Related
So now that Android 2.3 is out, what would it take to get it on the Gtab?
wiredmonkey said:
So now that Android 2.3 is out, what would it take to get it on the Gtab?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 I would also like to move my gtab from 2.2.0 to 2.3.0.
+1
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App
My guess, since ViewSonic hasn't released source is that it will be some time. Perhaps the Vega or Zpad devs will get to it first.
Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk
I think there is supposed to be a official update of the 20th.
I bet it will be Android 2.3 plus whatever app store Viewsonic managed to dig up.
The best thing about 2.3 for tablets like this without 3G is the VoIP phone calling.
Android 2.3 SDK is out. There's no OTA update for Nexus One yet. Nexus S release was announced for December 16th, so there will be something out by then for N1 presumably.
Not sure how much luck we'll have rolling our own Gingerbread build quite yet. We still have no kernel source or any other source code from Viewsonic for that matter. Basically, I'm pretty sure I'll have Gingerbread on my Nexus One well before my G Tablet.
BTW, there is some explicit stuff surrounding large screen support in the Gingerbread SDK. Sort of a recognition that there are now tablet devices out there even though they won't be blessed until the 3.0 release.
popezaphod said:
My guess, since ViewSonic hasn't released source is that it will be some time. Perhaps the Vega or Zpad devs will get to it first.
Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm new to Android, but why do we have to wait for Viewsonic? Can't the standard Android 2.3 source be compiled for the Gtab?
I'd recommend everyone calling Viewsonic support and asking them, if they get enough questions they may find some type of answer so we can guage their actions.
I do know that 2.3 has been worked on for this specific OEM device by Malata(zpad). The Woow! device is supposed to be released fairly soon with it. There are nvidia engineers working for Malata who will be on top of this, and I doubt it will take over a month to get it on our device one way or another.
wiredmonkey said:
I'm new to Android, but why do we have to wait for Viewsonic? Can't the standard Android 2.3 source be compiled for the Gtab?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android 2.3 "source" hasn't been released, only the SDK (Software Developers Kit).
You can download the SDK and start coding applications for OS 2.3 but you can't start building 2.3 ROM's until the source is released.
rothnic said:
I'd recommend everyone calling Viewsonic support and asking them, if they get enough questions they may find some type of answer so we can guage their actions.
I do know that 2.3 has been worked on for this specific OEM device by Malata(zpad). The Woow! device is supposed to be released fairly soon with it. There are nvidia engineers working for Malata who will be on top of this, and I doubt it will take over a month to get it on our device one way or another.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One month is better than six. With what we've seen so far, I wouldn't expect 2.3 any time soon, at least from VS. I know you Devs will get it to us way sooner.
Everyone excited about this VS "update" coming this month, I wouldn't get too terribly excited. Definitely wouldn't expect more than Flash for the Stock ROM. If VS is smart they'll pay Roebeet for his efforts and make TnT Lite the "update"
tcrews said:
Android 2.3 "source" hasn't been released, only the SDK (Software Developers Kit).
You can download the SDK and start coding applications for OS 2.3 but you can't start building 2.3 ROM's until the source is released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, gotcha.
Umm, I wouldn't expect anything but 2.2 from Viewsonic. Looking at the quality of their release software, besides bugfixes to make the stock ROM "usable" I doubt they will care about supporting this thing.
Once the source is released your time would be better spent thanking whichever dev decides to take this massive undertaking of porting 2.3.
tcrews said:
Android 2.3 "source" hasn't been released, only the SDK (Software Developers Kit).
You can download the SDK and start coding applications for OS 2.3 but you can't start building 2.3 ROM's until the source is released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not quite. you can use the sdk to build a rom.
its very hard and time consuming. but it can be done.
just look at what punk.kaos has done with the eris. there is already a (Very Buggy) gingerbread rom for the eris.
No, you can't use the SDK to build a rom but you can use the crippled system.img they provide in it and try to hack something together. Hacking that and using an older kernel isn't really the way to go. Compiling a rom is going to require source.
Building a rom, to me, is compiling from source. Otherwise you are tweaking someone else's rom or worse...trying to use an image created for the emulator.
