So why is it that gps works on 2.2 bland 2.2.1 but not 2.3? Just wonderibg
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA Premium App
I believed this is because the devs don't have actual source code yet.
we need drivers and the only way to come about hose would be an official vibrant gb kernel.
Im no expert but... wouldn't a person like eugene be able to make the drivers it would work?
Honestly, how much smarter are the people at samsung than the people on this forum???
I hope that was a joke.. the effort required to develop drivers for GPS without source code is immense for anyone that wasn't directly involved in the software development for the phone, hence no GPS working with 2.3 on the vibrant. The GPS in the i9000 galaxy s isn't the same as the vibrant, and there isn't a 2.3 rom leaked or released for the vibrant. That's why our 2.3 roms don't have GPS functioning.
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA Premium App
jwleonhart said:
Im no expert but... wouldn't a person like eugene be able to make the drivers it would work?
Honestly, how much smarter are the people at samsung than the people on this forum???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Eugene told the vibrant community to proverbially suck it if I recall correctly.
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA Premium App
jwleonhart said:
Im no expert but... wouldn't a person like eugene be able to make the drivers it would work?
Honestly, how much smarter are the people at samsung than the people on this forum???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's like me asking you to build an engine from scratch. I mean, you've probably been in a car. You may even know how to drive it. Maybe change out the washer fluid? Fill it up with gas? Maybe even change the oil!
So if you can do all of that, you should be able to design, fabricate, and build a fully functional, great engine from scratch... Right? It's a pretty important piece of a car - sure - but you work with cars every day!
Not trying to be (too much of) an ass here, but really. Coding drivers is a difficult, very time-consuming task. There's a bit of a difference between coding to directly interact with the hardware, and hooking into existing APIs and modifying existing code. Has nothing to do with smarts. It has to do with resources. Easy testing access to the direct hardware. Money. Time.
I don't really know what's involve in the GPS drivers but I would think that if we get the source for 2.2.1 and make it work, it shouldn't be that that to make it work in 2.3. I am missing something here? I wrote up some linux drivers before, it's not exactly a sacred thing.
brulee said:
I don't really know what's involve in the GPS drivers but I would think that if we get the source for 2.2.1 and make it work, it shouldn't be that that to make it work in 2.3. I am missing something here? I wrote up some linux drivers before, it's not exactly a sacred thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're missing the point because you're not even seeing what your typing. No we don't have source for 2.2.1 but do you not see those first two numbers. This means that because 2.2.1 is still Froyo we didn't need to update the GPS drivers because they didn't change. Now we are talking about Gingerbread which is 2.3 and a completely new build.
Think of it in terms of windows. When Vista SP1 was released it meant very little when it came to hardware for those already running Vista. Now when Win 7 came out some of you drivers had to be updated. Some things didn't work right off and if you've purchased any hardware in the last 5 years such as a mouse or keyboard you've likely seen the sticker saying Vista compatible or Win 7 compatible.
Does any of this make sense?
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA Premium App
How about this for a related and potentially dumb question. What's the technical reason why a vibrant 2.2 kernel couldn't be used with a 2.3 system. In the Linux desktop arena, a huge variety of kernels can be used with a huge variety of userland.
brulee said:
I don't really know what's involve in the GPS drivers but I would think that if we get the source for 2.2.1 and make it work, it shouldn't be that that to make it work in 2.3. I am missing something here? I wrote up some linux drivers before, it's not exactly a sacred thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
then you should have no problem getting us gps on 2.3...
funeralthirst said:
then you should have no problem getting us gps on 2.3...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would just like to say that you have made my morning. Thank you. ===================================================
explodingboy70 said:
You're missing the point because you're not even seeing what your typing. No we don't have source for 2.2.1 but do you not see those first two numbers. This means that because 2.2.1 is still Froyo we didn't need to update the GPS drivers because they didn't change. Now we are talking about Gingerbread which is 2.3 and a completely new build.
Think of it in terms of windows. When Vista SP1 was released it meant very little when it came to hardware for those already running Vista. Now when Win 7 came out some of you drivers had to be updated. Some things didn't work right off and if you've purchased any hardware in the last 5 years such as a mouse or keyboard you've likely seen the sticker saying Vista compatible or Win 7 compatible.
