versions? I mean, how is the G1 updated as far as it has. Did HTC release a 2.2 kernel to allow devs to put 2.2 on it?
That's were I'm start confused as well.
I understand that Samsung has some proprietary kernel level code and drivers.
But, I'm curious what is the difference between Linux kernel versions used for different versions of Android. It doesn't sound like major version change and hence should not change anything dramatically. It should be mostly bug fixes. That's why jt was able to get kernel work.
As in relation to ASOP for SF, I see it like attempt to adapt Samsung code to current android interfaces. Once again, these interfaces should not change dramatically between versions, because these are evolutionary. So, I assume when done it is pretty much paved road up to 3.0 at least. That said some new features might not work at all, because we do not have working initial binaries from Samsung.
By the way mrbirdman has GB in progress.
Alright... so this may sound like I'm oversimplifying it, but I don't mean to.
Why can't the dev community just create a "custom" kernel to work with their versions of 2.2, 2.3 and so on? You say that they are working to hack the 2.1 kernel Samsung has released so it allows 2.2 to run on the Fascinate... but why can't they just make a 2.2 kernel? Is that sorta what Cyanogenmod is doing to get a 2.2 Froyo build to work on a G1?
Based on the amazing things I've seen the dev community do, building ROMs from scratch, I guess I don't understand how the kernel can't be built specifically for each new version... forgetting about what Samsung releases.
Bwangster12 said:
Why can't the dev community just create a "custom" kernel to work with their versions of 2.2, 2.3 and so on?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Theoretically they could, it would just be a lot of work. Hardware drivers might not be compatible with the kernel version designed for 2.2 or 2.3. I don't think manufacturers are required to release the code for their drivers, so if a driver wouldn't work, one would need to be written from scratch, and without the detailed knowledge of the hardware itself, that is very difficult.
Hardware support is very integral to the kernel, so a kernel for one phone wouldn't run at all on another. So in addition to the difficulty of putting together a totally independent kernel, it would need to be done separately for each and every phone out there, and how many versions of the Galaxy S alone are there? How many HTC phones, how many Motorola and LG and Sony and so on.
It's just not realistic for people doing this, essentially, in their spare time.
So, what the devs generally do is wait until a carrier releases a version of Android (System, kernel, radio, etc.), and with all the hardware support in place and working, they can focus on building custom or AOSP versions of the system.
It's not that they couldn't build their own kernel, it's just a matter of practicality, audience and the shelf live of the particular phone. As it is, a new generation of phones are already either coming out or on the near horizon... and our phone is what, 4 to 5 months old?
Bwangster12 said:
Based on the amazing things I've seen the dev community do, building ROMs from scratch, I guess I don't understand how the kernel can't be built specifically for each new version... forgetting about what Samsung releases.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The misunderstanding is in the complexity of compiling a custom system, and developing a custom kernel. They are hugely different in terms of complexity.
Think of a ROM as taking Windows 3.1 and simply tweaking the components that are installed by default - what accessories are installed, what wallpaper is selected, the color scheme of the windows. Not terribly complicated.
Think of the kernel as having to compile DOS, complete with custom drivers for all the hardware - CPU, graphics, memory, storage, multitouch, sound, radio, modem, WiFi, networking, power management, USB support, file system support, etc. all by hand.
Related
I'm new to Android but not new to Linux and wondering what is necessary to get these ROMs (and others) working on the CDMA Hero. What are the major differences, proprietary drivers? Kernel modules?
New Cyanogen ROM, just released
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=567610
In other words, what's stopping us from running these ROM's right along with G1/Dream users?
I'm curious also... would love to try his roms...
Since Android 1.6 was supposed to add CDMA support I would think they should work as well as 2.0 unless the developers have taken the cdma support out of the code in their roms to shrink the size to fit on the G1's.
If I had a Hero I would be giving it a try most likely. I might try picking one up this week since Best Buy has them down to $99. I just wish it had a keyboard.
I'll try when I get home from work.
On a side note, even if this rom doesn't work, I should be able to boot into the recovery rom no matter what... riiiiiiight?
herzzreh said:
I'll try when I get home from work.
On a side note, even if this rom doesn't work, I should be able to boot into the recovery rom no matter what... riiiiiiight?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct! The recovery image isn't touched by normal ROMS typically.
I'm tempted. Can this be applied right over the MoDaCo ROM?
I have tried a couple things with these. I tried flashing it outright. Wouldnt get past the initial htc boot screen. So I replaced the kernel in the boot.img of Cyans rom with ours, that still didnt work. Then I tried replacing the entire boot.img and still no boot working. I think Donut uses the 2.6.29 kernel or whatever it is. Ours is .27 so I think we would need to recompile the .29 kernel and pray our drivers work with it. Please, someone else try it too and see if they can get it working. I would love you forever if you could. If not, we will just have to wait until HTC gets us Eclair.
Thanks
Thanks for trying this, chuckhriczko and others.
I'm mainly coming at this from the pure Linux point of view: shouldn't these ROM's run anywhere (barring proprietary bits)? Shouldn't we be able to "share and share alike" between platforms, Hero/Dream/G1/whatever? If there is a chip architecture difference, fine then we need a recompiled kernel. Obviously there is also the question of firmware, but that's a given on all phones.