Not to downplay his efforts or skill...but that is not a rom to use other than for experimenting or "learning" from.
babybacon said:
not quite. you can use the sdk to build a rom.
its very hard and time consuming. but it can be done.
just look at what punk.kaos has done with the eris. there is already a (Very Buggy) gingerbread rom for the eris.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my Viewsonic 10" GTab...
tcrews said:
No, you can't use the SDK to build a rom but you can use the crippled system.img they provide in it and try to hack something together. Hacking that and using an older kernel isn't really the way to go. Compiling a rom is going to require source.
Building a rom, to me, is compiling from source. Otherwise you are tweaking someone else's rom or worse...trying to use an image created for the emulator.
Not to downplay his efforts or skill...but that is not a rom to use other than for experimenting or "learning" from.
Sent from my Viewsonic 10" GTab...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Idk man. kaosfroyo on my eris has been wonderfully fast and stable (especially for as slow as the eris is) ever since v22. these things take some tweaking.
Hello there,
I have this theory... I want to hear your opinions to see if I'm just crazy or I'm correct in thinking this.
After seeing how the unmodified Acer Iconia Galaxy ROM + modified ASUS Transformer kernel (Clemsyn's) worked on a Transformer I started to think that this could be because of all the Honeycomb tablets are running a pretty similar OS configuration ("stock-like" Honeycomb).
Am I right in thinking this (I haven't actually used any other HC tablet except the Iconia)?
If this is right, it kind of explains why an unmodified ROM developed for the Iconia works with our device, as they are using pretty similar systems. The main difference, of course, is the hardware. This explains the wifi, battery and other issues in this example. This was partly corrected from the use of an ASUS TF kernel (Clemsyns) with the same ROM since the kernel provides the needed interfaces, modules, whatever for the respective hardware.
Of course, the kernels between the devices, I'm assuming as I haven't actually compared the source, are pretty similar aside from certain hardware modules that have been left out during compilation, as they are both just modified Linux kernel. This explains why the Iconia ROM worked (mostly) even when using an Iconia kernel.
So am I right with all the above, or am I missing something obvious, or am I just crazy (2am and my PC's made my room very hot afterall)?
Okay, so if the above is correct, couldn't/shouldn't we be doing some cooperative developement with other Honeycomb device developers? Or at least the Iconia developers, as I'm not sure about other devices. I mean, if the ROMs are pretty much compatible, all that would need to be done is have a respective kernel for the respective device flashed on-top of the ROM, right?
Anyway, laugh at me, flame me, tell me to go to bed, whatever, but I'd like to know what your thoughts are.
And on a related note:
Has anyone actually tried flashing any other "other-device ROMs" onto a TF with a TF kernel and got it working?
I'd love to try, but my internet is terrible... I swear someone else on the network constantly has their BT speeds uncapped 24/7 (share-house's are ****ty).
I think that's pretty much the goal of the CyanogenMod project. Only reason they haven't begun on a Honeycomb version is because Google never released the AOSP. Hopefully this will change with ICS.
Yes, the OEMs are working together with google behind the scenes.
More than likely Google has "forced" them to contribute code in order to participate and enjoy early code.
Unified code at the OS level would be a godsend and allow for Windows - style updates.
poltak11 said:
After seeing how the unmodified Acer Iconia Galaxy ROM + modified ASUS Transformer kernel (Clemsyn's) worked on a Transformer I started to think that this could be because of all the Honeycomb tablets are running a pretty similar OS configuration ("stock-like" Honeycomb).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As far as I'm aware, pretty much all the current crop of Honeycomb tablets are all based on the Nvidia Ventana reference platform, so it's not too surprising that they are all very, very, similar software-wise.
Regards,
Dave
JCopernicus said:
Yes, the OEMs are working together with google behind the scenes.
More than likely Google has "forced" them to contribute code in order to participate and enjoy early code.
Unified code at the OS level would be a godsend and allow for Windows - style updates.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But as the OEMs are working together, why aren't independant developers here on xda? I mean, I'm just thinking that a lot more nice work would get done if there was unified developement going on between the HC devices instead of seperate forums, and seperate ROMs that seem to be very similar.
And yes, I do agree about the closed source problem. But Google said this is just a temporary thing, right?
