Database Users

Dexter (Possible kernel/driver source) A7

Was searching around about our elocity interesting how this offers a built in 3g or bluetooths and sim card option this product seems quite a bit like our elocity same components too.
Dexter and any other developer see what you kind find out about this, looks like different interface could be the break in the kernel we wanted.
pioneercomputers.com.au/products/configure.asp?c1=183&c2=185&id=3203
Drivers and more under support tab
Hope this is what we needed to really get this ball rolling on other O.S.

Anyone feel free to find out what you can about thisw site and the drivers listed and lets work on pulling what we need from it and establishing a center for all the drivers.

rombold said:
pioneercomputers.com.au/products/configure.asp?c1=183&c2=185&id=3203
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice findings.. i tried search naz10 and epad n700, aigo N700 etc.. but no luck, but i guess you hit jackpot here
thanks..

ok, the site does not have any files for this tablet..

Dex I know it list everything for every product they have or so it would seem under driver tab. I wonder if we can email thier support and them compile the files or point them out for us.

Anyone have an in at Compal?
It would be awesome to get our hands on the boards they were making before they removed the GSM provisions.
As for that site, it just looks like a reseller to me.

codon.org.uk/~mjg59/android_tablets/
List android devices who are compliant with open kernel and access to them
Now there is alot I don't understand with these devices and how to build a rom, but with this from nvidea can't we use a existing kernel and patch into it.
NVIDIA Tegra 250 Developer Kit Hardware

rombold said:
Now there is alot I don't understand with these devices and how to build a rom, but with this from nvidea can't we use a existing kernel and patch into it.
NVIDIA Tegra 250 Developer Kit Hardware
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but you understand your PC?
so if you board has a core2duo with 2GB memory, and you add a Geforce, and as modems are rare, you find a nice windows7 compatible modem card + a wifi from broadcom with integrated bluetooth.
Next guy does almost the same but he uses a different wifi and bluetooth card for his pc..
so we got 2 pc's equipped almost the same but with different wifi/bt and of course on chose panasonic touch display , where the other one got LG touchscreen which again uses different drivers.
its all about drivers, not just the chipset

I will continue the search for every driver for this device. If you could list any known manaufacters and the part they made. I will search for every driver I can, and will keep you up to date with my progress. Keep me informed on your break throughs with honeycomb or if there is something you need to find and I will help.

u-boot, drivers and kernel source
Does anyone have the nvidia Tegra 250 devkit? Supposedly they were going to include u-boot support and source. See tegradeveloper.nvidia.com/tegra/forum/uboot-tegra-250
Does the dev kit even have open source for drivers and kernel patches. Is full support for the tegra 250 already at kernel.org or is it missing some key features?
I've held up on ordering the dev kit since my experience with nvidia is that they tend to keep as much information private as possible even with an NDA in place.
I'd gladly help develop a completely open bootloader with u-boot, Linux kernel and distro for this device if hardware specifications are actually available. Google was talking about a possible tegra based device that surely would include open source, but I don't think that project ever made it to market.

2ShedsJackson said:
Does anyone have the nvidia Tegra 250 devkit? Supposedly they were going to include u-boot support and source. See tegradeveloper.nvidia.com/tegra/forum/uboot-tegra-250
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you sign a NDA with Nvidia, so no chance of anyone releasing it to community. if they do if will be figured out, and a lawsuit coming their way..
so thats a no go.
Registered developers with Nvidia, know this, so they wouldn't dare risking a lawsuit..

So in their typical control freak fashion they don't want specs or source getting out into the open. Looks like I'll be skipping the A7 until it gets at least a touchscreen update.

2ShedsJackson said:
So in their typical control freak fashion they don't want specs or source getting out into the open. Looks like I'll be skipping the A7 until it gets at least a touchscreen update.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not entirely true, its only the parts you asked about..
kernel is GPL and parts of related drivers follows.. but bootloaders are a protected part, and some the vendor specific parts used to manage the chipset together with their nv drivers.. but thats how i read it..
more might be available, but i have not seen all of it.
toshiba + xoom is the only kernels with drivers i seen so far..

Trolling on Samsung Infuse Forum...

And from a few posts I read that Samsung has not only released the source code for their roms, but have actually reached out to the developer community to help with custom rom development.
Must be nice...
Sent from my Dell Streak using Tapatalk

If you asked me a year ago what I thought of samsung I would have had some nasty words...But in the past year they have stepped up their game like none other. Not only have they resolved many of the issues they were having in the past (GPS), but they are updating their phones a lot quicker, and have some of the best displays in the business. I will most likely be getting an SGS2 once it's released in the states because it's not only the top android phone now but samsung has become a top notch android company (pretty much opposite of dell) and that's very important to a lasting positive experience with a phone.