Otherwise, shouldn't these ROM's be fairly universal? Or if they are not, I'd like to know what makes ROM building such a unique endeavor for each phone.
5tr4t4 said:
Thanks for trying this, chuckhriczko and others.
I'm mainly coming at this from the pure Linux point of view: shouldn't these ROM's run anywhere (barring proprietary bits)? Shouldn't we be able to "share and share alike" between platforms, Hero/Dream/G1/whatever? If there is a chip architecture difference, fine then we need a recompiled kernel. Obviously there is also the question of firmware, but that's a given on all phones.
Otherwise, shouldn't these ROM's be fairly universal? Or if they are not, I'd like to know what makes ROM building such a unique endeavor for each phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe it's mostly the proprietary drivers for some of the hardware as well as needing a kernel recompile...once HTC releases the CDMA kernel, I'm sure we'll see a lot more (that or some genius will reverse engineer it...either way!)
The other thing to consider is that most of these ROMs are based on something...they take what's existing and tweak the heck out of it (I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of ROMs can trace their roots back to an official vendor image at some point).
I'm actually trying to setup a build environment and poke around but I'm starting from ground zero on the mobile platform side of things so I wouldn't hold out for me (and finding a Java 1.5 runtime is surprisingly hard these days ).
I'm noticing that we're seeing more and more ROM's pop up (primarily gutted ROMs focussed on eeking more speed as opposed to MoDaCo who went for more features).
thecodemonk said:
I believe it's mostly the proprietary drivers for some of the hardware as well as needing a kernel recompile...once HTC releases the CDMA kernel, I'm sure we'll see a lot more (that or some genius will reverse engineer it...either way!)
The other thing to consider is that most of these ROMs are based on something...they take what's existing and tweak the heck out of it (I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of ROMs can trace their roots back to an official vendor image at some point).
I'm actually trying to setup a build environment and poke around but I'm starting from ground zero on the mobile platform side of things so I wouldn't hold out for me (and finding a Java 1.5 runtime is surprisingly hard these days ).
I'm noticing that we're seeing more and more ROM's pop up (primarily gutted ROMs focussed on eeking more speed as opposed to MoDaCo who went for more features).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What OS are you using? If your using a Debian based linux then you can get it from the Debian Lenny repositories. One word about this though, it killed my existing Java 1.6 so I had to reinstall it when I needed it. Otherwise that works.
And yeah, we are primarily doing gutted roms because that is all we know up to this point. It is very difficult to find help from those who know all about recompiling a kernel and things like that. Like I said, I couldnt get Cyanogen to even boot on my phone but obviously, it should at the very least do that. But only one dev on these forums ever helped me with my CDMA roms and that was Mlign from the Dream forums. Everyone else (understandably busy) ignored me. Im not saying anything bad about them but it's just harder for people to learn. Patience will give us what we desire though.
vendor tree for cyanogen heroc
im a noob and dont know how to build it but its here:
http://github.com/darchstar/vendor_cyanogen_heroc
Thread gravedigging much?
yes haha i want cyanogen on my hero lol
So, coming from a string of G1's and a Nexus, I cannot stand SenseUi. At ALL. I can live with the widgets and launcher- they are actually tolerable- what I cant accept are the keyboard, the way contacts are brought up, the lack of cut/paste in several areas, and all the frilly crud that goes along with it. I seek a TRUE vanilla rom, based on Android components not HTC. People constantly recommend using advanced launcher or one similar, but these are just launchers- they dont change the stuff back to stock that I seek. So my question is, can there ever be a REAL vanilla rom that has none of the Sense components? Is it possible to de-theme these areas in similar fashion to how the current de-sensing works, or would it require that HTC releases a vanilla version (which they never will). I guess I am asking, am I fighting a loosing battle?
You are coming from an N1 and asking this question?
Really?
Cyanogenmod ring a bell?
i was in the same boat as you. i am on cyanogen now, however there are a few issues with this port. on the nexus i didn't ever have any issues with cm6 but on the incredible you have to install another kernel after you install cm6 so that the camera will work, the camcorder just doesn't work yet, and when i have wifi on i get a reboot about once a day. i live with it because like you i hate sense ui but i wish they would have released a n1 for verizon. they did just release the source code for 2.6.32 which is froyo today, so the code shoulod be added into the nightlies of cm6 shortly.
It's been said that the latest radio fixes many (if not all) of those problems in Cyanogen on DInc. I can't attest to this being true or not, but some people were talking about it last night in the "Unrevoked - Forever" thread in the dev section.
cool! so there is hope. I figured the CM rom would be truly vanilla, but since it had so many little oddities I haven't given it a go yet. Good to know there is the possibility. Thanks guys
gospeed.racer said:
cool! so there is hope. I figured the CM rom would be truly vanilla, but since it had so many little oddities I haven't given it a go yet. Good to know there is the possibility. Thanks guys
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The new .32 kernel source that was just released will also allow koush to finish CM6 for the incredible. Basically now that this new kernel is out the bluetooth stack and everything else including the camcorder not working in CM6 will all work once implemented.