It's hard to write too much code when you don't have the original to start with.
No one really wants to write Honeycomb from scratch.
sassafras
sassafras_ said:
It's hard to write too much code when you don't have the original to start with.
No one really wants to write Honeycomb from scratch.
sassafras
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand this, of course, but excuse my ignorance when it comes to Android Developement, but what are the developers of PRIME and Clemsyn's ROM and all the other HC ROMs working with at the moment, as there is no source other than the GPL'd kernel?
poltak11 said:
I understand this, of course, but excuse my ignorance when it comes to Android Developement, but what are the developers of PRIME and Clemsyn's ROM and all the other HC ROMs working with at the moment, as there is no source other than the GPL'd kernel?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are working with the OTA. It is all compiled things. They can add things on top of it, but they can't do modifications to it because its already compiled (source code not provided).
zephiK said:
They are working with the OTA. It is all compiled things. They can add things on top of it, but they can't do modifications to it because its already compiled (source code not provided).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, fair enough. Well assuming that Google actually does release the source-code sometime, will this sort of thing be happening? As in co-developement between devices?
It just seems like the sensible thing to be happening, as opposed to a greatly splintered "fork" style of developement.
poltak11 said:
Ah, fair enough. Well assuming that Google actually does release the source-code sometime, will this sort of thing be happening? As in co-developement between devices?
It just seems like the sensible thing to be happening, as opposed to a greatly splintered "fork" style of developement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chances are there will be a CyanogenMod type project once Android tablet sources are released.
However, there will always be developers who are primarily interested in doing their own thing, which is perfectly acceptable too.
Regards,
Dave
poltak11 said:
Ah, fair enough. Well assuming that Google actually does release the source-code sometime, will this sort of thing be happening? As in co-developement between devices?
It just seems like the sensible thing to be happening, as opposed to a greatly splintered "fork" style of developement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's a reason CM hasn't officially touched any Honeycomb tablet. There's no source. Once they open up the source with ICS then everyone will be working on it through github.
There is a great description of the ways to get ICS on Atrix from crnkoj:
crnkoj said:
So lets try to get some light into it, the issue about hw acceleration for the atrix is that, even now that nvidia released proper ICS binaries, those are made for recent kernel versions (post 2.6.39 and 3.x versions), those libs are floating around and are accessible to most people who would want to build stuff with hw acceleration, the problem on the atrix however is we only have 2.6.32 kernel sources from motorola, which in term means all the libs floating around are incompatible and useless. Now there would be two general ways of fixing this: 1. get libs that work with 2.6.32 kernels but are ics compatible (most improbable, except if moto leaks them and is still to lazy to move on from the 2.6.32 kernel) 2. get or make post 2.6.39 kernel sources that have the atrix's proprietary drivers including or rewritten (actually more probable, but still quite low chances, except if moto releases and ICS build for the photon/atrix or someone knows, has the time and will to write these code from scratch for the newer kernel versions). So as you can see this is quite a grim outlook, its still being worked on by community devs as far as my information are up-to-date, but i dont know which aproach they are choosing. There is however a minor glimpse of hope, since the move to integrate android drivers in the mainline/mainstream linux kernel is happening in the 3.3 kernel version (there are 3.2.x versions as of now), so this might be actually the best bet, hoping that most of the atrix proprietary drivers will be supported in it, one could just use the "nvidia libs floating around", another thing is nvidia is maintaining their own tegra2/3 kernel sources, so combined with the 3.3 move to android drivers and nvidia implementing support for tegra into their sources, it might not look so grim for us anymore, but this is all a developing story.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, there is another comment from one of the CM developers:
OK, since so many people are asking: The reason I'm doing the OMAP devices first is because the fine folks at Texas Instruments have, as before, published their reference code. (and Google's current reference device, the SGN, is an OMAP4, which also helps considerably).
The Optimus 2X (and its TMoUS brother, the G2x) is a Tegra2, and nVidia has, as always, published a total amount of zero useful lines of code; at this point, my time is better employed at getting CM9 off the ground with devices in which I can write code than it would be at figuring out how the hell to support old tegra binaries. It'll happen, but not in the near future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to this, there are some plans of CM-developers to make some kind of wrapper to use GB tegra binaries for ICS on GB kernel. Great!
