Related
I've just seen the news about onskreen going multitasking,,,,,,went to download,,,,,,,,,,,but really I don't know what to download and how to use it on my TF101G
As far as i know:
Cornerstone is no app as you understand it. It is something like a "launcher".
The problem is that cornerstone has to be integrated into the os by the manufacturer himself because it has to be integrated deeply into the os.
So you won't see cornerstone on tablets unless a manufacturer decides to implement it.
Or someone takes the AOSP code from google and releases a complete rom. But i think that would be a lot of work. I don't think that someone would do this. It would be awesome to see this im cyanogenmod^^. I mean both are open source now.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
I think I saw someone with a Xoom that has it.. (from Reddit). It would be awesome if we got it too.. I need to learn to make roms in my spare time.
it has to be baked into the rom its not a apk u run
I would love to try this too !
The "simple" way would be to get source from a rom, to integrate it and build the rom. But the integration step is unfortunatly not simply I think :/
Integrating difficulties is just one of the problems... for example Cornerstone requires ICS.. which we don't have.
asdfuogh said:
Integrating difficulties is just one of the problems... for example Cornerstone requires ICS.. which we don't have.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First ICS has to come out. Then we will gather our forces, go on our knees and humbly ask any dev to face the challenge and coock rom with Onskreen integrated. It will not be soon, but someday ... Hope never dies...
Since it's under the ASL, I hope that it's included into the official CM9 for the Transformer. If it is not, I'm sure that there will be unofficial CM9 roms with it. Now, Asus, release the ICS update for the Transformer we need the kernel sources and drivers...
Vyrlokar said:
Since it's under the ASL, I hope that it's included into the official CM9 for the Transformer. If it is not, I'm sure that there will be unofficial CM9 roms with it. Now, Asus, release the ICS update for the Transformer we need the kernel sources and drivers...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Steve Kondid stated he will work to get it into CM9 (that's if it come to the TF).
He has it running on his 10.1
"fat__tire: Just for fun... http://t.co/gLBPGYMW Sorta buggy but sorta cool. #nookcolor #cm9 #cornerstone"
--http://twitter.com/fat__tire/status/169628187347783681
well we got ICS. Anyone working on getting cornerstone working?
cmarticus said:
well we got ICS. Anyone working on getting cornerstone working?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First we need a stable custom rom then we need a normal version and a cornerstone version patience is a virtue
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using xda premium
^^ what he said but the expand on that we need a rom that is fully deodexed or one that has a full source code available so that it can be baked in without signature errors + we need a apk dev and a rom dev (Or one that can do both) to put it all together
Hi all, I'm new here, bought a GT7.7 few days ago. As i was using ICS on my GT8.9 before (I'm a member of the Galaxian-soup team who made a AOSP ICS rom for GT8.9), the HC feels very slow to me. So my question is why there is no ICS rom for GT7.7? The Galaxy Note has the same SoC as GT7.7, correct? Note has a official Samsung ICS leak, correct? So we should be able to get all needed libs from that rom to make everything work. Am i missing something? Is there some specific problem with GT7.7 that I'm not aware of or are there just no devs here who have tried?
I would try it alone, but unfortunately getting it to run needs some kernel mods and i don't have any experience with kernels. I know what needs to be done, so if there are devs here who have time and are interested, let's work together and make it happen.
Probably because the 7.7 doesn't really have a whole lot of community dev support yet, especially compared to the likes of the Note and the 8.9, both of which have been out for longer.
I would love to see you make one for us. ^^
If i would know how to cook a ICS ROM i already did it ^^
But someday that will happen
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
i think it is because da 7.7 just arrive US, and most of custom rom developers are from US, so we dont have much custom rom yet
I have to say I'm not missing ICS on this device - compared to another cheapo Chinese device (Aurora) I'm also using (where ICS is just SLOWWW!), the 7.7 is just right as it is! If ICS slows down the 7.7 then I'm sticking with HC.
sladeywadey said:
I have to say I'm not missing ICS on this device - compared to another cheapo Chinese device (Aurora) I'm also using (where ICS is just SLOWWW!), the 7.7 is just right as it is! If ICS slows down the 7.7 then I'm sticking with HC.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm missing it. I've been using AOSP ICS on my GT8.9 for two months now and it is a lot faster then HC, especially the browser. The stock browser in GT7.7 is unusable for me.
