Database Users

EB13 Kernel

Just compiled the kernel from the EB13 source. I noticed some drivers for TV-out being made.. Dont want to create any false hope but maybe this release can get us some nice features.

sounds good to me! Tv-out would be amazing for this phone!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk

Oh Man. Bluetooth emu gaming on my TV is this is true. Thanks for investigating. Excellent. Very excellent.

acburnett said:
Just compiled the kernel from the EB13 source. I noticed some drivers for TV-out being made.. Dont want to create any false hope but maybe this release can get us some nice features.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are tv out drivers in the old versions too.

I though maybe there had been. Maybe they can get them working in 2.2.

If you browse on your phone's root to
/sys/devices/platform/s5p-tvout
you'll find several files. Is this the same thing you came across?

acburnett said:
I though maybe there had been. Maybe they can get them working in 2.2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
This would finally make me thrilled with the Epic. Awesome phone but is purposely crippled too much...hope this OTA is worth the LONG wait...

farmsatguy said:
+1
This would finally make me thrilled with the Epic. Awesome phone but is purposely crippled too much...hope this OTA is worth the LONG wait...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Couldn't have worded it better myself.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App

I thought the device is hardware limited in the sense that the 3.5mm jack is missing the required connections to do TV-Out?

There are some people over in the dev section who felt there was a good reason to try and get it working.. After looking into the source code a bit deeper, it seems the last changes to any of the driver files (tv-out and hdmi are both mentioned) was in November. So they havent really done much to it recently.

ZenInsight said:
Oh Man. Bluetooth emu gaming on my TV is this is true. Thanks for investigating. Excellent. Very excellent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what I had in mind also. Hopefully someone will get SOME kind of tv out working. Playstation Suite (for GB only) on a big screen would be pretty cool!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App

[Q] Xoom Honeycomb Port

So, seeing as we all want us some Honeycomb, what would it take to get the Honeycomb on Xoom ported to Adam?
Sent from my ERIS GSBv2.1 using XDA App

Honeycomb source AND some packages from NVIDIA for the harmony dev board supporting HC.
We will also be able to port it over from the Malata tablets once they get it.

Why harmony if NI is switching to Ventana?
Sent from my ERIS GSBv2.1 using XDA App

Amon Darthir said:
Why harmony if NI is switching to Ventana?
Sent from my ERIS GSBv2.1 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's the quick version: Rohan is on something.

Amon Darthir said:
Why harmony if NI is switching to Ventana?
Sent from my ERIS GSBv2.1 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you link to your source for this?

no6969el said:
Can you link to your source for this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's where he first says it. According to then and their sources, only Ventana can run Honeycomb.
http://notionink.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/in-the-mean-time/
And I believe they've already made the switch to Ventana.
http://notionink.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/991/
Sent from my ERIS GSBv2.1 using XDA App

So its alot harder then just changing out the drivers then huh?
Sent from my ERIS GSBv2.1 using XDA App

Well, the update they released after that still said Harmony

Most likely because its still 2.2. NVidia says they are only supporting Ventana going forward from 2.3. Can anyone confirm which the Xoom is running?
Sent from my ERIS GSBv2.1 using XDA App

So I'm guessing that we just don't have a developer with enough skills to get us any Honeycomb love. The Nook is running the SDK and we don't even appear to have anyone trying. Running the SDK at the least would be better than nothing.

get to it then
Sounds like you have your work cut out for you. I can promise if it was currently possible we have ppl on it.

Amon Darthir said:
So I'm guessing that we just don't have a developer with enough skills to get us any Honeycomb love. The Nook is running the SDK and we don't even appear to have anyone trying. Running the SDK at the least would be better than nothing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The issue is the way the SDK emulates the processor among other things. Its not possible and many skilled devs have tried plus having a $1100…+ bounty.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App

Why do people not use the search functions, or services like google(we all have a google android device right)? Look no HC till we get the source code or can straight copy from device "A" with HC that is the same thing as device "B" without hc. SDK is the preview, it has no graphic acceleration and is ment for computer based emulation or single core emulation, like which is found in the nook color. People leave HC alone, if a DEV makes it, thank them with all your heart, dont stress them with trying to appease the mass. More than likely you should start spamming the forum with request for icecream because honeycomb may never be available to us because of googles decisions with the source.