Also, a question from me. LG has announced ICS on O2X. Will this release help us? I saw that some developers used O2X GB binaries for Atrix, and it worked even better Can we do the same trick with ICS binaries and get fully working ICS on ICS kernel?
v.k said:
Also, a question from me. LG has announced ICS on O2X. Will this release help us? I saw that some developers used O2X GB binaries for Atrix, and it worked even better Can we do the same trick with ICS binaries and get fully working ICS on ICS kernel?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can never be sure on the software world, but I hope so. A Motorola ICS release would definitely be better though.
Interesting information, thank you!
Easier said than done...
But thanks for sharing the info.
Sent from my Atrix 4G using Tapatalk
Hopefully something will get worked out. I have no plans on leaving this phone as I love the FP scanner too much
if i'm correct, samsung's galaxy r and captivate glide are both tegra 2 phones and they run on the 2.6.36 kernel, which supports hw acceleration to a certain degree, does this help us?
Would it be as simple as compiling cyanogenmod for a new phone? We have official builds for my phone (lg Optimus g), and various other AOSP based projects. The main reason I am asking is I have compiled cyanogenmod night lies before, and this looks very interesting so I want to try to get it working on my phone.
evodev said:
Would it be as simple as compiling cyanogenmod for a new phone? We have official builds for my phone (lg Optimus g), and various other AOSP based projects. The main reason I am asking is I have compiled cyanogenmod night lies before, and this looks very interesting so I want to try to get it working on my phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is
XpLoDWilD said:
It is
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a quick question,will it support mediatek devices?
s.sawrav said:
Just a quick question,will it support mediatek devices?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes.
We have early support for the r819.
I hope OmniROM is also meant for devices with low specs like for my Xperia U. I am interested to try it as a user.
Mayank7795 said:
I hope OmniROM is also meant for devices with low specs like for my Xperia U. I am interested to try it as a user.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you have a working AOSP, it should be available without problems.
@XpLoDWilD
Would it be worth me attempting to build this for the tf700, or do you guys have plans for it?
Cheers
What about devices that have CM10 only?
lozohcum said:
What about devices that have CM10 only?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You need at least an unofficial CM 10.2 / AOSP 4.3.
JoinTheRealms said:
@XpLoDWilD
Would it be worth me attempting to build this for the tf700, or do you guys have plans for it?
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Building is always worth an attempt...
I used to build my own CM, i'm gonna try to build my own omni too but i'm struggling. I must be doing something wrong with the repo init but I can't seem to find what... I'm gonna update my buildbot first because it's been awhile, and maybe try again tomorrow.
As always everyone forget about non-highended devices and lower android versions. Everytime new android version appers, all devs greedily jump on in and start making roms only for it. Nexus 7, Xperia Z/Z1... I vomit. And of course experienced devs are not willing to share their's knowledge about device maintenance
lozohcum said:
As always everyone forget about non-highended devices and lower android versions. Everytime new android version appers, all devs greedily jump on in and start making roms only for it. Nexus 7, Xperia Z/Z1... I vomit. And of course experienced devs are not willing to share their's knowledge about device maintenance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's why its worth scrawling through XDA, going through guides and learning to dev. Nothing wrong with a dev who decides to leave an older version for a newer version. They're doing it for fun and free.
lozohcum said:
As always everyone forget about non-highended devices and lower android versions. Everytime new android version appers, all devs greedily jump on in and start making roms only for it. Nexus 7, Xperia Z/Z1... I vomit. And of course experienced devs are not willing to share their's knowledge about device maintenance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually have a plan about getting legacy devices involved in the form of a "legacy branch" complete with legacy maintainers. It's tricky to get started off, but might prove useful for anyone wanting to get longer community support for their devices.
pulser_g2 said:
I actually have a plan about getting legacy devices involved in the form of a "legacy branch" complete with legacy maintainers. It's tricky to get started off, but might prove useful for anyone wanting to get longer community support for their devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As long as there is no hard reason to stop supporting a device and we have someone who is taking care of that device we will try
On the other side - there is constant evolution which sometimes will make it necessary to leave a device "behind" if the effort will become too large
Sent from my Find 5 using xda app-developers app
XpLoDWilD said:
It is
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not quite yet... Not until we have roomservice up and running.