That's a pretty refreshing turn of events and gives me new respect for Samsung also. It's about time that these companies realize that the modding community is the best friend they could ever have in many ways.
Supporting grass roots innovation is always a good thing!
I'll buy a Samsung device if they open up the driver and kernel to the community like that. Definitely a plus.

Something interesting I read recently somewhere else (can't remember now, might have been Reg Hardware), in order to be GPLv2 compliant (as Android is released as), point 3 of the license states that ALL source code must be made available, including the drivers...
No idea if this helps anything at all with our Streaks, but certainly the drivers are the current sticking point for DJ Steve and Fards et. al.

android is NOT gpl
the linux kernel inside it is gpl2
everything else (ie the entirety of android minus the kernel itself) is apache which means they can basically do whatever the hell they want with it

chaosdefinesorder said:
Something interesting I read recently somewhere else (can't remember now, might have been Reg Hardware), in order to be GPLv2 compliant (as Android is released as). . . .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android is not GPLv2 it is Apache Software License, 2.0.
License page
One of the reasons that is is Apache licensed and not GPL is that there are less restrictions on marrying proprietary bits with the main OS. Makes it easier for phone manufacturers to mate Android with the hardware and software bits they want to keep secret.

Yea, read this and weep:
http://www.neowin.net/news/samsung-embraces-cyanogenmod-gives-away-sgs2-to-devs
Definitely jealous...
Sent from my Dell Streak using Tapatalk

marvin02 said:
Android is not GPLv2 it is Apache Software License, 2.0.
License page
One of the reasons that is is Apache licensed and not GPL is that there are less restrictions on marrying proprietary bits with the main OS. Makes it easier for phone manufacturers to mate Android with the hardware and software bits they want to keep secret.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Aww pants, here's me being optimistic that we can force the drivers out of them

Will there ever be ports to ___? No!

There won't be ports to say, the Motorola Xoom or the HP TouchPad. Let me explain:
1. In it's current state, Windows 8 doesn't support ARM architecture, although it will later, so I suppose this is only a semi-valid point.
2. and 3. Windows 8 isn't open source, so any ports would be illegal and without source, it's basically impossible.
Please don't fill this subsection with questions concerning if it'll ever come to your tablet/phone/etc., because it won't.

your right,I almost forgot about legal stuff! +1 for pointing this out!

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4811/windows-8-tablets-running-on-ti-qualcomm-nvidia-amd-intel-silicon
???????
i guess we can be confident that 1. will happen

NikolaiT said:
There won't be ports to say, the Motorola Xoom or the HP TouchPad. Let me explain:
1. In it's current state, Windows 8 doesn't support ARM architecture, although it will later, so I suppose this is only a semi-valid point.
2. and 3. Windows 8 isn't open source, so any ports would be illegal and without source, it's basically impossible.
Please don't fill this subsection with questions concerning if it'll ever come to your tablet/phone/etc., because it won't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Microsoft does have Windows 8 running on ARM, the only thing they haven't done is release a dev build. We'll either get it at a later date or we'll have to wait for the beta.

NikolaiT said:
There won't be ports to say, the Motorola Xoom or the HP TouchPad. Let me explain:
1. In it's current state, Windows 8 doesn't support ARM architecture, although it will later, so I suppose this is only a semi-valid point.
2. and 3. Windows 8 isn't open source, so any ports would be illegal and without source, it's basically impossible.
Please don't fill this subsection with questions concerning if it'll ever come to your tablet/phone/etc., because it won't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not being open source didn't stop the HTC HD2 from recieving Windows Phone 7

Saljen said:
Not being open source didn't stop the HTC HD2 from recieving Windows Phone 7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mobile OSes are less work than a full fledged operating system, plus, you need to consider legality.

Nitro_123 said:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4811/windows-8-tablets-running-on-ti-qualcomm-nvidia-amd-intel-silicon
???????
i guess we can be confident that 1. will happen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While it will support ARM, I'd say it's doubtful that it would be released on a disk that you could just load onto your existing device, it will probably only come preloaded on devices by OEMs.
Saljen said:
Not being open source didn't stop the HTC HD2 from recieving Windows Phone 7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Traditionally MS haven't been worried about piracy of their mobile OS's. Their mobile OS efforts have mainly been about keeping people in the Windows eco-system, and to a much lesser degree selling licenses for CE to OEMs making embedded devices. In most cases of mobile OS roms being posted, they've just been updated/enhanced roms for existing Windows mobile devices and so haven't really cost sales and have possibly enhanced the ecosystem.
They're generally much much more concerned about piracy of their main OS. It remains to be seen how they will react to people trying port the ARM version of Windows 8, but they could easily react as strongly as they would for a normal x86 windows.