I will try to build a AOSP ICS rom and see how far i get. Are there any kernel devs here?
I'd be interested in trying to help, but I've never actually done android kernel development. I have set up a build environment to compile the kernel but only to **** around for myself; I've never actually released anything on xda.
I am wondering though, is it actually possible to modify the HC kernel to run a ported ICS ROM? Over in GS2-land I'm pretty sure all the ICS ROMs are running modified, leaked kernels. Even CM9 is using mostly a leaked kernel with repacked initramfs I'm pretty sure.
teiglin said:
I'd be interested in trying to help, but I've never actually done android kernel development. I have set up a build environment to compile the kernel but only to **** around for myself; I've never actually released anything on xda.
I am wondering though, is it actually possible to modify the HC kernel to run a ported ICS ROM? Over in GS2-land I'm pretty sure all the ICS ROMs are running modified, leaked kernels. Even CM9 is using mostly a leaked kernel with repacked initramfs I'm pretty sure.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it is possible. For GT8.9 we are using android 3.1 kernel from Samsung (for some reason Samsung has not released android 3.2 kernel source code for GT8.9). Of course it needs to be modified to make hw acceleration, touchscreen etc work.
poisike said:
Yes, it is possible. For GT8.9 we are using android 3.1 kernel from Samsung (for some reason Samsung has not released android 3.2 kernel source code for GT8.9). Of course it needs to be modified to make hw acceleration, touchscreen etc work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds like you need a better kernel dev than me, then. But as others have said, development over here is pretty limited--you could try posting in the dev section, but ezynow is the guy who has posted anything on the kernel side of things. Maybe things will pick up a bit with the VZW release, but to be honest, this is a pretty niche device--I love it and I'm sure most of the people reading this do too, but at the price point it's just never going to be that popular. Here's to hoping.
you need all the updated binary libraries for ICS in addition to the new kernel before installing ICS will be possible
Availability around the world ( aside from Asia ) might be quite low or next to non-existent, its a great device but I've got a feeling it wont get too much of a developer support as samsung just keeps on crunching out new tablets.
OK, i'm confused now. I've been gathering information about the gt7.7 and i have found a lot of conflicting information. Do we have a confirmed partition table information? http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=21695494&postcount=5 < this looks right to me, can anyone confirm this?
The strange thing is that even the root.zip released here seems to mount the wrong partition, it mounts /dev/block/mmcblk0p4 as system?! To me it looks like the system is mmcblk0p9 or am i wrong?
Are P6800 and P6810 partition tables the same?
No they are not.
Sent from my GT-P6810 using XDA Premium App
poisike said:
OK, i'm confused now. I've been gathering information about the gt7.7 and i have found a lot of conflicting information. Do we have a confirmed partition table information? http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=21695494&postcount=5 < this looks right to me, can anyone confirm this?
The strange thing is that even the root.zip released here seems to mount the wrong partition, it mounts /dev/block/mmcblk0p4 as system?! To me it looks like the system is mmcblk0p9 or am i wrong?
Are P6800 and P6810 partition tables the same?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The partition tables are different and details have been posted elsewhere.
davp has previously posted about the possible error in root.zip as you also have identified. See http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=22650451 There does not appear to be any response by JadeEyedWolf or any others. Whilst it might not be a likely critical problem, it may, at the least, be poor coding.
Sent from my GT-P6810 using XDA
HTC opened source code of kernel 3.0.16 for One V. It's the same hardware based as our DHD. So I hope now devs can use it to make our custom roms to be fully functional with ICS 4.0.
Who is the first?
http://htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
FireBlast said:
HTC opened source code of kernel 3.0.16 for One V. It's the same hardware based as our DHD. So I hope now devs can use it to make our custom roms to be fully functional with ICS 4.0.
Who is the first?
http://htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
good news
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA
cool wonder how long before we get a full working ics rom a day or two at most.....
It's not that simple.
While they share the same SoC, they do not have the same board, hence board config files.
The jump from linux 2.6.x to 3.0.x is huge and u can't simply bring in those missing board-spade*.c .h files from the old kernel and expect them to compile. You're going to get a whole lot of compile errors because the underlying linux kernel has gone through so much changes. It's a daunting and massive undertaking.