Even though the bluetooth works perfect in CM6 unlike normal senseui roms. /letting out BT steam
...
I wonder when this will be ready?
Let me start by saying I'm fairly new to Android, and that this probably should go in a general Android forum, but since I'm a Fascinate user, this seems appropriate to me. I've searched, but haven't found a real explanation, and I'm not one to take things as fact without a reasonable explanation.
So it seems like everyone is waiting for an official 2.2 release for the Fascinate, flashing 2.1 ROMs but not capable of upgrading to 2.2+; but I'm wondering why we can't just compile our own OS for our phones? Android is a Linux-like OS, and I know Linux users would never stay on an old version if a newer (better?) version was available. I'm talking down-and-dirty tweak-every-option-by-hand Slackware here. Is the source available for download? If so, why can't we do something with it? Is something in the phone completely locked and unhackable? Is it the fear of having a $500 paperweight? Is it difficult to regain Verizon network connectivity?
Again, forgive the noob question, and thanks in advance for any help you can give me!
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=792986
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=883004
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=882946
There is currently work being done by jt, birdman, and the other skew of developers trying to develop a working AOSP version of 2.2/2.3. The biggest struggle that they have encountered was the RIL (Radio Interface Layer) binaries. Samsung produced some bogus complex proprietary binaries with no properly working source code. Because this phone is CDMA and not GSM, we can't simply use galaxy s files.
Anyways, the point is that there is work being done to bring it to our phone. They have a working AOSP 2.1 that is currently in alpha stage. Jt basically built his own RIL for this phone to get it working.
If this RIL works, we may end up with 2.3 sooner than later.
eulipion2 said:
Let me start by saying I'm fairly new to Android, and that this probably should go in a general Android forum, but since I'm a Fascinate user, this seems appropriate to me. I've searched, but haven't found a real explanation, and I'm not one to take things as fact without a reasonable explanation.
So it seems like everyone is waiting for an official 2.2 release for the Fascinate, flashing 2.1 ROMs but not capable of upgrading to 2.2+; but I'm wondering why we can't just compile our own OS for our phones? Android is a Linux-like OS, and I know Linux users would never stay on an old version if a newer (better?) version was available. I'm talking down-and-dirty tweak-every-option-by-hand Slackware here. Is the source available for download? If so, why can't we do something with it? Is something in the phone completely locked and unhackable? Is it the fear of having a $500 paperweight? Is it difficult to regain Verizon network connectivity?
Again, forgive the noob question, and thanks in advance for any help you can give me!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You obviously have not searched hard enough, as this has been discussed in many places. I would suggest you start by searching this forum (edit: or seeing the links and posts above).
I will say, however, that recent achievements by (edit: the developers mentioned above) have made your suggestion quite possible. If you want to get a taste of what is to come, see the aosp alpha sticky located in the development section. The rom still has bugs, but it is a giant step forward for the Fascinate.
Sent from my Galaxy-S Fascinate
Florynce said:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=792986
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=883004
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=882946
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^^^^^
10char
I must add/point out that the work these guys are doing could easily pave the way for Cyanogenmod- and other well-featured roms to be compiled/ported and used on Fascinate as well.
I've read the above links, but they didn't really quite answer my question. I guess I'm wondering why a Linux-based OS isn't acting/being treated like a Linux-based OS.
Let's say I go out and buy a new computer today. I want to put Linux on it. I get the machine home, download my distro of choice and make an install cd. As I'm installing, I configure the installation either for my specific hardware or I can use a generic profile if my hardware isn't listed.
Now say a new version of the Linux kernel comes out. I can upgrade without having to wait for a version for my hardware. Or if I install MyDistro v1 when I get my machine, and MyDistro v2 comes out the next day, I don't have to wait for someone to develop a version to work with my hardware.
So my question is more of a why can't we upgrade our distro like other Linux variants? Is it because there's no generic replacement for the Samsung RIL? If I were to download the source and do a generic build, or even a specific one, I wouldn't be able to install it because...?
Sorry to be a pain, but I genuinely have no clue. Again, thank you for the insight!
2.2 will boot on the I500 just nothing works. If you would like to help http://opensource.samsung.com/
The source code can be found there. Please feel free to help the development along.
I suggest you read through the reply's to your question and pay special note to those bringing up the RIL as that seems to be the biggest hurdle right now.
I think maybe the answer you are looking for is that it is possible to do it, it's just extremely difficult because Samsung's open source is very shoddy and isn't based on AOS, which is what is used for most other phones.
Since the developers don't have a build that works, they have to work from the ground up with AOS and get every last feature on the fascinate working without using Samsung's code (TouchWiz, widgets, etc).
The links they gave you explain most of it but you have to sift through the posts. There is a dev named jt (amongst others) who is working on a ROM that is upgradable based on AOSP and it looks very promising.
edit: It's also worth noting that when I say "not based on AOS" I mean that it is proprietary software used by Samsung-only phones and is not coded by Google. It still, of course, is based on Android OS. It would be akin to a ROM coded by Samsung for their phones rather than generic ROMs that could be downloaded by other phones.