(For those that didn't understand what I said - roomservice is the part of CM's repo management system that will automatically sync a device tree and all dependencies. roomservice is HEAVILY dependent on github's APIs, so we couldn't even start work on that particular piece of infrastructure until the project went public.)
lozohcum said:
As always everyone forget about non-highended devices and lower android versions. Everytime new android version appers, all devs greedily jump on in and start making roms only for it. Nexus 7, Xperia Z/Z1... I vomit. And of course experienced devs are not willing to share their's knowledge about device maintenance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reason for the Nexus/Xperia Z support is because the vendors have AOSP source for pretty much the entire device readily available. The Xperia Z series (Z, Z Tab, Z1) have source widely available for (IIRC) pretty much everything bar the radio. Heck - sony had uploaded AOSP 4.3 sources before CM had 10.2 nightlies running, from memory.
Anything beyond that boils down to porting existing patches, or people bringing up other devices. This will generally happen for more widely used devices first simply because there's more likely to be someone available with the skills to do it. By the sounds of Omni is working, you could have pretty much any obscure old phone but if you're happy to do the bringup then it'll get added
M.
mattman83 said:
The reason for the Nexus/Xperia Z support is because the vendors have AOSP source for pretty much the entire device readily available. The Xperia Z series (Z, Z Tab, Z1) have source widely available for (IIRC) pretty much everything bar the radio. Heck - sony had uploaded AOSP 4.3 sources before CM had 10.2 nightlies running, from memory.
Anything beyond that boils down to porting existing patches, or people bringing up other devices. This will generally happen for more widely used devices first simply because there's more likely to be someone available with the skills to do it. By the sounds of Omni is working, you could have pretty much any obscure old phone but if you're happy to do the bringup then it'll get added
M.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Someone should write a definitive guide about converting CM10 device tree to AOSP JB device tree, so more people can work on devices maintenance
pulser_g2 said:
I actually have a plan about getting legacy devices involved in the form of a "legacy branch" complete with legacy maintainers. It's tricky to get started off, but might prove useful for anyone wanting to get longer community support for their devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope the Acer IconiaTAB A5000 will get supported.
Please, support for RAZR i (x86)
lozohcum said:
Someone should write a definitive guide about converting CM10 device tree to AOSP JB device tree, so more people can work on devices maintenance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Problem is, every device has its own pitfalls. Some are harder to overcome than others.
For example, the lack of NEON in tegra2 combined with the dependency of newer gapps on NEON really screws tegra2 devices, and there isn't much that can be done about it.
Also, in some cases, the things needed to get a device working aren't in the tree, but are in the frameworks to handle OEM-specific oddities (RIL hacking in opt/telephony, which I admit I'm not too familiar with...) or platform support. Sometimes, old devices get left behind simply because their platform overall is a ***** to support beyond a certain point. (See how MSM8660 devices have been lagging lately, due to Qualcomm pretty much sunsetting that chipset.)
The kernel source that LG posted on their opensource distribution site is not the code for the latest shipping version. Is that cool? Do they have any responsibility to provide the source for the newest version the shipped?
I wonder if the code they released matches earlier versions even. If only I could track down a rip of the system & boot images from the original version that shipped in Dec. 2014. Or even for the version after that. If anyone has one of those laying about, thanks, yo.
I have no idea, but that doesn't sound right.
Are you looking to unlock the bootloader so people can flash updated FFXOS ROMs to the device?
Saijin_Naib said:
I have no idea, but that doesn't sound right.
Are you looking to unlock the bootloader so people can flash updated FFXOS ROMs to the device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, I think I was wrong. Gah! I didn't realize that the prima_wlan stuff could be included included from outside the kernel tree. A qcom opensource repo is maybe where they built it from maybe?
> unlock the bootloader
No problems there, the Fx0 is wide-open. Like other LG devices, once you clear the CAF you gain Fastboot, and from there this device is splayed all day. You lose Download Mode, but since neither Mozilla or LG have seen fit to provide any of the usual KDZ images for that, I can't see any downsides. Maybe if they decide to update the Fx0 it would get used? I think it'd update in recovery instead though, yes?