Does any of this make sense?
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your answer @explodingboy. I know when there is a new version of OS, most if not all drivers have to be ported over. You actually answer my question though -- you don't even have source for 2.2.1!
P.S. I am new on this forum and there is some rule here that I have to wait 5 minutes to edit my post. :-(
Captivate must've gotten their leak because their GPS works
dcontrol said:
Captivate must've gotten their leak because their GPS works
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On 2.3? Can you post a link to this as proof?
Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk
dcontrol said:
Captivate must've gotten their leak because their GPS works
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The captivate users are lucky in that their GPS works with the i9k files. Its been that way for most if not all of the i9k 2.2.1 roms from Samsung.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
geoffcorey said:
The captivate users are lucky in that their GPS works with the i9k files. Its been that way for most if not all of the i9k 2.2.1 roms from Samsung.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I honestly don't get this. Hardware wise (excluding supported bands) the captivate and the vibrant have the same gps chip. The only difference is software wise: the vibrant uses one software/driver implementation, the captivate another (Which honestly makes no sense.....). In *theory*, the drivers/software implementation should work with our gps chip. Correct me if I'm wrong (Note: I've used the plumbob gps fix for the captivate with some success on the vibrant).
compuguy1088 said:
I honestly don't get this. Hardware wise (excluding supported bands) the captivate and the vibrant have the same gps chip. The only difference is software wise: the vibrant uses one software/driver implementation, the captivate another (Which honestly makes no sense.....). In *theory*, the drivers/software implementation should work with our gps chip. Correct me if I'm wrong (Note: I've used the plumbob gps fix for the captivate with some success on the vibrant).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its probably because the north korean samsung made the vibrant and the south korean samsung made the captivate and you already know they dont get along.
Re
Here's the confusing thing for me, we had gps for 2.2 after eugene made it work with the leak from the i9k. So now that we have a 2.3 release from Samsung what makes it different. Did gingerbread somehow make gps different. My point is that when we were first getting 2.2 roms gps came quick.
edit: Im not complaining just curious.
compuguy1088 said:
I honestly don't get this. Hardware wise (excluding supported bands) the captivate and the vibrant have the same gps chip. The only difference is software wise: the vibrant uses one software/driver implementation, the captivate another (Which honestly makes no sense.....). In *theory*, the drivers/software implementation should work with our gps chip. Correct me if I'm wrong (Note: I've used the plumbob gps fix for the captivate with some success on the vibrant).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Totally agreed with your assessment! There must be some hardcoded data for the Asian built version vs. North American. Would a binary diff give us some hints? But then if you don't have the source, you can't rebuild the damn thing!
Related
Anyone smarter than me know if we can work off of this at all?
supercurio said:
See, you just need to ask
Galaxy S with Nexus S kernel - Booting Nexus S Android Gingerbread
Videos are here:
http://www.youtube.com/supercurioxda
What's about this port:
- It uses the Nexus S kernel compiled from sources
- It runs the exact /system image release, we dumped yesterday. (I spent the night of it so it's still the same day!)
Am i French ?
Now you don't have any doubt anymore
Which filesystem ?
This early preview runs on Ext4. no RFS at all, the kernel don't support RFS.
Does everything work ?
Nope, but I must admit I didn't expect such a result.
Don't work: GPS / Voice / Wifi / some Buttons / camera
Work: everything else: like sound, GL acceleration etc
Will it work ?
I think most of it will work after countless hours spent on it.
Is it flashable with Odin ?
That's a good idea <Gregounech>, i think i'll do that tomorrow.
Do you work alone ?
I worked alone to produce this preview, but not to produce the dump yesterday.
Credits go the IRC channel #NSdev on freenode !
What about a team ?
That's the goal. Rendez-vous on IRC so we can produce ports and improve the quality very fast of this.
Is this opensource ?
Everything will be released after i get some sleep!
Edit: for inpatients, I pushed the latest initramfs : https://github.com/project-voodoo/nsonsgs-initramfs
Articles:
http://briefmobile.com/samsung-galaxy-s-android-2-3-gingerbread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
Yea I read this too.. Hopefully fascinate gets a port
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Not sure. Still more or less a noob dev. Not sure how difficult it its to adapt the gsm port for cdma. thoughts anyone?
