Guys,
Naturally, as the title states, its a general discussion thread for huashan LBL users. I want to discuss some things with like-minded people and hopefully once the momentum builds, we can try to achieve something.
Android L official release is just around the corner and our official fate is sealed by Sony @ 4.3.
But i plan on trying to port L using existing 4.3 kernel and make it at least boot so we know later on its a possibility for Locked Bootloader to have Android L.
Unlocked Bootloader guys are advised to stay away, as sooner or later, they will get proper AOSP 5.0.
Some points i want to make important.
1. This is NOT a cheer thread. Dont just post to show your excitement. It blocks the purpose of healthy discussion.
2. This is not for people who want new android. Have some sense, it isnt going to come anytime soon.
3. This is strictly for Locked Bootloader guys. So any other person coming and commenting might just be wasting his time.
Although, if you really have some positive thing to contribute, than whatever you have, LBL or UBL, please do share with all.
This is a good starting place to study.
https://github.com/Android-L-Porting-Team/Android-L-Mako/commits/master?page=3
Lets begin !
Im not sure how much id be able to contribute but ill be willing to help any way I can do. Do we even have a vague idea of what kernel modules would be needed for L? Im assuming thats what we'd need as I remember Bagyusz saying thats what he had to do for KK.
Has any of the freexperia team looked at L yet to your knowledge? Perhaps they may be able to give some small insight into drivers etc for LBL/UBL.
Will PA still be updated while this is being looked at? I'm assuming PAC wont need anything now unless problems occur as its all automated. Until L is working PA is a good thing for those wanting L due to them implementing features from L in KK such as recents and tinted bars (if they ever release them to legacy!!).
Oblox said:
Im not sure how much id be able to contribute but ill be willing to help any way I can do. Do we even have a vague idea of what kernel modules would be needed for L? Im assuming thats what we'd need as I remember Bagyusz saying thats what he had to do for KK.
Has any of the freexperia team looked at L yet to your knowledge? Perhaps they may be able to give some small insight into drivers etc for LBL/UBL.
Will PA still be updated while this is being looked at? I'm assuming PAC wont need anything now unless problems occur as its all automated. Until L is working PA is a good thing for those wanting L due to them implementing features from L in KK such as recents and tinted bars (if they ever release them to legacy!!).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dont worry so much. PA is at a stage that if u have linux, u can just compile it right away and all is on Auto.
I will release milestone builds... No point pushing weekly updates if there arent any major changes.
For PAC, i have even taken that burden off and compiling and uploading is not my headache now.
And apart from above, i dont use PA personally. PAC suits me best.
As you stated the main concern is how well "the sealed by Sony @ 4.3. bootloader" will be able to cope with android L?
I really appreciate your enthusiasm. And yes there is only one way to find out. And that is to actually try porting it.
mmfh said:
As you stated the main concern is how well "the sealed by Sony @ 4.3. bootloader" will be able to cope with android L?
I really appreciate your enthusiasm. And yes there is only one way to find out. And that is to actually try porting it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Porting is not an issue. We need a team. Not a band, but maybe 3 people. One compiler, One to tinker with trees and files, One tester. Just my suggestion.
One person cannot do it alone, unless he is an expert dev.
And about coping with L, all current devices having L port are using 4.4 kernel. And our 4.3 copes with 4.4. Technically there are not much issues compatibility wise. Just ramdisk and correct blobs.
I may be wrong, but thats why this discussion is goign on, if someone wants to correct me, please do.
I think this is an interesting project, XDA needs ppl like U
you think is easy port L with 4.3 kernel? I mean I'm just talking w/o reference, but Sony is just (until now) ignoring ART which is the biggest change for L (since 4.4 but well, now is not optional), and I think that could be a barrier to port new android for older phones (like SP)... what do you think about?
I hope this thread came with great news in the near future, :good:
This can be either hard or easy, hell or heaven, depending on the changes in L official release. Up until now, the changes are lying in ramdisk, but some features aren't available in the beta release.
But here are a few things that I noticed right now, before the official release:
1. UBL and LBL are stuck with 4.3 blobs. We are already using patched libraries, I guess it will get worse later, even on UBL.