Perfect, thanks!
Try thinking of it as buying an Ubuntu laptop from dell. Sure its " Ubuntu" but not stock. It so full of bloat and badly written drivers that aren't supplied openly for the user that it would be hell trying get the latest version of ubuntu to run on it.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
For clarification.... so I can wrap my brain around this. Is this situation kinda like having bought a new computer that's running an os, but has no installed device drivers and nowhere to download them from, so they have to be written by hand?
Edit: that last post came thru while I was writing this one, I think it basically answers my question...
So what the devs on here are trying to do is develop a "generic" profile that can work on our phone (as well as others?), creating a solid base to allow users to upgrade and change at-will without having to wait for official releases?
See, that's the part I'm having a hard time with. No generic profile built into the OS to use in the absence of a hardware specific one?
LoverBoyV said:
Try thinking of it as buying an Ubuntu laptop from dell. Sure its " Ubuntu" but not stock. It so full of bloat and badly written drivers that aren't supplied openly for the user that it would be hell trying get the latest version of ubuntu to run on it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On a sidenote, I bought a Dell netbook witih Ubuntu. Didn't waste time with Ubuntu, but I chose it because I didn't want MS to get money from a license fee. Installed Mac OS X on it the day it arrived
Ya know, I tried to do the same thing with my inspiron 1525 notebook, with snow leopard 10.6.3 since I have a spare hard drive. Spent a whole day with numerous guides, trying this n that. Got it to actually boot to the desktop once, bit as I was putting the drivers in, it went into KP and from that point on, I could never even reinstall back to the desktop again.
Well, Samsung is giving us a simple/reliable update to Froyo with unique functionality, as soon as possible.
Source: (Twitter, About 12pm 1/2/2011 from Samsungtweets via Cotweet - http://twitter.com/Samsungtweets/samsung-usa )
Samsungtweets We are working to make the Android 2.2/Froyo upgrade available to all U.S Galaxy S owners as soon as possible.
Samsungtweets We want Galaxy S owners to have simple/reliable upgrade. We r running tests due to complexity/unique functionality
EDIT: gave more specific time and source of tweets. Post is meant to be objective, without definition of ASAP for this context.
Swyped w/ XDA App. When in doubt, mumble.
soba49 said:
Well, Samsung is giving us a simple/reliable update to Froyo with unique functionality, as soon as possible.
Source (Twitter, 6 hours ago):
Samsungtweets We are working to make the Android 2.2/Froyo upgrade available to all U.S Galaxy S owners as soon as possible.
Samsungtweets We want Galaxy S owners to have simple/reliable upgrade. We r running tests due to complexity/unique functionality
Swyped w/ XDA App. When in doubt, mumble.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure if this is meant to be funny or not haha. Are those recent tweets?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
They seem to post the same things over and over, of course this is also because people constantly ask when is froyo coming, and every time they say there is no definite date. It is coming soon that that is all they will say; yelling, moaning and crying isn't gonna make it come any sooner, just sit back and it will eventually come.
Hello,
This was brought up in another thread that is now locked.This post asked the question.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=11287492&postcount=40
and this is the blog post by Cyanogen
http://www.cyanogenmod.com/home/a-note-on-unofficial-ports-and-how-to-get-it-right
From what I can make from the blog post that Cyanogen put up on the CM website the Epic 4g as well as the other Galaxy S CM ports are not backed by Cyanogen because they do not go through the normal chain of how they add their code into their source code tree.The Galaxy S CM github has many changes to the stock android code that could possible and probably does break the code from being compiled for other phones. The framework is modified to work with the Samsung RIL that our phones use. The CM team will make additions to the stock android code not modifiy the stock code itself. So from my understanding of thing this is why Cyanogen does not consider what the CMSGS team has done as a part of the mainline CM code base. I believe this goes for all the Galaxy S phones not just the Epic.
Does being backed by the CM team make it get done any quicker? If so....
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Being backed by the Cm team would definitely speed up the porting process, Cyanogen had the Evo Release Client up and running in a little over a month without source
So its a matter of pulling the source together and prperly placing it into their source control so their build bot can properly dov what build bots do...build...then CM helps with the port process?
If I think I'm following that right...somone better start uploading code to Cyanogens t&c's(terms and conditions) so we can have some epic awesomesauce.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Most importantly, no major hardware functionality should be broken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What this statement implies is that no Cyanogenmod port is ever gonna be official right away; there's always an in-progress period where major functions are broken. Regardless of other issues, that's where our Epic port is at right now and part of the reason why it's not official.
Poryhack said:
What this statement implies is that no Cyanogenmod port is ever gonna be official right away; there's always an in-progress period where major functions are broken. Regardless of other issues, that's where our Epic port is at right now and part of the reason why it's not official.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True but there is code that is changed in the Galaxy S port that doesn't get changed at all in other CM ports as far as I know.
If we had HTC Epic's instead of Samsung Epic's and still identical devices... CM would officially support the Epic.