Would definitely be interested in seeing this happen.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
pfarrelliv said:
Not sure. Still more or less a noob dev. Not sure how difficult it its to adapt the gsm port for cdma. thoughts anyone?
Would definitely be interested in seeing this happen.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have been obsessively following efforts at cyanogen forums and this forum... i am pretty on top of things, and i am NOT aware of any success taking kernels/roms/images from GSM and having them work on CDMA...damn right depressing
The problem is deeper than just kernel. There are fundamental issues as to why we're not already on 2.2...
I'd go into it, but this thread isn't about that. Plus, I am not a programmer, so I don't want to overstep my bounds.
It's significantly easier to port things on GSM versions of phones. We likely won't see it until at least Froyo is working on our devices, possibly later. This also shouldn't be in the Development forum...
RacerXFD said:
The problem is deeper than just kernel. There are fundamental issues as to why we're not already on 2.2...
I'd go into it, but this thread isn't about that. Plus, I am not a programmer, so I don't want to overstep my bounds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd really like someone to help me understand (in noob terms) why porting is so hard for CDMA devices. Expect a thanks if you can explain it to me!
A thanks is what I am not after. It's that for anyone that has had this device since september this topic has been beaten to death.
Give this a read.
good day.
chopper the dog said:
A thanks is what I am not after. It's that for anyone that has had this device since september this topic has been beaten to death.
Give this a read.
good day.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, thanks anyway. I haven't had the device since September.
I just wanted to remind anyone new to Fascinate Modding, that there is NO GINGERBREAD ROM for the SAMSUNG FASCINATE at this time.
So if you are itching to flash a ROM from a different phone. Please DO NOT BE MISLED by this thread and flash Gingerbread for a i9000.
You have a Galaxy S Variant, Not the Galaxy S phone.
I know this has been posted in the Captivate forums, but I was wondering if any Fascinate devs had messed with it?
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/28/android-2-3-2-gingerbread-leaks-for-samsung-galaxy-s/
Doesn't really apply to the Fascinate since the i9000 is GSM.
Kevin Gossett said:
Doesn't really apply to the Fascinate since the i9000 is GSM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It still has the same absolutely everything else hardware wise minus a hard-disabled (but still present) FM radio tuner, right? That's got to count for *something!*
There's no source in the leak, so no, it doesn't help much at all.
Kaos mentioned in his thread in the dev section that he may be able to use some libraries from this leak, but otherwise is not expecting any major breakthroughs.
Keefkeef said:
It still has the same absolutely everything else hardware wise minus a hard-disabled (but still present) FM radio tuner, right? That's got to count for *something!*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are a few things different besides the cell radio and fm radio. Either way, it's enough differences to prevent it from working.
Keefkeef said:
It still has the same absolutely everything else hardware wise minus a hard-disabled (but still present) FM radio tuner, right? That's got to count for *something!*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
im sure its better that the leak is out there than not...as was mentioned kaos/others may gleam a few things from it...
but much like the dozens of froyo leaks for all the other galaxy s variants over the months (including cdma) it wont be turned into a rom compatible with this phone
still it does show that samsung is actively working on gb for its touchwiz-based phones...so those that plan on keeping this phone for the 2 years that they might be tied into a contract *might* be in luck...in spring 2012 with a 2.3 ota
the rest of us that move on to whatever superphone comes out this summer/fall will have to put our hopes on a developing kaoscinate or whatever
nitsuj17 said:
the rest of us that move on to whatever superphone comes out this summer/fall will have to put our hopes on a developing kaoscinate or whatever
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dude!!!!! you cant leave!!!! your stuff rocks!!!
Ditto +1
From my VoodooFrankenClean'd SteelBlue SGS
can anybody port the 3.0 honeycomb version to our beloved Hero?
they did it to the G1/Magic, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RKEHfOwnSI&feature=player_embedded
any hope??
If there is a port to G1/Magic I guess that is possible a port to Hero..
RubenFreitas said:
If there is a port to G1/Magic I guess that is possible a port to Hero..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
there is a port, in this thread http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=936874
hiato said:
there is a port, in this thread http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=936874
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
is this port working on hero ?