Still want rips of Japanese system partition though. I wonder if the hiddenmenu is also stripped from those versions with v2.1 also? I want that hiddenmenu.
I have no idea. I'm not familiar at all with setting up a repo or anything. I've only ever build the ZTE Open repos provided by Mozilla, haha.
Oh, that is promising. What is the CAF?
Are you looking to get your Fx0 up and running with nightlies? If things actually work, I might grab one from eBay as a development/testing device as well.
Saijin_Naib said:
I have no idea. I'm not familiar at all with setting up a repo or anything. I've only ever build the ZTE Open repos provided by Mozilla, haha.
Oh, that is promising. What is the CAF?
Are you looking to get your Fx0 up and running with nightlies? If things actually work, I might grab one from eBay as a development/testing device as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Err, I meant LAF, its the partition on some LG devices where the Download Mode boot image lives. I've been spending a lot of time with my head buried in Codeaurora(CAF) repos, it's on the tip of my tongue.
Are you looking to get your Fx0 up and running with nightlies?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I already have to some extent. I should have a fully-functional test build any day now. Been codeblocked by some frustrating commits from Mozilla lately, broke my crap like 3 damn times in the last week. Refining the whole build setup now, trying to minimize reliance on prebuilt stuff, building as much as can, hence the interest in the pronto_wlan module, which I assumed was something that was exclusively build in the kernel tree (as seen on other LG devices), but apparently there's a CAF repo for that. Anyway, yeah.
culot said:
Err, I meant LAF, its the partition on some LG devices where the Download Mode boot image lives. I've been spending a lot of time with my head buried in Codeaurora(CAF) repos, it's on the tip of my tongue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, good to know. I'm a bit saddened to see that the prices on the Fx0 have gone up since just this past weekend. These must be getting more and more popular...
As an aside, you wouldn't happen to be knowledgeable about how to root the LGE LGL15G (LG Sunrise, 4.4.2, TracFone). I bought one as a beta testing device and as an Android Tablet/Wi-Fi toy, but there is no space on it due to the included bloatware O_O
culot said:
I already have to some extent. I should have a fully-functional test build any day now. Been codeblocked by some frustrating commits from Mozilla lately, broke my crap like 3 damn times in the last week. Refining the whole build setup now, trying to minimize reliance on prebuilt stuff, building as much as can, hence the interest in the pronto_wlan module, which I assumed was something that was exclusively build in the kernel tree (as seen on other LG devices), but apparently there's a CAF repo for that. Anyway, yeah.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was reading on the Mozilla wiki that they've been doing some code cleanup to transition FFXOS to B2G, and to make it so the community can maintain it. Apparently, they've been a bunch of busy bees debranding everything and settling dependencies. Is this why your builds have been busted?
Do you think the Fx0 could replace the Flame as the defacto B2G development/testing device?
I'm torn between getting one for grabbing yet another ZTE Open and smashing my face against the wall trying to get it to fully work with nightly builds.
What's in that hiddenmenu? That isn't the normal developer tools menu I'm used to, right?
Is it the Blaze Initiative stuff (themeing, hacking, add-ons, mods, etc)?
Saijin_Naib said:
Ah, good to know. I'm a bit saddened to see that the prices on the Fx0 have gone up since just this past weekend. These must be getting more and more popular...
As an aside, you wouldn't happen to be knowledgeable about how to root the LGE LGL15G (LG Sunrise, 4.4.2, TracFone). I bought one as a beta testing device and as an Android Tablet/Wi-Fi toy, but there is no space on it due to the included bloatware O_O
I was reading on the Mozilla wiki that they've been doing some code cleanup to transition FFXOS to B2G, and to make it so the community can maintain it. Apparently, they've been a bunch of busy bees debranding everything and settling dependencies. Is this why your builds have been busted?
Do you think the Fx0 could replace the Flame as the defacto B2G development/testing device?
I'm torn between getting one for grabbing yet another ZTE Open and smashing my face against the wall trying to get it to fully work with nightly builds.
What's in that hiddenmenu? That isn't the normal developer tools menu I'm used to, right?