Period. They can say whatever they want but we all know this to be the case. You can't tell me Samsung changes their code that much more then HTC... last I checked Sense was a much more in depth overall to the underlying OS then Touchwiz is.. but maybe not.
The thing is, HTC uses the same hardware across the board (snapdragon processors, same camera etc.) which makes Rom ports much much easier to pull off, whereas the Hummingbird in the Galaxy S is only in the Galaxy S and only the Unlocked Galaxies and Gsm have froyo source so far.
Thanks for osting this skeeter
Android Creative Syndicate- From spontaneous ingenuity, comes creative brilliance
063_XOBX said:
The thing is, HTC uses the same hardware across the board (snapdragon processors, same camera etc.) which makes Rom ports much much easier to pull off, whereas the Hummingbird in the Galaxy S is only in the Galaxy S and only the Unlocked Galaxies and Gsm have froyo source so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The changes in the code have nothing at all to do with the cpu its all for the radio which even having froyo source will not help a bit with.Its all in the way the code changes were done. Rather then adding to the base code in CM the code was directly changed which is what Cyanogen has an issue with doing so basically could and probably has broken the radio code for other cdma phones, I don't know what or if any of the code in the frameworks was changed for the gsm Galaxy S phones so I can't say for sure that it the source from the CMSGS github wouldn't work on another GSM phone I only know that changes were made to get it working on the Epic and Fascinate.I don't think what the CMSGS team did was wrong they did what they had to do to get things working and from the time I spent working on it it didn't seem like there was much input from the CM team at all but that was probably happening in another irc channel that I was not invited into if they were involved.I was hoping that the Galaxy S would have had more interest from the CM team as a whole I know a phone or two was collected and donated to at least one dev and i also heard that Koush was supposed to take over the Captivate port of CM I am not sure if that ever happened or not but the Epic and Fascinate were from the beginning the red headed step children of the Galaxy S line it really is too bad that there wasn't for developers around to help work on it and make an offical Cyanogen backed CM port.I blame it all on the Evo personally if the Epic came out first it would be the Epic sporting all the kernel and roms that you can find in the Evo forum instead we are left with a handful or less of devs and a phone that is far from the potential that it has.
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
dreamsforgotten said:
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where's the thank spam? hah.
I've slowly been dipping myself into the Developer 'pool' for the epic if you will..and at first when I started working nobody really ever helped out..they just threw me a link and was like..start reading blah blah blah..
Reading only gets you so far; Imho you learn better when you've got the experience of working first hand with the material you're trying to learn.
dreamsforgotten said:
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When it comes to working on CM most of the work that needs to be done is all coding which we have very few if anyone java coders. Also you can use extract-files.sh on a phone running straight DK28 to get the propietary files needed to build CM with.When it comes to everything else most of the devs have taught themselves how to do the things they so by trial and error and alot of reading the internet. I know I have little coding skill so its would be hard to teach someone something you don't know how to do yourself and alot of the other things like putting togther device files to build android even on the google site has no real information on how to do it at all the best way I think is to just compare what the other phones use and piece it together from that.
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
theimpaler747 said:
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I can see its not that Cyanogen doesn't want to support the galaxy s devices its that it seems they don't give any input to the devs that are working on CM for the galaxy s. They have basically split off from the main CM source tree itself and run their own source tree. It seemed like (and this is from the limited amount I saw on irc) that there was no input from the CM team they just let them work on their own. CM has ways to setup the code so the source tree remains workable across the board on all the devices it supports, the cmsgs team has just taken a different route on things and gone their own route thus making it not backed by cyanogen, was it the right way to do it who knows but it has made all the galaxy s devices redheaded step children in the eyes of Cyanogen and the CM team as a whole by the looks of it. I know from the point of view of having an Epic the major hold up to it is having coders with the proper skills to do the coding in general we had one coder working on it I don't know if he is still involved or not at this point. All I know is to make is a backed by Cyanogen CM port the coding that has been done so far would have to be completely redone in the ways that the rest of the CM team adds code to the CM source tree with as little to no modification of the stock CM code as possible.
Also I would like to add that I am not trying to put anyone down that is working on the CMSGS team they have done CM working on these devices and am in no way bad mouthing the work that has been done. This is just my view on things and why Cyanogen doesn't back the galaxy s CM ports.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
theimpaler747 said:
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, trying to comprehend everything that is going on here, I feel like the CMTeam does not feel the Epic is worth porting to CM7 due to it's delay on a FroYo source, which I am positive would make the Epic's porting much easier.
However, it still makes me wonder why they could not have used 2.1 to port to CM7, as like you said, the Hero has been able to do.
It also confuses me that the Captivate has even been able to run a Gingerbread port (I believe cyanogen) then. I realize that the Captivate has no 4G or a slide or anything, but the fact that they were willing to work off of 2.1 I assume gets me wondering why no one has tried making a CM port for the Epic's 2.1
I am trying to understand this as best as I can, so please forgive me if I seem to be giving false input on this conversation.