NikolaiT said:
Mobile OSes are less work than a full fledged operating system, plus, you need to consider legality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's never stopped developers from porting anything before...
I think at this point the largest hurdle is getting a build from an ARM dump. And drivers...can't forget about drivers.

NikolaiT said:
Mobile OSes are less work than a full fledged operating system, plus, you need to consider legality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would the legality be an issue? As long as you have a valid licence and key, when it officially becomes for sale, wouldn't it be ok?

dhiral.v said:
Why would the legality be an issue? As long as you have a valid licence and key, when it officially becomes for sale, wouldn't it be ok?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It most likely won't.

ugothakd said:
It most likely won't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why not?
If you've paid for the license, I am free to put it on which ever device I own be it my laptop, desktop or tablet.

dhiral.v said:
Why not?
If you've paid for the license, I am free to put it on which ever device I own be it my laptop, desktop or tablet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I mean the arm copy...it'll most likely never be sold as a seperate product. Just built in

1. WinMo wasn’t open source either. Unlike WinMo, Windows licenses can be purchased.
2. Considering the fact that Intel and Google are now working together, the likelihood of cross compatible hardware specs are high for both Arm and Intel chips
3. This OS if it stays in close to current form will be a sort of hybrid of mobile/desktop OS. The mobile side will create a need for sideloaded apps, tweaks, reg hacks etc.
4. It is almost certain that Windows Phone will converge with this os down the line and I would argue that this forum has potential to be the most used forum of the site so the earlier the devs get started the better!

TechJunkiesCA said:
4. It is almost certain that Windows Phone will converge with this os down the line and I would argue that this forum has potential to be the most used forum of the site so the earlier the devs get started the better!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This porting work will indeed happen. Just not on this forum aparently/unfortunately. Discussions about illegal software is a far cry from hosting illegal software. Developers often experiment with breaking laws for learning about a system. exe - tutorials about changing esn # with specific notes that you should not do it. It's just an experiment.
My question is it against the rules to discuss or link to other sites that house these ports? It used to be at least overlooked. See example below and there are countless others in the older stuff.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=362344&page=3
In the past XDA was much more loose about this type of stuff and was my first place to look for the dream goal of putting a desktop class OS on a PDA.

ugothakd said:
It most likely won't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But do you honestly think anyone will care much about it?
Take Mac OS X for instance. It clearly states in the EULA that installing the software on unapproved/non-Mac hardware are illegal, and yet there are tons of people with dedicated forums hacking away at it to make it run on various PC hardwares, and still ongoing for years.

eXecuter.bin said:
But do you honestly think anyone will care much about it?
Take Mac OS X for instance. It clearly states in the EULA that installing the software on unapproved/non-Mac hardware are illegal, and yet there are tons of people with dedicated forums hacking away at it to make it run on various PC hardwares, and still ongoing for years.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good point...people will try. But the bootloaders are most likely different. Maybe devices with hacked bootloaders (captivate) would be possible.
sent from my epic 4g. with the key skips.

You are 100% right NikolaiT...

If you own a valid license it can't be illegal anyways be it ARM version or not.
We'll see how microsoft releases the product and how many different versions there are in what form.

Indeed, i think we need to leave the legalities aside, and use the assumption of....
You have your Legal and valid licence key, this is how you can get it working on x y and Z
Of course, if it is only Sold as OEM then legally you dont have leg to stand on, OEM copies are for the sole use on the hardware in which is was purchased with, i think the licence says it allows a number of hardware upgrades but you are not intitled to rip it off one PC and dump it on another one. (assuming its the same as a Win 7 Licence), yes people do do it, but that doesnt make it legal or condonable, so if thats the case the XDA couldnt allow anything to do with it
But lets say it can be brought as a retail package, then there is nothing to stop us from attempting to install it on anything we like, infact it may even be easier than we think given that MS usually gives a shed load of drivers, the tricky bit will be getting the bootloaders to allow it.

eXecuter.bin said:
But do you honestly think anyone will care much about it?
Take Mac OS X for instance. It clearly states in the EULA that installing the software on unapproved/non-Mac hardware are illegal, and yet there are tons of people with dedicated forums hacking away at it to make it run on various PC hardwares, and still ongoing for years.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Forbidden, not illegal. The EULA doesn't really have any legal basis whatsoever. Apple can deny you support on your product if you break the EULA though.