My money is on devs waiting for HTC to release DHD kernel source for ICS.
Hey guys.
I am new to android developing.
I started by porting the CM10.1 ROM from HTC Desire, but my phone is stuck at the Huawei logo when it boots up.
I can still flash another ROM, but that is not the problem.
I want to know how to fix this. I want it to go past the Huawei Logo.
By the way, I used this procedure: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1598713 and I used Aurora ICS 5.0 for the base ROM. I know it doesn't have the same version of android, but there is no reason I shouldn't be experimenting like this.
Can anyone help?
Thanks.
rqmok said:
Hey guys.
I am new to android developing.
I started by porting the CM10.1 ROM from HTC Desire, but my phone is stuck at the Huawei logo when it boots up.
I can still flash another ROM, but that is not the problem.
I want to know how to fix this. I want it to go past the Huawei Logo.
By the way, I used this procedure: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1598713 and I used Aurora ICS 5.0 for the base ROM. I know it doesn't have the same version of android, but there is no reason I shouldn't be experimenting like this.
Can anyone help?
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Delete phone.apk and try it?
Sent from my U8800-51
You can't port CM10.1 ROM to ICS ROM as base. That is inpossible.
I know
Mlopik said:
You can't port CM10.1 ROM to ICS ROM as base. That is inpossible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, but it is not completely impossible.
I also tried to port it with CM10.1 that you are trying to fix, but I still get the same thing.
I will setup logcat and upload the information here.
Thanks.
Need to ask something
Hey again.
I haven't had time to do anything to my phone yet.
I am replying to ask if there is an awesome tutorial out there that could help me with this porting?
Currently, to port my ROM, I replaced files in port ROM from base ROM. Should I replace files in base ROM from port ROM?
Thanks for the help.
Hi Again
Hello.
I found out that there was a problem with the base ROM.
I have ported CM10.1 from U8800! Yaay!
But there are four things that are not working:
- WiFi
- Bluetooth
- Cam Recording
- Sound
Can you guys tell me how to fix the audio? In the logcat, it says that there is no sound output.
Thanks
CatLog results
Hey guys.
I've got the log attached to this reply. Have a look at the audio events and see what is wrong. I can't figure it out by myself.
Thanks
When will you releasing it fully functional?
Working on JB
Djuganight said:
When will you releasing it fully functional?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have just ported the Jelly Bean from u8800pro to u8800non-pro, so I will be working on this ROM.
Seriously, I have no idea when I will be releasing a fully functional ROM. Because I have my studies as well, so I don't get much time to work on the ROM.
The audio is working in this ROM (wasn't working in the previous port),
The things that are currently not working are:
- WiFi
- Bluetooth
- Video Recording
I will try my best to do as much as possible.
I am new at building android ROMs, so please don't expect too much from me
I will be needing some help from other developers as well.
Do you think I should make a thread for this? or is there already enough not-fully functional JB ROMs there?
Thanks.:good:
Lololololol ridiculous!
Another porting, same issues...
How many are now? 4, 5 Jelly beans?
Ooo man, some times is just better to stay quiet....
Djuganight said:
Lololololol ridiculous!
Another porting, same issues...
How many are now? 4, 5 Jelly beans?
Ooo man, some times is just better to stay quiet....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know how you feel. I also feel that way.
I would like to build Jelly Bean from source, like Blefish is doing right now, but I need a 64bit computer for that (mine is only 32bit. Unless there is a hack for this, I can't build from source.
I think everyone is going to start porting Jelly Bean ROMs until one starts working. :silly:
Everyone is porting the rom with the intention of making ir fully working and then abandon development. Why don't you and others continue the work that is already done instead of making a new port which will end up like the others.
Like your are having compatibility issues due to your 32bit computer, perhaps our device is incompatible with JB...
Djuganight said:
Everyone is porting the rom with the intention of making ir fully working and then abandon development. Why don't you and others continue the work that is already done instead of making a new port which will end up like the others.
Like your are having compatibility issues due to your 32bit computer, perhaps our device is incompatible with JB...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
U8800 is compatible with JB.
Djuganight said:
Everyone is porting the rom with the intention of making ir fully working and then abandon development. Why don't you and others continue the work that is already done instead of making a new port which will end up like the others.