Its the time taken to port a phone, combined with the number of phones above yours on their list. The fact is they have a list of other phones they feel like investing their time in over the galaxy s line in general which is even more of a reason all knowledge of development on the Epic should be layed out even in pieces like the rest of the information here. Honestly thinking "leak it to noobnl, then we'll get all the goods" isn't going to cut it. Java coders, ubuntu fanatics who have compiled a few apps, and new people willing to learn should be putting heads together compiling new ****. If we dont start a group effort of making a bone stock aosp froyo altering the existing drivers were not going to be much further with source code. And it should be layed out here irc dont work for everyone.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
acer1096xxx said:
Well, trying to comprehend everything that is going on here, I feel like the CMTeam does not feel the Epic is worth porting to CM7 due to it's delay on a FroYo source, which I am positive would make the Epic's porting much easier.
However, it still makes me wonder why they could not have used 2.1 to port to CM7, as like you said, the Hero has been able to do.
It also confuses me that the Captivate has even been able to run a Gingerbread port (I believe cyanogen) then. I realize that the Captivate has no 4G or a slide or anything, but the fact that they were willing to work off of 2.1 I assume gets me wondering why no one has tried making a CM port for the Epic's 2.1
I am trying to understand this as best as I can, so please forgive me if I seem to be giving false input on this conversation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But like I said, there's CM7 (Android 2.3 if you don't know) for the HTC hero, with no 2.2 or 2.3 source code. So why not us?
theimpaler747 said:
But like I said, there's CM7 (Android 2.3 if you don't know) for the HTC hero, with no 2.2 or 2.3 source code. So why not us?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright, this is what I believe.
The Hero does not have 4G, or a QWERTY keyboard, two things the Epic does have that could make a pure AOSP port more difficult without a source. Also, HTC runs Snapdragon throughout the whole system, making tweaks a lot more simpler than SGS's Hummingbird Processor, which uses something else (I can't remember) with their system as well.
The last part I'm not sure if that makes a big deal or not, since I have seen a (what I think) CM7 port for the Samsung Captivate, so it may simply be because of 4G and the QWERTY keyboard.
I see what you're saying though. I guess the CMTeam should have no problem making a CM7 port based off of the Epic's 2.1 source...maybe they're just waiting because 2.2 might make it easier and supposedly 2.2 is coming soon so there'd be no point in starting now...otherwise I have no clue.
acer1096xxx said:
Alright, this is what I believe.
The Hero does not have 4G, or a QWERTY keyboard, two things the Epic does have that could make a pure AOSP port more difficult without a source. Also, HTC runs Snapdragon throughout the whole system, making tweaks a lot more simpler than SGS's Hummingbird Processor, which uses something else (I can't remember) with their system as well.
The last part I'm not sure if that makes a big deal or not, since I have seen a (what I think) CM7 port for the Samsung Captivate, so it may simply be because of 4G and the QWERTY keyboard.
I see what you're saying though. I guess the CMTeam should have no problem making a CM7 port based off of the Epic's 2.1 source...maybe they're just waiting because 2.2 might make it easier and supposedly 2.2 is coming soon so there'd be no point in starting now...otherwise I have no clue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think we also have 'limited functionality' w/ 2.1 as far as the phone's full capability.
2.2 will unlock some hidden potential IMO. Could be the reason why all the hubbub to 'wait for 2.2'.. again, just speculating.
Here's what Cyanogen said on the Official CyanogenMod Forums.
http://www.cyanogenmod.com/home/a-note-on-unofficial-ports-and-how-to-get-it-right
With this said, why don't we jump on the bandwagon and just join the CM team? Why don't we make this thing official (if we haven't tried already)? Just a thought, so don't kill me with your opinions. The Devs here are freakin' legit here and I'd like to see 'em do some of the work on the CM Team.
I trust the devs I download from because I follow their work. I don't need it to be "official". Besides, I like the personal touch and one-on-one support I get right here on the xda eris forum. And there's variety.
We could debate the politics of branding and what is CM and what is not CM. But the devs here disclose their sources, changes, known issues and brand their roms as uniquely their own while providing the support and updates. I don't think there's any confusion as to what is 'official' and what is not as the Android Police article referenced in CM's statement implies.
+1. The devs here are excellent, and the devs that base there ROMs on CM list them as "based" on CM not the official CM ROM. I'm not aware of any confusion that this has caused. I'm also not sure what creative constraints would be put on our devs if they went CM. I like the way they individualize the roms for thier personalities and their audiences. I also am not sure what benefit would come with being an "official" CM rom. Just my 2 cents.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not discrediting the Developers that cook these ROM by ANY MEANS whatsoever. They do incredible work with what they push, but here's what I'm saying. The CM ROMS are based off of Official CM Source Code, yes, but I think we'd be making it way easier on ourselves and the developers if we were an actual part of CyanogenMod. If we were a part of CM, then we'd get the CM ROMS as perfect as they can get and THEN the developers can add their own customization to a ROM based off of the Eris Release of CyanogenMod. They all are already doing the work that it would take to actually /BE/ a part of the CyanogenMod team, so why not get on with CyanogenMod so we can be official, and THEN the devs can customize and tweak ROMS they way they see fit?
