Related
Heads up: The Nvidia Harmony device defs just went "live" in the Cyanogen Repository for anyone playing with the source. It's a way cleaner start than the frankenbuild I was working on. This puts us 3/4 there to a viable gingerbread build on the gtablet
Sweeeeeeeet!
Ouh yeahh ^^
Is it disgusting to tell everyone I almost pee'd a little? ( from excitement not urinary incontinence, I'm an old fart but not that old )
Follow @cmsrc and you'll see that our own Brint E. Kriebel has been committing!
Hello,
This was brought up in another thread that is now locked.This post asked the question.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=11287492&postcount=40
and this is the blog post by Cyanogen
http://www.cyanogenmod.com/home/a-note-on-unofficial-ports-and-how-to-get-it-right
From what I can make from the blog post that Cyanogen put up on the CM website the Epic 4g as well as the other Galaxy S CM ports are not backed by Cyanogen because they do not go through the normal chain of how they add their code into their source code tree.The Galaxy S CM github has many changes to the stock android code that could possible and probably does break the code from being compiled for other phones. The framework is modified to work with the Samsung RIL that our phones use. The CM team will make additions to the stock android code not modifiy the stock code itself. So from my understanding of thing this is why Cyanogen does not consider what the CMSGS team has done as a part of the mainline CM code base. I believe this goes for all the Galaxy S phones not just the Epic.
Does being backed by the CM team make it get done any quicker? If so....
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Being backed by the Cm team would definitely speed up the porting process, Cyanogen had the Evo Release Client up and running in a little over a month without source
So its a matter of pulling the source together and prperly placing it into their source control so their build bot can properly dov what build bots do...build...then CM helps with the port process?
If I think I'm following that right...somone better start uploading code to Cyanogens t&c's(terms and conditions) so we can have some epic awesomesauce.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Most importantly, no major hardware functionality should be broken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What this statement implies is that no Cyanogenmod port is ever gonna be official right away; there's always an in-progress period where major functions are broken. Regardless of other issues, that's where our Epic port is at right now and part of the reason why it's not official.
Poryhack said:
What this statement implies is that no Cyanogenmod port is ever gonna be official right away; there's always an in-progress period where major functions are broken. Regardless of other issues, that's where our Epic port is at right now and part of the reason why it's not official.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True but there is code that is changed in the Galaxy S port that doesn't get changed at all in other CM ports as far as I know.
If we had HTC Epic's instead of Samsung Epic's and still identical devices... CM would officially support the Epic.
Period. They can say whatever they want but we all know this to be the case. You can't tell me Samsung changes their code that much more then HTC... last I checked Sense was a much more in depth overall to the underlying OS then Touchwiz is.. but maybe not.
The thing is, HTC uses the same hardware across the board (snapdragon processors, same camera etc.) which makes Rom ports much much easier to pull off, whereas the Hummingbird in the Galaxy S is only in the Galaxy S and only the Unlocked Galaxies and Gsm have froyo source so far.
Thanks for osting this skeeter
Android Creative Syndicate- From spontaneous ingenuity, comes creative brilliance
063_XOBX said:
The thing is, HTC uses the same hardware across the board (snapdragon processors, same camera etc.) which makes Rom ports much much easier to pull off, whereas the Hummingbird in the Galaxy S is only in the Galaxy S and only the Unlocked Galaxies and Gsm have froyo source so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The changes in the code have nothing at all to do with the cpu its all for the radio which even having froyo source will not help a bit with.Its all in the way the code changes were done. Rather then adding to the base code in CM the code was directly changed which is what Cyanogen has an issue with doing so basically could and probably has broken the radio code for other cdma phones, I don't know what or if any of the code in the frameworks was changed for the gsm Galaxy S phones so I can't say for sure that it the source from the CMSGS github wouldn't work on another GSM phone I only know that changes were made to get it working on the Epic and Fascinate.I don't think what the CMSGS team did was wrong they did what they had to do to get things working and from the time I spent working on it it didn't seem like there was much input from the CM team at all but that was probably happening in another irc channel that I was not invited into if they were involved.I was hoping that the Galaxy S would have had more interest from the CM team as a whole I know a phone or two was collected and donated to at least one dev and i also heard that Koush was supposed to take over the Captivate port of CM I am not sure if that ever happened or not but the Epic and Fascinate were from the beginning the red headed step children of the Galaxy S line it really is too bad that there wasn't for developers around to help work on it and make an offical Cyanogen backed CM port.I blame it all on the Evo personally if the Epic came out first it would be the Epic sporting all the kernel and roms that you can find in the Evo forum instead we are left with a handful or less of devs and a phone that is far from the potential that it has.