I would say try it.
rdejager said:
I would say try it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea, let us know
it's certainly buildable for the hero - but most hardware will be broken I would imagine.
Sitting here, playing with an ugly port of the sdk, the first images,most just to remove my pin code so I can get into the system
yes elelinux!
do you think when the sources get released you would have much chance of building a full (or near full) working honeycomb rom?
sjknight413 said:
yes elelinux!
do you think when the sources get released you would have much chance of building a full (or near full) working honeycomb rom?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it's possible, but it will not be easy. Especially because Honeycomb is made for tablets... and not for our phones.
If it's built from SDK I bet that almost none of the hardware is working...
mljjlm said:
If it's built from SDK I bet that almost none of the hardware is working...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is correct, but strangely all the backlighting of the buttons etc worked out of the box, buttons it is easy to fix if you want.
Just a little test for fun nothing else, also saw that there was support for mdpi so theoretically it could be working on Hero with some manual intervention.
Another thing to, boot up without problems
elelinux said:
That is correct, but strangely all the backlighting of the buttons etc worked out of the box, buttons it is easy to fix if you want.
Just a little test for fun nothing else, also saw that there was support for mdpi so theoretically it could be working on Hero with some manual intervention.
Another thing to, boot up without problems
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, please make a rom for us to play with please. I cant believe the G1 has one and we dont.
maybe we are are asking too much on our hero....
but hey if it'll work then we shall have it
SENT FROM MY HTC HERO running GINGERBREAD by elelinux
elliotn said:
maybe we are are asking too much on our hero....
but hey if it'll work then we shall have it
SENT FROM MY HTC HERO running GINGERBREAD by elelinux
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
????
the G1 is already running it!!!
hiato said:
????
the G1 is already running it!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes but hardly anything is working! Even the Nexus one has no audio,wifi,bluetooth,calls!
Yes, it is foolish to ask for a ROM that's meant to run on tablets to be made for phones. But I never have never said and never will say no to a new ROM...
Sent from my Hero using XDA App
Yes it's going to run like ass and our screens won't do any good either.
But... as always, I'm eager to see what crazy stuff the ROM-people come up with.
but the sdk version includes some feature of switching from tablet to mobile mode by simply changing resolution... they won't have included it if it wasn't meant to be run on mobiles, and in 3.1, mobile (2.x) and tablet (3.0) development lines shall be joined (says wikipedia lol). moreover, lots of people out here said it would be impossible to run 2.2 and 2.3 on hero, and right now i'm looking at my rooted android 2.3 hero which is incredibly smooth and stable (way better than with stock os). so why shouldn't it be possible? ele just said even backlight of the buttons worked out of the box, which was not case in 2.x. i'm still believing in our developers (although i can't code well enough to support them ) and i'm sure they'll do some magic
greets, Summoner
Do you really use wikipedia for truths? Anyone can add to Wiki?!
no i don't... i just think it sounds possible... otherwise, there would be two future development lines which the consequence would be that there were VERY different features depending where more / the better devs work on lol^^
i didn't claim it was the absolute truth, otherwise i wouldn't have explicitly said it came from wiki ...
greets Summoner
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
Let me first start by saying the rom doesnt boot completely. It boots all the way to when the screen dims and vibrates, when it is about to display lockscreen.. Logcat shows everything installing and starting correctly.. It wasn't hard to get to this stage, so it gave me a little bit of confidence in this awesome project.. Froyo was my favorite android version, as it was a huge upgrade for my old hero.
I thought it would be hilarious to release cm6 for the nexus s, heck I would have run it for the rest of my nexus's lifetime.
So, let me know what you guys think.. keep digging around to get it booting or give up because its old news..
If anyone wants to help for just a fun proof of concept project, or just to poke around, lemme know, the more the merrier
That is all. Waste of a thread, but that is what the general section is for.
LOL in this time and age running froyo is like going back to xp from windows 7. But yeah as a proof of concept its kind of interesting;-) What would be really interesting, is running gingerbread on the gnx
Oh wow.... I don't even know what to say.....