Once again, absolutely NO discredit to the developers here, and I understand what it takes to keep these ROMS current and I am very appreciative of their work.
The CM ROMs that we have are either built from CM source or ported from the Hero builds already. I'm not really sure what this would give us other than maybe a "go team go" feeling and maybe a little more help than we already get. But the Eris and CDMA Hero are so similar, that doesn't matter much in my opinion as long as any Hero issues get worked out.
The CM buildbots are just building from source and posting the results, much like you would get if you ran EasyDev or did it manually. Now, there's a lot of work going on before that with the code, of course. But... That's what we use too.
I'm not against this at all. It just means that someone will have to 1) want to do it 2) have the time 3) convince Team Douche to let them in. I seem to remember that someone asked early on and the response was that we had to send them an Eris. This might have changed.
This comes up every so often. I guess one of us can find out what we would need to do at least...
Nothing would really change for the end user if we became official cm at this point. Basically one of the devs here that builds from source would submit their vendor tree to the cm source and they would be responsible for maintaining it just like we do now. The only real difference would be that it would get built by the cm build bot and nightly's would be released. I tweeted to cyanogen about getting my 2.2 tree in there along time ago when 2.2 was new but either I did it wrong(not a twitter person lol) or it just got lost in the many many tweets that go through cyanogens account. I never really pushed the issue more because of the extra time it would take me personally and it was just easier to work on my own schedule.
The only added benefit would be that maybe if there was an issue we could not fix then the cm team would take an extra look at our specific phone to help out but really since our phone is so close to the hero and it has official support they sort of fix most of our bugs anyway. I've personally always tried to give the cm team all the credit they deserve(which is alot) and I think the other dev's do the same.
Here's what Cyanogen posted up to www.cyanogenmod.com a week or so again. It looks like we'd need an interested dev here to stop by #cyanogenmod-dev on Freenode to start the process.
I think (and I use xtrSENSE, so I could be wrong) that a lot of people would like and "official" CM port for the Eris, just so they'd have "peace of mind" knowing they've got something "official."
And again, as we've seen mentioned in this post, it couldn't hurt to ask. Provided Team Douche doesn't actually want an Eris, we only stand to gain extra help on our ports.
Cyanogen said:
There’s been some recent talk about unofficial versions of CyanogenMod being created and released on sites like XDA, with large amounts of missing features and broken functionality, and I just wanted to talk about our position on this.
An “official” CyanogenMod version is one that uses our code review system, our source repository, and our mirror network. It should look, act, and feel like CM on any other device, and more importantly, it should follow our release schedules (which is a “when it’s ready” kind of thing, but we do plan our final/RC releases when we feel it’s ready). Most importantly, no major hardware functionality should be broken.
We want to see CM available for every device out there, and our infrastructure (and our developer community) is there for anyone to use. We spend a lot of time making new releases of Android backward-compatible with devices that are not ready for them, and we also spend much time making all of these (sometimes not so pretty) changes co-exist together without breaking other devices. The more eyes on your code, the better it will be.
That said, as much as we’d like it to be, the CMSGS project is not yet an official part of CyanogenMod. There are also a number of other unofficial ports out there which haven’t been submitted to us that we’d love to include. If you’re interested, stop by #cyanogenmod-dev on Freenode. If you didn’t get it from our mirror network or the CM forums, don’t expect it to be up to our standards.
The biggest thing to keep in mind when porting to a new device is to think about how your change is going to affect other devices. This is the biggest reason why we aren’t supporting Samsung devices other than the Nexus S yet. Don’t change hardcoded default values just to suit your device. Use the configuration options available, or add new ones with the original values as defaults. Do a build for another unrelated device after you make your changes (it helps to have another device to test with, of course) and verify it as well. Android was made for this, so do it right.
Like I’ve said so many times before, CyanogenMod is all about the community. And our community can help you too. I’d love to see more of these ports contributed to the project- it’s only going to make things better. We’ve grown from just a mod to what I’d call an “Android distribution” and we need to keep our standards high.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh no, does this mean we're all running unofficial CM ROMs ?
Wait, everything is working fine though... Official, unofficial, pffft
hallstevenson said:
Oh no, does this mean we're all running unofficial CM ROMs ?
Wait, everything is working fine though... Official, unofficial, pffft
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 10 char......
A dev would have to maintain the device and be committed to building it up, like Darchstar was (is?) for the Hero CDMA. It really all depends on the Dev/Devs for the device, for example I've seen Cyanogen say in his twitter that he would also like to see the Dream/Saphhire continue to be developed for but no one has stepped up to maintain it. I can also only imagine that there are some qualifications for someone to maintain a device. Here is a list of the current maintainers for the devices
https://github.com/cvpcs/android_vendor_cyanogen/blob/gingerbread/CHANGELOG.mkdn
Yeah, I can understand that. That's all I was saying, though. If they were doing all of the same work anyway I just thought it would be nice to have. I also didn't know if anyone had pursued this in the past, but seeing as how Conap had already tried I think I'm good with that. I also have no problems running the unofficial ROMs, just so you know. Thanks, guys!