Can a dev put a simular post like this
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=974503
for this forum

I still fail to see why we NEED to have source. With the similarities between the Xoom and the Adam (same processor etc) what else do we need to make a port? Why is the source so important?

Amon Darthir said:
I still fail to see why we NEED to have source. With the similarities between the Xoom and the Adam (same processor etc) what else do we need to make a port? Why is the source so important?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source is important to get everything working correctly. However, porting is possible if someone has the knowledge on how to do it. The devs that have these devices are darn good at what they do but we are hurting in this particular area. Not much to be done about it though.

daiuton said:
Can a dev put a simular post like this
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=974503
for this forum
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you don't like these posts then quit reading them. Stuff like this is hilarious coming from a newb.

blazingwolf said:
Source is important to get everything working correctly. However, porting is possible if someone has the knowledge on how to do it. The devs that have these devices are darn good at what they do but we are hurting in this particular area. Not much to be done about it though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats what I figured. I would work on it if I had any idea of what to do. I just do some app developing though so I have no skills. Thing is the emulator doesn't work well enough for me to test out my app. Thats why I'm asking what it takes to get this thing ported. I need it running like yesterday.

Amon Darthir said:
Thats what I figured. I would work on it if I had any idea of what to do. I just do some app developing though so I have no skills. Thing is the emulator doesn't work well enough for me to test out my app. Thats why I'm asking what it takes to get this thing ported. I need it running like yesterday.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What issues are you having with the emulator?
If you can't get that working take your app in to a store that sells the XOOM (Verizon, Staples, BestBuy, etc), load it up on there to test and then delete it when your done. Not the most elegant solution but it will work in a pinch.

blazingwolf said:
What issues are you having with the emulator?
If you can't get that working take your app in to a store that sells the XOOM (Verizon, Staples, BestBuy, etc), load it up on there to test and then delete it when your done. Not the most elegant solution but it will work in a pinch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha. Very true. The problem is as of last night the project file is 829 MB. Thats why it won't run on the emulator. I don't know how to get it to accept however large that APK file will be once compiled. Other then the emulator just being slow thats my main problem. I can live with the slowness though. Just need to give it a ton more memory. Haha.
O. And the file is only going to get larger if things go as planned. Haha

Just a disappointment :(

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1073930 - the original thread
https://github.com/doixanh/X8Features - the github source
Are there any DEVs willing to compile this in there ROM (lookin at you ACS) lol I have wanted this so badly, but am unwilling to take the performance hit that ee03 causes compared to SRF 1.1.1.

Dont take the dive to gb
Even though the devs try hard some things just cannot be
Like taking the crap**** gb leak and turn it into gold
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA Premium App

gtuansdiamm said:
Dont take the dive to gb
Even though the devs try hard so things just cannot be
Like taking the crap**** gb leak and turn it into gold
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This makes no sense? The developer dioxanh got this to work perfectly on froyo and put the source on github for other DEVS to compile for there ROMs. It can be because he has done it

I meant that the gb link is über slow and it probably wont get better till the next leak
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA Premium App

All the Epic ROM's with the exception of MIUI and CM7 are NOT compiled from source code.
They are merely customizations and hacking based off of the compiled libraries. It would likely be impossible to reverse engineer this into any of the ROM's. It would need to be done in Smali... if that's even possible..

Syndicate is in fact compiled from source if I'm not mistaken, that's why they always wait for a few days source leaks to release.