Like your are having compatibility issues due to your 32bit computer, perhaps our device is incompatible with JB...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Our device will remain compatible with every new android untill android will be using some new architecture of processor, so "sometimes it's better to stay silent".
OP, abandon your trials of getting a working JB using copy-paste ports. It can be only ported from source.
P.S.: just install ubuntu x64 and try to build something like CWM recovery out of forumber's source. If it builds, you can build anything you want. Today's computers know how to emulate x64. I'm myself using an old pentium d 820 (i386, sse2 and that's all) and I can build.
Mlopik said:
U8800 is compatible with JB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That I don't know for sure but I believe our is. But why 4 or 5 JB around, all with exactly same issues
Now I and others also pick up a JB Rom, mod it here and there and then instead of 4/5 roms we can have dozens. Then again non working well. This makes sense?
Djuganight said:
That I don't know for sure but I believe our is. But why 4 or 5 JB around, all with exactly same issues
Now I and others also pick up a JB Rom, mod it here and there and then instead of 4/5 roms we can have dozens. Then again non working well. This makes sense?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's still same ROM with other features.. It isn't simply fix Wi-Fi without source.
Djuganight said:
That I don't know for sure but I believe our is. But why 4 or 5 JB around, all with exactly same issues
Now I and others also pick up a JB Rom, mod it here and there and then instead of 4/5 roms we can have dozens. Then again non working well. This makes sense?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because most of devs or those who like to be called developers don't have required knowledge and then leave the project as an excuse.
Honestly I have no hope that we can see a JB rom fully functional.
dark_vader said:
Because most of devs or those who like to be called developers don't have required knowledge and then leave the project as an excuse.
Honestly I have no hope that we can see a JB rom fully functional.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why you don't make some for android yourself? if it's so simply.
nagato.fm said:
Our device will remain compatible with every new android untill android will be using some new architecture of processor, so "sometimes it's better to stay silent".
OP, abandon your trials of getting a working JB using copy-paste ports. It can be only ported from source.
P.S.: just install ubuntu x64 and try to build something like CWM recovery out of forumber's source. If it builds, you can build anything you want. Today's computers know how to emulate x64. I'm myself using an old pentium d 820 (i386, sse2 and that's all) and I can build.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So I can install ubuntu x64 on my x86 laptop? Are you talking about a virtual machine or installing ubuntu x64 on the actual laptop?
And as for others: Instead of saying that JB is not compatible with our device and all that sh*t, why don't you encourage me and give me some solutions.
Anyways, I am not posting this JB ROM until it's fully functional, because I might stop development as well (getting interested in firefox os).
rqmok said:
So I can install ubuntu x64 on my x86 laptop? Are you talking about a virtual machine or installing ubuntu x64 on the actual laptop?
And as for others: Instead of saying that JB is not compatible with our device and all that sh*t, why don't you encourage me and give me some solutions.
Anyways, I am not posting this JB ROM until it's fully functional, because I might stop development as well (getting interested in firefox os).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First of all,your CPU must support x64,If it supported,you can install x64 to you computer.
If you want install x64 system in virtual machine (like VirtualBox),you CPU must support VT-x or AMD-V (virtualization).
You can check virtualization and x64 support via SecurAble;
http://securable.en.softonic.com
Guys,
Naturally, as the title states, its a general discussion thread for huashan LBL users. I want to discuss some things with like-minded people and hopefully once the momentum builds, we can try to achieve something.
Android L official release is just around the corner and our official fate is sealed by Sony @ 4.3.
But i plan on trying to port L using existing 4.3 kernel and make it at least boot so we know later on its a possibility for Locked Bootloader to have Android L.
Unlocked Bootloader guys are advised to stay away, as sooner or later, they will get proper AOSP 5.0.
Some points i want to make important.
1. This is NOT a cheer thread. Dont just post to show your excitement. It blocks the purpose of healthy discussion.
2. This is not for people who want new android. Have some sense, it isnt going to come anytime soon.
3. This is strictly for Locked Bootloader guys. So any other person coming and commenting might just be wasting his time.
Although, if you really have some positive thing to contribute, than whatever you have, LBL or UBL, please do share with all.