It's not like we just want it to be official... but porting a ROM has its downsides. There's nothing to say devs couldn't take a ROM that is NATIVELY supported for the eris (and not for the hero) and do exactly what they already do... we would just be cutting out work for them and it would definitely effect the end user.
Hungry Man said:
It's not like we just want it to be official... but porting a ROM has its downsides. There's nothing to say devs couldn't take a ROM that is NATIVELY supported for the eris (and not for the hero) and do exactly what they already do... we would just be cutting out work for them and it would definitely effect the end user.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the way i do it is best for me,,and seems to be going fine,,, the cm7 ports have been alot better then the froyo ,, and alot faster ,, look how long it took the froyo camera to work,, gb the camera works outta the box,,
Hungry Man said:
It's not like we just want it to be official... but porting a ROM has its downsides. There's nothing to say devs couldn't take a ROM that is NATIVELY supported for the eris (and not for the hero) and do exactly what they already do... we would just be cutting out work for them and it would definitely effect the end user.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is more than one definition of porting that people are using around here.
1) Porting to an unsupported device = compiling source, building a vendor tree, and getting it to work on said device (This is basically what the CyanogenMod team would do to make it an official build, although they would integrate the changes into the main source. The changes would mostly still be in a separate vendor tree in the repo. And it would be 'official'. From a practical/technical view, what workshed is doing is the same thing that the CM team would do.)
2) Porting an existing build to an unsupported device = taking an existing, already compiled ROM and making it work on said device (This is what tazz is doing with the Heroc build. This works out well when going from the Heroc.)
Anyone, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that I have that right.
The only downside that I see from either of these is MAYBE not getting quite the support that we would get if the Eris had an 'official' build. I really don't think it's affecting much of anything, IMHO. It might in the future as the Heroc and Eris become more and more dated devices. But then, many of you won't really care because you're kids will be using them as mp3 players anyway while you use your fancy, new quad core HTC Destroyer 6G. (What's a Beiber?)
gnarlyc said:
There is more than one definition of porting that people are using around here.
1) Porting to an unsupported device = compiling source, building a vendor tree, and getting it to work on said device (This is basically what the CyanogenMod team would do to make it an official build, although they would integrate the changes into the main source. The changes would mostly still be in a separate vendor tree in the repo. And it would be 'official'. From a practical/technical view, what workshed is doing is the same thing that the CM team would do.)
2) Porting an existing build to an unsupported device = taking an existing, already compiled ROM and making it work on said device (This is what tazz is doing with the Heroc build. This works out well when going from the Heroc.)
Anyone, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that I have that right.
The only downside that I see from either of these is MAYBE not getting quite the support that we would get if the Eris had an 'official' build. I really don't think it's affecting much of anything, IMHO. It might in the future as the Heroc and Eris become more and more dated devices. But then, many of you won't really care because you're kids will be using them as mp3 players anyway while you use your fancy, new quad core HTC Destroyer 6G. (What's a Beiber?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought it was a girl
tazzpatriot said:
I thought it was a girl
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its a dude.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zb64y6Nvs0
refthemc said:
Its a dude.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zb64y6Nvs0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nope still a girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwIa2S0YQs4
FYI: http://twitter.com/cyanogen/status/45246447385452544
@cyanogen said:
@Algamer we don't officially support the eris, it would be nice if someone doing the porting joined up with us though
about 8 hours ago via web in reply to Algamerhttp://twitter.com/Algamer/status/45235578886815744http://twitter.com/Algamer/status/45235578886815744
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think OUR devs are doing just fine. Why change now?
wildstang83
wildstang83 said:
I think OUR devs are doing just fine. Why change now?
wildstang83
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Our devs are doing more than just fine, especially considering the amount of development we STILL have going on even though the Eris was a short-lived device that was EOL'd after like 8 months, was mid-range compared to the original Droid, and is a pretty niche device being MDPI on Verizon...
Why change now? That's a good question and I don't have a great answer. Like some have said on this post, maybe we'll get more support with bugs, etc. Additionally, a lot of the users here on XDA are looking for consistency. Since many who read and post here lack the skill set to do any meaningful ROM development themselves, they rely on the kindness of willing devs. However, devs will often add their own "personal touches" to their ROMs, which is great and well within their right to do. Having said that, many users are just looking to for something where they know, "Oh OK, so this is the base CM ROM that's officially distributed."
Personally, I don't care whether we have an "official" CM build or not for the Eris. I'm pretty reserved when it comes to ROMs for everyday use and am still using xtrSENSE as my default. The only reason I posted up cyanogen's recent tweet was to show that cyanogen himself is well-aware of the Eris development, is personally following the Eris ports, and is open to a partnership. My hope is that, by bridging communication, I am doing my part in helping to expose any possible mutual benefit (Eris XDA devs, ROM end-users, and Team Douche at CM) that could be gained by considering an "official" build. Ultimately, I understand that this is a decision that can only be made by the devs and also, not fulling understanding ROM development or having the skill set myself, I believe they are in the best position to make that decision. Like I said, I'm merely acting as a messenger, bringing this communication to light on our forum.