An opensource Mali-400 driver is being developed

A reverse engineered, open-source, Mali-400 driver.
Pretty cool, but don't expect to see it running on the Note soon.
It would be nice to see more opensource drivers!
Imagine if a new Android build's source comes out and a developer already has access to drivers for i.e the camera.
I don't understand why ARM or any other company doesn't make their drivers opensource in the first place.
Popular hardware will get reverse engineered opensource drivers eventually.
Nvidia's optimus for example. It just takes a lot of time.
But a driver is software and software has to be closed source for some reason
Here's a link for some more information if you're interested.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=arm_mali_reverse&num=1

So the waiting begins. Bump this thread next year when they're done

DaanJordaan said:
A reverse engineered, open-source, Mali-400 driver.
Pretty cool, but don't expect to see it running on the Note soon.
It would be nice to see more opensource drivers!
Imagine if a new Android build's source comes out and a developer already has access to drivers for i.e the camera.
I don't understand why ARM or any other company doesn't make their drivers opensource in the first place.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think its just one of those bloody minded ideas in business. "We don't do it that way because thats not the way we do things." Kind of circular logic stupidity.
If you are selling a product then surely its in your interest for your product to be more useful and become more popular!
Imagine buying a sports car which required you to use a driver with it as you were never allowed to know how to drive it yourself ;-)

PurpleMelbourne said:
Imagine buying a sports car which required you to use a driver with it as you were never allowed to know how to drive it yourself ;-)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very nice comparison!

Omni Rom For MTK Devices

Many rom projects like Cyanogen mod, Paranoid droid rom and many others were released only for renowned company phones like Galaxy Series, Nexus series etc etc, where as millions & billions of MTK soc phones that contribute alot to the daily millions of Android activations are left out. Many MTK phones developers started request threads for cyanogen mod and other rom communities to build/release a rom for MTK phones but those request were neglected till date.
Now with the start of new rom project "Omni", MTK phone devs are hoping that this rom will also be compiled & released for MTK phones. We want Omni pioneers to release this rom for millions & billions of MTK phones.
We are willing to help you guys making Omni rom project better & grow.
Regards

Wouldn't have it been easier to read some posts in the forum?

This will happen. When you're able to watch the presentation video (which will be up in the next few days) you'll notice that @XpLoDWilD shows Omni running on the Oppo R819, a quad-core MTK device.

jerdog said:
This will happen. When you're able to watch the presentation video (which will be up in the next few days) you'll notice that @XpLoDWilD shows Omni running on the Oppo R819, a quad-core MTK device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are a lot of things in the way. Also, any MTK devices that ship without kernel sources (there are a lot of them) are still out of luck.
The R819 is a game changer here - Oppo really wants it to receive community firmware support and has been EXTREMELY cooperative with us in terms of getting us documentation.

Entropy512 said:
The R819 is a game changer here - Oppo really wants it to receive community firmware support and has been EXTREMELY cooperative with us in terms of getting us documentation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So they are giving you access to the MTK framework sources? Or do you have to reimplement the dual sim support (I have never seen any open source ROM with dual sim support)? I'd really love to help a bit, having some MTK6577 phones lying around here.

I too have two MTK phones .....they are a powerful if it got development projects like this ...it will be the no.1 vendor in chip set marketing and ...I support for OMNI PROJECT
Sent from my Fly IQ451 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

C-o-M said:
So they are giving you access to the MTK framework sources? Or do you have to reimplement the dual sim support (I have never seen any open source ROM with dual sim support)? I'd really love to help a bit, having some MTK6577 phones lying around here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure about the state of dsim support. We do have access to quite a bit, however some items even the OEM we're working with doesn't have access to source for, and it's also a nasty licensing minefield.
There's much better potential than there has been previously, however there are still some nasty technical and legal challenges. For example, MTK's 4.2 firmware appears to be using all sorts of hwcomposer backcompat hacks to use what is effectively a 4.0 (ICS) HWC.

Entropy512 said:
I'm not sure about the state of dsim support. We do have access to quite a bit, however some items even the OEM we're working with doesn't have access to source for, and it's also a nasty licensing minefield.
There's much better potential than there has been previously, however there are still some nasty technical and legal challenges. For example, MTK's 4.2 firmware appears to be using all sorts of hwcomposer backcompat hacks to use what is effectively a 4.0 (ICS) HWC.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With this I assume device will not receive 4.4 barely 4.3 but can I ask how is to work with OEM?
Sent from my Xperia U using xda app-developers app

XperianPro said:
With this I assume device will not receive 4.4 barely 4.3 but can I ask how is to work with OEM?
Sent from my Xperia U using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody can predict what happens in the future.
In terms of working with OEMs, not sure what your question is, but one thing we do bring to the table with Omni is considerable experience in working with OEMs. And that should be rather beneficial for everyone

Will you be allowed to release all sources needed to build the ROM?