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
dreamsforgotten said:
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where's the thank spam? hah.
I've slowly been dipping myself into the Developer 'pool' for the epic if you will..and at first when I started working nobody really ever helped out..they just threw me a link and was like..start reading blah blah blah..
Reading only gets you so far; Imho you learn better when you've got the experience of working first hand with the material you're trying to learn.
dreamsforgotten said:
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When it comes to working on CM most of the work that needs to be done is all coding which we have very few if anyone java coders. Also you can use extract-files.sh on a phone running straight DK28 to get the propietary files needed to build CM with.When it comes to everything else most of the devs have taught themselves how to do the things they so by trial and error and alot of reading the internet. I know I have little coding skill so its would be hard to teach someone something you don't know how to do yourself and alot of the other things like putting togther device files to build android even on the google site has no real information on how to do it at all the best way I think is to just compare what the other phones use and piece it together from that.
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
theimpaler747 said:
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I can see its not that Cyanogen doesn't want to support the galaxy s devices its that it seems they don't give any input to the devs that are working on CM for the galaxy s. They have basically split off from the main CM source tree itself and run their own source tree. It seemed like (and this is from the limited amount I saw on irc) that there was no input from the CM team they just let them work on their own. CM has ways to setup the code so the source tree remains workable across the board on all the devices it supports, the cmsgs team has just taken a different route on things and gone their own route thus making it not backed by cyanogen, was it the right way to do it who knows but it has made all the galaxy s devices redheaded step children in the eyes of Cyanogen and the CM team as a whole by the looks of it. I know from the point of view of having an Epic the major hold up to it is having coders with the proper skills to do the coding in general we had one coder working on it I don't know if he is still involved or not at this point. All I know is to make is a backed by Cyanogen CM port the coding that has been done so far would have to be completely redone in the ways that the rest of the CM team adds code to the CM source tree with as little to no modification of the stock CM code as possible.
Also I would like to add that I am not trying to put anyone down that is working on the CMSGS team they have done CM working on these devices and am in no way bad mouthing the work that has been done. This is just my view on things and why Cyanogen doesn't back the galaxy s CM ports.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
theimpaler747 said:
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, trying to comprehend everything that is going on here, I feel like the CMTeam does not feel the Epic is worth porting to CM7 due to it's delay on a FroYo source, which I am positive would make the Epic's porting much easier.
However, it still makes me wonder why they could not have used 2.1 to port to CM7, as like you said, the Hero has been able to do.
It also confuses me that the Captivate has even been able to run a Gingerbread port (I believe cyanogen) then. I realize that the Captivate has no 4G or a slide or anything, but the fact that they were willing to work off of 2.1 I assume gets me wondering why no one has tried making a CM port for the Epic's 2.1
I am trying to understand this as best as I can, so please forgive me if I seem to be giving false input on this conversation.
Its the time taken to port a phone, combined with the number of phones above yours on their list. The fact is they have a list of other phones they feel like investing their time in over the galaxy s line in general which is even more of a reason all knowledge of development on the Epic should be layed out even in pieces like the rest of the information here. Honestly thinking "leak it to noobnl, then we'll get all the goods" isn't going to cut it. Java coders, ubuntu fanatics who have compiled a few apps, and new people willing to learn should be putting heads together compiling new ****. If we dont start a group effort of making a bone stock aosp froyo altering the existing drivers were not going to be much further with source code. And it should be layed out here irc dont work for everyone.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
acer1096xxx said:
Well, trying to comprehend everything that is going on here, I feel like the CMTeam does not feel the Epic is worth porting to CM7 due to it's delay on a FroYo source, which I am positive would make the Epic's porting much easier.
However, it still makes me wonder why they could not have used 2.1 to port to CM7, as like you said, the Hero has been able to do.
It also confuses me that the Captivate has even been able to run a Gingerbread port (I believe cyanogen) then. I realize that the Captivate has no 4G or a slide or anything, but the fact that they were willing to work off of 2.1 I assume gets me wondering why no one has tried making a CM port for the Epic's 2.1
I am trying to understand this as best as I can, so please forgive me if I seem to be giving false input on this conversation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But like I said, there's CM7 (Android 2.3 if you don't know) for the HTC hero, with no 2.2 or 2.3 source code. So why not us?
theimpaler747 said:
But like I said, there's CM7 (Android 2.3 if you don't know) for the HTC hero, with no 2.2 or 2.3 source code. So why not us?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright, this is what I believe.