This is a good starting place to study.
https://github.com/Android-L-Porting-Team/Android-L-Mako/commits/master?page=3
Lets begin !
Im not sure how much id be able to contribute but ill be willing to help any way I can do. Do we even have a vague idea of what kernel modules would be needed for L? Im assuming thats what we'd need as I remember Bagyusz saying thats what he had to do for KK.
Has any of the freexperia team looked at L yet to your knowledge? Perhaps they may be able to give some small insight into drivers etc for LBL/UBL.
Will PA still be updated while this is being looked at? I'm assuming PAC wont need anything now unless problems occur as its all automated. Until L is working PA is a good thing for those wanting L due to them implementing features from L in KK such as recents and tinted bars (if they ever release them to legacy!!).
Oblox said:
Im not sure how much id be able to contribute but ill be willing to help any way I can do. Do we even have a vague idea of what kernel modules would be needed for L? Im assuming thats what we'd need as I remember Bagyusz saying thats what he had to do for KK.
Has any of the freexperia team looked at L yet to your knowledge? Perhaps they may be able to give some small insight into drivers etc for LBL/UBL.
Will PA still be updated while this is being looked at? I'm assuming PAC wont need anything now unless problems occur as its all automated. Until L is working PA is a good thing for those wanting L due to them implementing features from L in KK such as recents and tinted bars (if they ever release them to legacy!!).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dont worry so much. PA is at a stage that if u have linux, u can just compile it right away and all is on Auto.
I will release milestone builds... No point pushing weekly updates if there arent any major changes.
For PAC, i have even taken that burden off and compiling and uploading is not my headache now.
And apart from above, i dont use PA personally. PAC suits me best.
As you stated the main concern is how well "the sealed by Sony @ 4.3. bootloader" will be able to cope with android L?
I really appreciate your enthusiasm. And yes there is only one way to find out. And that is to actually try porting it.
mmfh said:
As you stated the main concern is how well "the sealed by Sony @ 4.3. bootloader" will be able to cope with android L?
I really appreciate your enthusiasm. And yes there is only one way to find out. And that is to actually try porting it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Porting is not an issue. We need a team. Not a band, but maybe 3 people. One compiler, One to tinker with trees and files, One tester. Just my suggestion.
One person cannot do it alone, unless he is an expert dev.
And about coping with L, all current devices having L port are using 4.4 kernel. And our 4.3 copes with 4.4. Technically there are not much issues compatibility wise. Just ramdisk and correct blobs.
I may be wrong, but thats why this discussion is goign on, if someone wants to correct me, please do.
I think this is an interesting project, XDA needs ppl like U
you think is easy port L with 4.3 kernel? I mean I'm just talking w/o reference, but Sony is just (until now) ignoring ART which is the biggest change for L (since 4.4 but well, now is not optional), and I think that could be a barrier to port new android for older phones (like SP)... what do you think about?
I hope this thread came with great news in the near future, :good:
This can be either hard or easy, hell or heaven, depending on the changes in L official release. Up until now, the changes are lying in ramdisk, but some features aren't available in the beta release.
But here are a few things that I noticed right now, before the official release:
1. UBL and LBL are stuck with 4.3 blobs. We are already using patched libraries, I guess it will get worse later, even on UBL.
2. I think we should wait until the CM12(?) will be working on UBL, while helping with bringing it up. If it works on UBL, then we should tinker with the LBL version. Actually, we have the hijack part, and we have the patches needed. I think it will be easy to get it to boot.
3. I think when @delewer finishes his kexec modules, some people that are experienced with kernel development could port it to SP, and then we could use it on forever locked phones. It will take some time, but will be the best for our phones.
So overall, if we have some luck, we would only have to kang CM trees, add the patches for hwcomposer, etc., add hijack and maybe some kernel modules. But we can be extremely unlucky and... I don't even want to imagine the worst case scenario.
Dont worry, the ground work is there. bagyusz gave us a great gift. I am sure Final release wont have boot-related changes. Maybe framework and libs, but not more.
The best thing is, 4.3 SONY rom DID NOT support ART. Bagyusz made it work even on LBL. and as Android L only supports ART, so thats the most important point i think.
Hmm, is ART even kernel-dependent?
I think that's not the case, and it's just great for us. So, bagyusz did a great work(it's just amazing), but I don't think he made any change to support ART.