I would absolutely try this out
I'd rock cm6 on my nexus. For "old times sake" it's like banging your ex.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
Banging your ex is like eating digested food.
thedudejdog said:
I'd rock cm6 on my nexus. For "old times sake" it's like banging your ex.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
shabgard said:
Banging your ex is like eating digested food.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
doesnt it sounds as good as forcing your poop back into your....
wugui said:
doesnt it sounds as good as forcing your poop back into your....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's exactly what it's like.
swamp goblin said:
Let me first start by saying the rom doesnt boot completely. It boots all the way to when the screen dims and vibrates, when it is about to display lockscreen.. Logcat shows everything installing and starting correctly.. It wasn't hard to get to this stage, so it gave me a little bit of confidence in this awesome project.. Froyo was my favorite android version, as it was a huge upgrade for my old hero.
I thought it would be hilarious to release cm6 for the nexus s, heck I would have run it for the rest of my nexus's lifetime.
So, let me know what you guys think.. keep digging around to get it booting or give up because its old news..
If anyone wants to help for just a fun proof of concept project, or just to poke around, lemme know, the more the merrier
That is all. Waste of a thread, but that is what the general section is for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are incompatibility. Because Nexus S is the first Gingerbread-device, Androi 2.3.0 is the lowest compatibly OS version.
You also can't install System V(AT&T's Unix system since about 1970) in your computer.
biergaizi said:
They are incompatibility. Because Nexus S is the first Gingerbread-device, Androi 2.3.0 is the lowest compatibly OS version.
You also can't install System V(AT&T's Unix system since about 1970) in your computer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes this is true, but the point is that its almost booting.. I knew this from the start, it will require back porting drivers and probably a few kernel edits, but it may be possible.. in the end its just Linux running on a few upgraded drivers and a few kernel changes..
biergaizi said:
You also can't install System V(AT&T's Unix system since about 1970) in your computer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not without doing some back porting.
This is much easier to do from Gingerbread back to Froyo though, since you are building something to run on the same hardware and software stack (ARM and Android 2.x). The most difficult part would be getting drivers to work, but just as older drivers are made to work on new OS versions with shims and other tricks, in theory this is possible, if not a lot of work.
I'm not sure what will be gained though. Gingerbread didn't seem like a significant resource drain over Froyo, so I can't imagine there are any speed/power gains.
Sent from my cm_tenderloin using XDA
Do it!
Chinpokomon said:
Not without doing some back porting.
This is much easier to do from Gingerbread back to Froyo though, since you are building something to run on the same hardware and software stack (ARM and Android 2.x). The most difficult part would be getting drivers to work, but just as older drivers are made to work on new OS versions with shims and other tricks, in theory this is possible, if not a lot of work.
I'm not sure what will be gained though. Gingerbread didn't seem like a significant resource drain over Froyo, so I can't imagine there are any speed/power gains.
Sent from my cm_tenderloin using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah not really much to gain, but how awesome would it be to be able to be able to add to the list of things that can run on the nexus s.. and froyo on the flagship gingerbread device? against all rules
Swamp i will join you even this is a complete stupid idea we can do it for the fun. And if this work i know a couple of good froyo roms to port so may i join you
Sent from my Amazon Kindle Fire using Tapatalk
What about cupcake?
In all seriousness though, froyo would make a great ROM. and It should in theory be faster than GB.
swamp goblin said:
Yeah not really much to gain, but how awesome would it be to be able to be able to add to the list of things that can run on the nexus s.. and froyo on the flagship gingerbread device? against all rules
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How about cupcake next
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Lol this would be funny to run and remember the eye burn from the menu and setting being black text with white back ground
Sent from my A500 using Tapatalk
Great Idea! I also thougt already how older Android Versions would run on the Nexus S.
When 2.2 is running, you guys should start porting 1.6 ;-)
Doesn't it help, that the similar SGS already was running 2.2?
Wow...you are amazing swamp goblin.
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA
coolfranz said:
Great Idea! I also thougt already how older Android Versions would run on the Nexus S.
When 2.2 is running, you guys should start porting 1.6 ;-)
Doesn't it help, that the similar SGS already was running 2.2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, its funny because I tried porting a froyo touchwiz rom from the og epic, and it got to pretty much the same place when booting haha.. hopefully I can get this working, along with other variations of froyo, that would be the greatest achievement for me in any android related stuff.