The Hero does not have 4G, or a QWERTY keyboard, two things the Epic does have that could make a pure AOSP port more difficult without a source. Also, HTC runs Snapdragon throughout the whole system, making tweaks a lot more simpler than SGS's Hummingbird Processor, which uses something else (I can't remember) with their system as well.
The last part I'm not sure if that makes a big deal or not, since I have seen a (what I think) CM7 port for the Samsung Captivate, so it may simply be because of 4G and the QWERTY keyboard.
I see what you're saying though. I guess the CMTeam should have no problem making a CM7 port based off of the Epic's 2.1 source...maybe they're just waiting because 2.2 might make it easier and supposedly 2.2 is coming soon so there'd be no point in starting now...otherwise I have no clue.
acer1096xxx said:
Alright, this is what I believe.
The Hero does not have 4G, or a QWERTY keyboard, two things the Epic does have that could make a pure AOSP port more difficult without a source. Also, HTC runs Snapdragon throughout the whole system, making tweaks a lot more simpler than SGS's Hummingbird Processor, which uses something else (I can't remember) with their system as well.
The last part I'm not sure if that makes a big deal or not, since I have seen a (what I think) CM7 port for the Samsung Captivate, so it may simply be because of 4G and the QWERTY keyboard.
I see what you're saying though. I guess the CMTeam should have no problem making a CM7 port based off of the Epic's 2.1 source...maybe they're just waiting because 2.2 might make it easier and supposedly 2.2 is coming soon so there'd be no point in starting now...otherwise I have no clue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think we also have 'limited functionality' w/ 2.1 as far as the phone's full capability.
2.2 will unlock some hidden potential IMO. Could be the reason why all the hubbub to 'wait for 2.2'.. again, just speculating.
Was just wondering, since HTC has released the source for the Flyer would it now be possible for devs to port it to our little tablet that could?
+1
This is a fantastic idea if we can get some of these great developers to port this. I'd much rather have a Flyer rom than a MIUI rom which is just recently rolling out. I was considering getting one once they were available but heck you can't beat the NC in price plus it gives me something along with my HD2 to modify and keep my sanity lol...
Holy crap, didn't even know of it. Sounds great!
racks11479 said:
Holy crap, didn't even know of it. Sounds great!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Racks does this mean you'll give it a shot. I'm down to try but I'm not sure how compatible the kernel is and I really dread doing any kernel work.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
I'm excited with just possibility, wish I had more experience to actually give porting this a go.
This helps a lot. I've been trying to port this recently, but It has been slow. This will help a lot! (Can't start today, got OS X Lion to install)
That is awesome to hear.
Racks,
This would be amazing if you could get ahold of this system dump( source codes) and create one of your amazing ROMs to run off The SD card this would be fantastic. You and all the developers are doing great things for all us NC owners. Thanks for all you do...
Before people actually get ANY hopes up..
All HTC has done, is release the KERNEL source code, not the OS source code. The kernel code is worthless, since the Flyer has completely different hardware from us. This is not the OS source, so we are still where we were before; stuck trying to port Sense binaries..
I see...thanks for the info Mr Madcat ... I'm still somewhat new for the roms. On the nook...been using different roms on my HD2 forever but am still a noob in the NC forum.
Divine_Madcat said:
Before people actually get ANY hopes up..
All HTC has done, is release the KERNEL source code, not the OS source code. The kernel code is worthless, since the Flyer has completely different hardware from us. This is not the OS source, so we are still where we were before; stuck trying to port Sense binaries..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He's got a point. This isn't the Sense UI code, but it could help.
Boo I assumed it included os source.
I'd be pretty darn interested in that too...
I think that this is future of our x10 on CM9, 100% faster than AOSP ICS code. Come on FXP developers, bring it to us.
blog.gsmarena.com/android-ice-cream...nks-to-linaro-the-future-looks-even-brighter/
What do u think about this?
Sent from my "z10i"
BTW not all patches will be merged
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=27308375&postcount=35875
Yap, but Linaro is based on CPU optimisation, not on GPU, and nightly CM9 with Linaro code for Galaxy Nexus work faster than the one with AOSP code.
Sent from my "z10i"
neoxx3m said:
Yap, but Linaro is based on CPU optimisation, not on GPU, and nightly CM9 with Linaro code for Galaxy Nexus work faster than the one with AOSP code.