Is it the Blaze Initiative stuff (themeing, hacking, add-ons, mods, etc)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you think the Fx0 could replace the Flame as the defacto B2G development/testing device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Considering how much proprietary LG stuff is on the Fx0, I doubt it. Dunno. Since FxoS is transitioning to B2G is there even a need for a official dev device? I have no idea really.
What's in that hiddenmenu? That isn't the normal developer tools menu I'm used to, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just the usual LG-specific hiddenmenu stuff. It seems like it was included in the initial release version for the Fx0... but from there, I don't know. Too bad I can't find any of the previous versions anywhere. Somebody must have them, somewhere.
Is it the Blaze Initiative stuff (themeing, hacking, add-ons, mods, etc)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have no idea what that is. Tell me more!
root the LGE LGL15G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, I don't know anything about that. I did try one once, seemed like a decent value for the $15 or so it was selling for.
culot said:
Considering how much proprietary LG stuff is on the Fx0, I doubt it. Dunno. Since FxoS is transitioning to B2G is there even a need for a official dev device? I have no idea really.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Drat. I was hoping they (LG) had opened up some of the binary blobs in their source release. I guess you're right in that there is no need for an official dev device, but much like with LuneOS, I think there is a need for a "supported" target/reference device that sets the baseline for functionality. I was hoping the Fx0 could be this device, but with your evaluation of it being still a highly closed, it sounds like a poor choice.
culot said:
Just the usual LG-specific hiddenmenu stuff. It seems like it was included in the initial release version for the Fx0... but from there, I don't know. Too bad I can't find any of the previous versions anywhere. Somebody must have them, somewhere.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've never seen this menu. Do the new Fx0 devices sold on eBay have this OS image installed, or is it something that was only shipped on the KDDI carrier sold devices?
culot said:
I have no idea what that is. Tell me more!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Blaze initiative was a path Mozilla were looking to take FireFoxOS on by allowing the OS to be customized and tweaked much like the desktop browser. The device would have the ability to call up the DevTools to edit the code of any running webapp to modify the appearance and functionality of the program. From what I had read, this would extend to even privileged/system apps. In this manner, the user could add something to say the Messages app (like a timestamp for how late a message arrived), change the background color of the messages thread, etc. These add-ons could be submitted to the Marketplace for certification and download. Also, it was likely that users could directly share these modifications by Sharing activities including Email, SMS, etc.
There was also talk of migrating over various XUL add-ons from the desktop browser that would be compatible with FFXOS. That alone would have made the platform borderline unstoppable, as the possibilities for expansion of utility, safety, and aesthetics would be nearly endless.
All of this being said, I can't currently find the articles about this initiative anymore. I'll keep looking.
culot said:
No, I don't know anything about that. I did try one once, seemed like a decent value for the $15 or so it was selling for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got mine for $9.99, and it benches out to being fairly comparable to the Moto E, which is not a bad performance point to be at for around $10. Shame it is SIM-locked and very difficult to root and take the garbageware out of.
Saijin_Naib said:
I've never seen this menu. Do the new Fx0 devices sold on eBay have this OS image installed, or is it something that was only shipped on the KDDI carrier sold devices?.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It looks like maybe the hiddenmenu was removed with a FxOS v2 update that added the ability to edit APNs, something that had to be done in the hiddenmenu previsouly. Maybe...
Ah, crap, I was wrong: the hiddenmenu, along with a ton of other LG & KDDI stuff, was stripped out of the international/unlocked version, leaving it a slow, featureless shell. It's disgusting actually. I feel acutely slighted. It's amazing the difference between both the speed and the features of the Japanese and unlocked versions. Apparently in Japan this is actually a decent phone. Too bad the international/unlocked peeps got the shaft.
And here I thought FxOS in general was just slow and terrible: turns out that was just result of the hatchet job pulled on the unlocked variants of the Fx0.
I wonder if it would be possible to overcome the mozfree issue that prevents the old libs from working on newer B2G?
Gah! I feel angry.
Hey. Do you still want the original jap 2.0 images?
aflaton said:
Hey. Do you still want the original jap 2.0 images?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you have a retail firmware, it would be much appreciated.