TheDub said:
They are merely customizations and hacking based off of the compiled libraries. It would likely be impossible to reverse engineer this into any of the ROM's. It would need to be done in Smali... if that's even possible..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Look all I know is that this DEV made it possible to implement into custom ROMs for froyo. It says so clearly in the forum I posted if you had bothered to read it at all.

Actually read it .. Good work on dev for doing this! .. But it must be cooked into roms only and only works for a few roms
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App

I know Impaler and Mystery and others are busy workin on 1.2, and It would be cool if they lookd into implementing this into it.

jspsuperman said:
Look all I know is that this DEV made it possible to implement into custom ROMs for froyo. It says so clearly in the forum I posted if you had bothered to read it at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did "bother" to read it. It's Froyo source code to implement this feature. We don't have 100% of Samsungs source code for Froyo/Eclair/Gingerbread, they don't release it.
We only receive the kernel source code. This could only be baked into a Froyo based AOSP ROM which other then the very dated CM6 we do not have.
The kernel source code and the entire operating system (AOSP) are two completely different things, and the code to make this work isn't in the Kernel it's in the Framework.
ACS's ROM is not AOSP.
AOSP: Android Open Source Project - I'm using it to reference having the entire operating system's source code available, not just the kernel.

I wasnt aware that only the kernal source was released. What a bummer if a sony X8 can do this but our epic cant without gingerbread

Yeah just the way it is...
Most phones don't have 100% complete source drops, the popular two phones that do of course are the Nexus One and Nexus S, this is why the Nexus phones so easily get ROM's like CyanogenMod working. With the Epic and Galaxy S developers are forced to "rewrite" lots of code to get things interfacing with the Samsung proprietary drivers properly.
If we had 100% of the source code I don't doubt ROM's would be very different today, there would have also been a official CyanogenMod by now I'm sure.
If you want to see for yourself what Samsung releases you can go to:
https://opensource.samsung.com/
Do a search for I9000 for example and download one of the releases (I looked at I-9000-Opensource.zip)
You will see a few files in there.. one labeled kernel, the other eclair.
The kernel one is obvious, the eclair one contains only the hardware libraries.
So unfortunately, this really isn't possible in any of our existing Froyo ROM's, except CM6.
PS: I9000 is the model number for the European Galaxy S.

jspsuperman said:
I wasnt aware that only the kernal source was released. What a bummer if a sony X8 can do this but our epic cant without gingerbread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't mess with TheDub

qbking77 said:
Don't mess with TheDub
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apparantly lol That sucks but I guess gingerbread will be official soon enough then we will have somthin else kickass from U ACS folk lol

063_XOBX said:
Syndicate is in fact compiled from source if I'm not mistaken, that's why they always wait for a few days source leaks to release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is not true, just so you know.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App

Why Atrix developers doesn't seem like to dev directly from ICS AOSP?

Usually, (for other devices of course), ICS roms that are developed from AOSP tend to be more stable, less buggy and better than CM9 roms, so im kind of curious why Atrix developers have decided to work on CM9, even thought its far from complete?
Just a question.

djluis48 said:
Usually, (for other devices of course), ICS roms that are developed from AOSP tend to be more stable, less buggy and better than CM9 roms, so im kind of curious why Atrix developers have decided to work on CM9, even thought its far from complete?
Just a question.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
because CM9 is what we all want in the end.

djluis48 said:
Usually, (for other devices of course), ICS roms that are developed from AOSP tend to be more stable, less buggy and better than CM9 roms, so im kind of curious why Atrix developers have decided to work on CM9, even thought its far from complete?
Just a question.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not 100% but I think the developers need something from the moto/nvidia which is why the rom was ported from the photon and not just built From the ground up .
Again not 100%
Sent from the Atrix of Chuck Norris.