Sent from my "z10i"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Big part of it be integrated into drivers
No driver sources = no implementation
Galaxy nexus have them(and its nexus devices only which is having all sources)
BTW its won't increase much visible performance and mainly benchmarks are improved
Its proven by AOKP team(if i remember correctly it was AOKP team who released linaro tweaks and toolchain based rom)
Anything newer is better but many stuff can't be implement
Linaro team is working on code for all devices with ICS. On video in first post Linaro ICS is running on SoC same as Motorola RAZR. Find interview with Linaro team leader on youtube and watch it. I think that future of Android and upgrades for devices based on Android is in Linaro optimisations. I hope so that Google will see it and hire those guys on Android development.
Sent from my "z10i"
You don't get it...
Its like you made the cake but forgot to add sugar, now you need to remake the cake but you don't have the ingredients
Razr is having same SoC as galaxy nexus which is open source so they have the ingredients
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=27323815
Read last post on that page
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
Linaro code in 125build of FXP CM9. Is it true? I hope so.
Sent from my "z10i"
neoxx3m said:
Linaro code in 125build of FXP CM9. Is it true? I hope so.
Sent from my "z10i"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
they removed it due to incompabilities.
THeLogiC said:
they removed it due to incompabilities.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
who wonders ?
Maybe in 126build.
Sent from my "z10i"
basically i've heard a lot of **** regarding linaro...
i have compiled kernels using linaro, gnu, android's own, and the old linaro toolchain... and i found NO DIFFERENCE AT ALL in daily use...
linaro is not magic... i would just tell guys to use google and wikipedia a bit and get to know what linaro is ....
it wont make things 100% faster... it's just another toolchain...think of it as another version of compiler (just like gcc 4.2, 4.3, 4.6 all can compile the same file and in 99.9% cases all the three binaries will run exactly the same way.... )
linaro just has some optimization options available... which MAY OR MAY NOT make any major difference to the final product...
i would just say... stop overhyping this linaro stuff....
this is what Roman Birg wrote on AOKP website
a note about linaro (warning, tech mumbo jumbo ahead)
These builds do NOT include the new Linaro optimizations. The optimizations don't increase the speed of Android by 100%, nor do they inject butter. They use a newer toolchain to compile Android, which has more optimizations. The Linaro people have also made the proper changes in Android code to allow builds to be compiled with -O3 instead of -O2 flags (think of it as another pass of code optimizations).
Please do not ask us whether we will include them in the future. We like speed as much as the next guy, but we want to make sure that it doesn't break ANYTHING. When/if it's ready, you'll know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used this rom on my Samsung infuse and it would be awesome if a dev could port it to the s4!
If you look on the original thread in the infuse forums you can see step by step instructions on how to port it.
I tries to do it, but don't know how to do step 6.
It turns out I was able to do it on my own!
chrisc93 said:
I used this rom on my Samsung infuse and it would be awesome if a dev could port it to the s4!
If you look on the original thread in the infuse forums you can see step by step instructions on how to port it.
I tries to do it, but don't know how to do step 6.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That rom is AOSP-based. So why don't you just try one of the other AOSP-based roms around here, such as AOKP or SlimBean?
mattdm said:
That rom is AOSP-based. So why don't you just try one of the other AOSP-based roms around here, such as AOKP or SlimBean?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am currently running Task's AOKP and it is really nice (i found it better than Slim on the s4), but BeanStalk has more features.
I was just wondering if it would be possible to get BeanStalk ported.
Thanks for the reply!
chrisc93 said:
I am currently running Task's AOKP and it is really nice (i found it better than Slim on the s4), but BeanStalk has more features.
I was just wondering if it would be possible to get BeanStalk ported.
Thanks for the reply!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not really easy whatsoever to port a Rom that is for a different device especially if the resolution is different for the other Phone.
Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk 2
I am unfamiliar with porting, so it is good to know it's not an easy task.
Thanks for your answer!
jetlitheone said:
It's not really easy whatsoever to port a Rom that is for a different device especially if the resolution is different for the other Phone.
Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's where source comes in handy...it eliminates a lot of those issues, really all we need is xxhdpi (we should be able to cherrypick that from cm when needed) to be added into aosp and then source porting should be a breeze for the most part - if you know how to build from source that is...actually building a custom aosp rom like scotts, that's a different story
Zip porting is where resolution and all that stuff makes it hard/not possible
Just look at cm...its available on nearly every device...why? Because its got its source up. Basically all you need to do is add in all the correct hardware source, kernel sources, device sources and proprietary files and your good...not saying its easy, as you do need to figure out what you need to add in, as well as edit a few files...but its definitely not really hard (although some of those errors you run into do make you want to throw your computer out a window)
-I guess it is a little hard, but for the most part its pretty much the same for any source port...trial and error your way through errors until it builds
Anyways, I'm sure someone will get around to it...I was gonna try and compile pure aosp...but my dev environment needs to be updated before I can start compiling again (been months since I compiled anything)
If it can be ported to the galaxy s3, than it can be ported to the galaxy s4 (I'm not saying the two are similar, but both are completely different from the Samsung infuse)
Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2
mg2195 said:
That's where source comes in handy...it eliminates a lot of those issues, really all we need is xxhdpi (we should be able to cherrypick that from cm when needed) to be added into aosp and then source porting should be a breeze for the most part - if you know how to build from source that is...actually building a custom aosp rom like scotts, that's a different story
Zip porting is where resolution and all that stuff makes it hard/not possible
Just look at cm...its available on nearly every device...why? Because its got its source up. Basically all you need to do is add in all the correct hardware source, kernel sources, device sources and proprietary files and your good...not saying its easy, as you do need to figure out what you need to add in, as well as edit a few files...but its definitely not really hard (although some of those errors you run into do make you want to throw your computer out a window)
-I guess it is a little hard, but for the most part its pretty much the same for any source port...trial and error your way through errors until it builds
Anyways, I'm sure someone will get around to it...I was gonna try and compile pure aosp...but my dev environment needs to be updated before I can start compiling again (been months since I compiled anything)
If it can be ported to the galaxy s3, than it can be ported to the galaxy s4 (I'm not saying the two are similar, but both are completely different from the Samsung infuse)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow this was some great info!
I've never built from source, but I'm going to give it a try with TMO's cm 10 for the s4. Just to get a grip on dev'ing.
Thanks.
EDIT: Actually, it looks like cyanogenmod has the galaxy s4 AT&T github repo up to date. I may just try to build using that source.
chrisc93 said:
Wow this was some great info!
I've never built from source, but I'm going to give it a try with TMO's cm 10 for the s4. Just to get a grip on dev'ing.
Thanks.
EDIT: Actually, it looks like cyanogenmod has the galaxy s4 AT&T github repo up to date. I may just try to build using that source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please keep in mind, in order to build from source you must have linux...actually I think Mac works too...but windows won't
Follow the link in my signature, its full of a bunch of tutorials, somewhere close to the top should be a thread called compile jb from ubuntu or something like that...follow that thread to get you started and get you build environment set up
-it is very confusing at first especially if your new to linux, bit once you get going it gets easier
Anyways, good luck!!! The great thing about porting from source is it gets your feet wet, gets you used to the basics with source...and eventually you can get experimental and start creating your own source roms...also, it is kinda addicting lol, for a while I was compiling non stop...I went from a flashaholic to a compileaholic lol...now, I'm neither due to my busy schedule but summer is just around the corner for me so that should change
Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2
mg2195 said:
Anyways, good luck!!! The great thing about porting from source is it gets your feet wet, gets you used to the basics with source...and eventually you can get experimental and start creating your own source roms...also, it is kinda addicting lol, for a while I was compiling non stop...I went from a flashaholic to a compileaholic lol...now, I'm neither due to my busy schedule but summer is just around the corner for me so that should change
Sent from my HTC PH39100 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! I'm looking forward to the challenge! Who knows, maybe I'll become a compileaholic too :laugh::laugh:
There is a build for the gs2 skyrocket here
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2249072
Not sure if that helps at all...
Sent from my AT&T Galaxy S4 Running AOKP 4.2.2
Just wanted to check in and let you all know that I successfully built cm10 for the galaxy s4! Used the source from the official branch. It's a pretty neat feeling knowing that I built the rom from source (and it's really neat seeing my name in the build date ) :victory:
I'm going to be contacting scott to see if he can help me build his rom. I already synced his repo on my computer, so I'm hoping the rest won't be too hard. :fingers-crossed:
Thanks @mg2195 for the help! :highfive:
I did it!
I am running the latest version of BeanStalk on my s4!!!!
I will make a new thread in the dev section as soon as I get permission. This rom is awesome!
:victory:
Felt like this deserved some attention
As johnny drama would say.... VICTORYYYYYY!!
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda premium
I'm am on my infuse ATM and am running Beanstalk. My S4 is on the fedex truck on the route to my house and I'm super excited and pumped to see this may be coming to the S4 if it does I may just keep my phone
Sent from my SGH-I997 using xda premium