And yeah, maybe there are just changes in frameworks and libs, but I'm still paranoid about this.
Anyway, I think that we are going to make it. That's what I feel, and I hope it comes true
neXus PRIME said:
Porting is not an issue. We need a team. Not a band, but maybe 3 people. One compiler, One to tinker with trees and files, One tester. Just my suggestion.
One person cannot do it alone, unless he is an expert dev.
And about coping with L, all current devices having L port are using 4.4 kernel. And our 4.3 copes with 4.4. Technically there are not much issues compatibility wise. Just ramdisk and correct blobs.
I may be wrong, but thats why this discussion is goign on, if someone wants to correct me, please do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I'm far from developer, I'm afraid cannot be of big help to you.
But I'm willing to contribute by testing builds and discovering bugs.
MrSteve555 said:
Hmm, is ART even kernel-dependent?
I think that's not the case, and it's just great for us. So, bagyusz did a great work(it's just amazing), but I don't think he made any change to support ART.
And yeah, maybe there are just changes in frameworks and libs, but I'm still paranoid about this.
Anyway, I think that we are going to make it. That's what I feel, and I hope it comes true
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not kernel dependant, i know, but you know what, booting a new android version using old kernel with just hijack n scripts is one HELL of a job.
And ART even didnt work for a long time on AOSP CM for huashan on UBL.
My point was, what we have here is a 4.3 kernel and blobs which might or might not be enough for android L. But before official release, we can try to port L from mako, by replacing blobs and ramdisk and boot, so that we have at least a proof of concept that LBL CAN boot L. Just boot. Nothing else.
neXus PRIME said:
Not kernel dependant, i know, but you know what, booting a new android version using old kernel with just hijack n scripts is one HELL of a job.
And ART even didnt work for a long time on AOSP CM for huashan on UBL.
My point was, what we have here is a 4.3 kernel and blobs which might or might not be enough for android L. But before official release, we can try to port L from mako, by replacing blobs and ramdisk and boot, so that we have at least a proof of concept that LBL CAN boot L. Just boot. Nothing else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Just" hijack? Bagyusz gave us an excellent base(hijack), and I bet we can boot FFOS or Ubuntu on that.
I didn't even know that ART didn't work on huashan before. Wasn't it a Gapps problem?
And yeah, these maybe aren't enough, as we are already patching some libs.
Ans one thing - I don't think we could port that from mako. It uses a little different base, and it isn't a CAF base. I think we should just wait
MrSteve555 said:
"Just" hijack? Bagyusz gave us an excellent base(hijack), and I bet we can boot FFOS or Ubuntu on that.
I didn't even know that ART didn't work on huashan before. Wasn't it a Gapps problem?
And yeah, these maybe aren't enough, as we are already patching some libs.
Ans one thing - I don't think we could port that from mako. It uses a little different base, and it isn't a CAF base. I think we should just wait
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just hijack meant different in a positive sense. But maybe it came out wrong.
And I'm talking about porting. Framework. Not building from source. They are actually doing same thing. I'll have to give it some time though.
neXus PRIME said:
Just hijack meant different in a positive sense. But maybe it came out wrong.
And I'm talking about porting. Framework. Not building from source. They are actually doing same thing. I'll have to give it some time though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I know what you are trying to say with porting L. Actually, there would be a few things that would break:
1. The YUV color palette support (fixable with our hwcomposer, gralloc etc)
2. GPU drivers - this is the "best" part. L is precompiled, and I think it uses the libRS override, which doesn't work on our huashan because of a kernel difference (if we could build from source, we could just not enable it). There are a few other things that aren't compatible. So even if we got it to boot, it would just show black screen, and I assume by "just booting" you mean actually seeing the effort
3. The whole "thing" is built off AOSP repos, not CAF ones. Idk if SP's stock kernel would play nicely with the whole different stuff.
These are just my assumptions, in the end everything could work just fine. If you have the sufficient time, it's nice to try. Just deleting the mako proprietary stuff, and adding the needed huashan blobs + adding correct ramdisk would get it to the bootable/half working state (or there is a chance that the "build" wouldn't even boot.). I guess it's not done yet for a reason.
Anyway, I have to squash one last bug in my CM builds. If it will work, I could also try porting the magical "L".