There are sources for various MTK devices (MT6577/MT6575) that can be used already. I assume it would be no problem for the omni team to integrate them into their builds.

darkguy2008 said:
There are sources for various MTK devices (MT6577/MT6575) that can be used already. I assume it would be no problem for the omni team to integrate them into their builds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We have more recent ones that are being used to bring up MTK devices.
At the BBQ, Xplod demonstrated an Oppo r819 running Omni, which is an MT6589

pulser_g2 said:
We have more recent ones that are being used to bring up MTK devices.
At the BBQ, Xplod demonstrated an Oppo r819 running Omni, which is an MT6589
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So with this you mean that those sources work for MT6577 devices?

I wish you guys the best of luck, but conserning MTK and their closed sources policy, i really don't believe those sources (and im talking about the framework /RIL) will be Open Source.
If we are lucky enought we may get some working builds for some of the phones (if an brand gives you support), but concerning the MTK licenses, well its an MINE FIELD.
An good example is the on-going Cyanogen project by FAEA for the F2S (MT6589), they got the green light from MTK, BUT the project will remain Closed Source, so no one will get those sources...
B.Regards

superdragonpt said:
An good example is the on-going Cyanogen project by FAEA for the F2S (MT6589), they got the green light from MTK, BUT the project will remain Closed Source, so no one will get those sources...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AFAIK, you are wrong:
chasepoes said:
Well I know of one dev. who is develloping CM port voor MTK658x devices (usinf Faea mobile). For now he has to operate under a NDA agreement, but once finished his source will be come available.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

darkguy2008 said:
So with this you mean that those sources work for MT6577 devices?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unknown. And as I've said, it's a licensing nightmare.
It may be that certain components will have to be developed in a "some people have the source but can only release blobs" - I would prefer to avoid this if at all possible. The issue is if any of those "files with nasty license" are in things that can't be cleanly separated, it will present a MAJOR issue.

Entropy512 said:
Unknown. And as I've said, it's a licensing nightmare.
It may be that certain components will have to be developed in a "some people have the source but can only release blobs" - I would prefer to avoid this if at all possible. The issue is if any of those "files with nasty license" are in things that can't be cleanly separated, it will present a MAJOR issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I assume something like the HTC Magic or the Defy can be done. They don't have the sources for the hardware GPU but they managed to enable hardware compositing after some work somehow. I don't think that MTK will oppose to the project using the libs and such instead of having full access to the code, usually that feels less restrictive for both the company and the devs, imho.
I may be talking rubbish though, I'd just like the MT6577 devices to get some lovin', because we've been fighting for quite some time against ZTE for them to release the kernel sources so we can develop ROMs for the V970M and more =/

darkguy2008 said:
Well I assume something like the HTC Magic or the Defy can be done. They don't have the sources for the hardware GPU but they managed to enable hardware compositing after some work somehow. I don't think that MTK will oppose to the project using the libs and such instead of having full access to the code, usually that feels less restrictive for both the company and the devs, imho.
I may be talking rubbish though, I'd just like the MT6577 devices to get some lovin', because we've been fighting for quite some time against ZTE for them to release the kernel sources so we can develop ROMs for the V970M and more =/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ZTE,I dont know much about this company but its worse than Sony I think...
Why not release kernel sources,what are developers doing at their company...

XperianPro said:
ZTE,I dont know much about this company but its worse than Sony I think...
Why not release kernel sources,what are developers doing at their company...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty much most Chinese companies are like this. Oppo is VERY non-typical of a Chinese company, which is why they have a FAR better chance of global success than any other Chinese mobile OEM right now.

Entropy512 said:
Pretty much most Chinese companies are like this. Oppo is VERY non-typical of a Chinese company, which is why they have a FAR better chance of global success than any other Chinese mobile OEM right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How very true. I have high hopes for this project as my current device is an OPPO R819. I chose OPPO because exactly they try to be open with the developers, having the experience of Motorola and their locked bootloaders the past years while the Motorola DEFY was my main device. It took a long time for the DEFY to get its first custom kernel and it only happened thanks to some very persistent people. It shouldn't be like this, so as long I have a choice I'll opt for unlocked (and cheap...) devices.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app