djluis48 said:
Usually, (for other devices of course), ICS roms that are developed from AOSP tend to be more stable, less buggy and better than CM9 roms, so im kind of curious why Atrix developers have decided to work on CM9, even thought its far from complete?
Just a question.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
NVidia won't release the drivers and sources required to accomplish this, so a 1/2 ass port is all that can be done at the moment. This has nothing to do with the devs. They are giving us the best they can with what they have right now.

djluis48 said:
Usually, (for other devices of course), ICS roms that are developed from AOSP tend to be more stable, less buggy and better than CM9 roms, so im kind of curious why Atrix developers have decided to work on CM9, even thought its far from complete?
Just a question.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please open eyes before posting. Development are working hard and doing what they can.
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium

JayRolla said:
Please open eyes before posting. Development are working hard and doing what they can.
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not saying that they arent working hard, just asking why they choosing CM9 instead of AOSP 4.0, just a simple question. And ponting out that builds based on AOSP seems to be more solid and stable than builds based on CM9, mostly because CM9 itself its still not from complete
Sent from my MB860 using XDA

Also, IIRC, they're borrowing heavily from CM7 for our current CM9 builds. I believe we'll see more options when we finally get official source and drivers in Q3.
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium

CaelanT said:
NVidia won't release the drivers and sources required to accomplish this, so a 1/2 ass port is all that can be done at the moment. This has nothing to do with the devs. They are giving us the best they can with what they have right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please read the above before commenting again! If you had read it the first time you would not have posted what you did below!.............Or maybe you still would have, who knows!!! You can program all you want for an AOSP ROM, but without device specific drivers you can never optimize for any one device. Simple as this, for any ICS on the Atrix, whether AOSP, CM9, MIUI, or whatever, you still need device drivers. Try running your NVidia graphics card in your computer without a driver................yeah, see what I mean (but then again you might like 640 x 480!)!
djluis48 said:
Not saying that they arent working hard, just asking why they choosing CM9 instead of AOSP 4.0, just a simple question. And ponting out that builds based on AOSP seems to be more solid and stable than builds based on CM9, mostly because CM9 itself its still not from complete
Sent from my MB860 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BTW...........Please link the AOSP 4.0 builds for the Atrix you are referring to!

CaelanT said:
Please read the above before commenting again! If you had read it the first time you would not have posted what you did below!.............Or maybe you still would have, who knows!!! You can program all you want for an AOSP ROM, but without device specific drivers you can never optimize for any one device. Simple as this, for any ICS on the Atrix, whether AOSP, CM9, MIUI, or whatever, you still need device drivers. Try running your NVidia graphics card in your computer without a driver................yeah, see what I mean (but then again you might like 640 x 480!)!
BTW...........Please link the AOSP 4.0 builds for the Atrix you are referring to!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're rude.

Purple Drama Llama said:
You're rude.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No! I already answered the question earlier in the thread, but OP obviously is not reading and persists.
Both my posts were quite nice actually!
Bye!
BTW, why no comment about this post being rude?:
JayRolla said:
Please open eyes before posting. Development are working hard and doing what they can.
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

CaelanT said:
BTW...........Please link the AOSP 4.0 builds for the Atrix you are referring to![/B]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Woops, i forgot to tell that i was refering to other devices AOSP 4.0 ROMS, but if you are as inteligent as you seems to be, you should have known that because the Atrix actually doesn't have any rom coded from AOPS 4.0, at least on this forum.
The roms i was refering to was ICS Passion and ICS Euforia, both made by the same developer, Neobuddy, made for the Samsung Vibrant, a 1ghz phone, with 512mb for ram, without official drivrrs released, and the rom is more stable than the current Atrix ICS builds (no offend, i recongnize the guys are doing a great job making it happen), and almost as smooth as a the builds, and that phone is in a similar condition driver-related, that its, without any drivers being released. Thats why my doubt came, why the developers chiosed CM9 as a base, even thought it isnt really stable yet, and not completed, and why builds made from AOSP 4.0 tend to be more stable?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA

djluis48 said:
Woops, i forgot to tell that i was refering to other devices AOSP 4.0 ROMS, but if you are as inteligent as you seems to be, you should have known that because the Atrix actually doesn't have any rom coded from AOPS 4.0, at least on this forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And that's why I asked you to link them. You are comparing AOSP ROM's on other devices to CM9 on other devices. Because you see something run more smoothly on one device, does not directly mean it will run smoothly on another device. In any event, your question was answered in as far as there are drivers and source that the devs do not have in order to make any ICS based ROM's work optimally on the Atrix. If I had to hazard a guess as to why the devs are using CM9 as a base, it would be because the groundwork has been laid for them. The Atrix doesn't have an army of devs, so we get a smaller mix of options with ROM's.

CaelanT said:
And that's why I asked you to link them. You are comparing AOSP ROM's on other devices to CM9 on other devices. Because you see something run more smoothly on one device, does not directly mean it will run smoothly on another device. In any event, your question was answered in as far as there are drivers and source that the devs do not have in order to make any ICS based ROM's work optimally on the Atrix. If I had to hazard a guess as to why the devs are using CM9 as a base, it would be because the groundwork has been laid for them. The Atrix doesn't have an army of devs, so we get a smaller mix of options with ROM's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The OP was asking why the Atrix doesn't have AOSP ROM's.. so you.. ask him to link them?
I've been lurking around the forums since the release of this phone and you have got to be one of my favorite posters so far, give me a good laugh every time.
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium

Celidonius said:
The OP was asking why the Atrix doesn't have AOSP ROM's.. so you.. ask him to link them?
I've been lurking around the forums since the release of this phone and you have got to be one of my favorite posters so far, give me a good laugh every time.
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wrote something about that yesterday but in the mist of trying to add a pic xda app fc'd.
+1
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium

I kind of think I get what the OP is asking. He's asking why build a really souped up race car where as a regular car is just as fine. Seems like he's not picky and he would be content with anything stable vs anything available now. But that's another thread isn't it?
Sent from my MB860 using XDA

Request "enable usb audio for dac device " mod or kernal

This "Enable USB audio", requesting by user to standardize USB audio on Android smartphones/tablets, is currently ranked 7 of 20,775 on google just in 6 month only...
Anyone can let me know which kernal or rom is support this feature well ??
so that i can use my DAC device on s2 just like apple product
(known ;redpill kernal...)

No SGS2 kernels support it. And I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for one. Very unlikely to happen.

Try out redpill with Hyperdroid Androidmeda to see if it works for you... Doubt it will though.

MistahBungle said:
No SGS2 kernels support it. And I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for one. Very unlikely to happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you please explain a bit more WHY it is unlikely to happen? I would be thrilled to have such feature

Doktor-Prase said:
Could you please explain a bit more WHY it is unlikely to happen? I would be thrilled to have such feature
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There was a bounty for this, but none claimed it. Thats why it wont propably happen. It would be still nice to have.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium HD app

MistahBungle said:
No SGS2 kernels support it. And I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for one. Very unlikely to happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i had just found 1 ...but he said "Experimental: USB Audio support for DAC devices"
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1288850

karendar said:
Try out redpill with Hyperdroid Androidmeda to see if it works for you... Doubt it will though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok thks ..i try to flash it now ..

100 bucks says it doesn't work. Better devs than that guy have had a look at it & gone 'Nup".
You won't see this on SGS2 given development is very much mature (I.E closer to being no more development than development just starting) for that phone with a new model out & devs beginning to move on.
Only way you might get it is if you either code it yourself or a dev who personally wants to use this feature puts himself thru the crap of coding it.

Well the sgs3 supports it en a lot of developers have succeeded in running it on other devices such as the archos 9 tablet.
Would it realy be that hard to implement the usb sound driver files into a kernel and rom?
Isnt it a basic alsa driver?

There is an official google thread request on this where you can subscribe.