2. I think we should wait until the CM12(?) will be working on UBL, while helping with bringing it up. If it works on UBL, then we should tinker with the LBL version. Actually, we have the hijack part, and we have the patches needed. I think it will be easy to get it to boot.
3. I think when @delewer finishes his kexec modules, some people that are experienced with kernel development could port it to SP, and then we could use it on forever locked phones. It will take some time, but will be the best for our phones.
So overall, if we have some luck, we would only have to kang CM trees, add the patches for hwcomposer, etc., add hijack and maybe some kernel modules. But we can be extremely unlucky and... I don't even want to imagine the worst case scenario.
Dont worry, the ground work is there. bagyusz gave us a great gift. I am sure Final release wont have boot-related changes. Maybe framework and libs, but not more.
The best thing is, 4.3 SONY rom DID NOT support ART. Bagyusz made it work even on LBL. and as Android L only supports ART, so thats the most important point i think.
Hmm, is ART even kernel-dependent?
I think that's not the case, and it's just great for us. So, bagyusz did a great work(it's just amazing), but I don't think he made any change to support ART.
And yeah, maybe there are just changes in frameworks and libs, but I'm still paranoid about this.
Anyway, I think that we are going to make it. That's what I feel, and I hope it comes true
neXus PRIME said:
Porting is not an issue. We need a team. Not a band, but maybe 3 people. One compiler, One to tinker with trees and files, One tester. Just my suggestion.
One person cannot do it alone, unless he is an expert dev.
And about coping with L, all current devices having L port are using 4.4 kernel. And our 4.3 copes with 4.4. Technically there are not much issues compatibility wise. Just ramdisk and correct blobs.
I may be wrong, but thats why this discussion is goign on, if someone wants to correct me, please do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I'm far from developer, I'm afraid cannot be of big help to you.
But I'm willing to contribute by testing builds and discovering bugs.
MrSteve555 said:
Hmm, is ART even kernel-dependent?
I think that's not the case, and it's just great for us. So, bagyusz did a great work(it's just amazing), but I don't think he made any change to support ART.
And yeah, maybe there are just changes in frameworks and libs, but I'm still paranoid about this.
Anyway, I think that we are going to make it. That's what I feel, and I hope it comes true
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not kernel dependant, i know, but you know what, booting a new android version using old kernel with just hijack n scripts is one HELL of a job.
And ART even didnt work for a long time on AOSP CM for huashan on UBL.
My point was, what we have here is a 4.3 kernel and blobs which might or might not be enough for android L. But before official release, we can try to port L from mako, by replacing blobs and ramdisk and boot, so that we have at least a proof of concept that LBL CAN boot L. Just boot. Nothing else.
neXus PRIME said:
Not kernel dependant, i know, but you know what, booting a new android version using old kernel with just hijack n scripts is one HELL of a job.
And ART even didnt work for a long time on AOSP CM for huashan on UBL.
My point was, what we have here is a 4.3 kernel and blobs which might or might not be enough for android L. But before official release, we can try to port L from mako, by replacing blobs and ramdisk and boot, so that we have at least a proof of concept that LBL CAN boot L. Just boot. Nothing else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Just" hijack? Bagyusz gave us an excellent base(hijack), and I bet we can boot FFOS or Ubuntu on that.
I didn't even know that ART didn't work on huashan before. Wasn't it a Gapps problem?
And yeah, these maybe aren't enough, as we are already patching some libs.
Ans one thing - I don't think we could port that from mako. It uses a little different base, and it isn't a CAF base. I think we should just wait
MrSteve555 said:
"Just" hijack? Bagyusz gave us an excellent base(hijack), and I bet we can boot FFOS or Ubuntu on that.
I didn't even know that ART didn't work on huashan before. Wasn't it a Gapps problem?
And yeah, these maybe aren't enough, as we are already patching some libs.
Ans one thing - I don't think we could port that from mako. It uses a little different base, and it isn't a CAF base. I think we should just wait
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just hijack meant different in a positive sense. But maybe it came out wrong.
And I'm talking about porting. Framework. Not building from source. They are actually doing same thing. I'll have to give it some time though.
neXus PRIME said:
Just hijack meant different in a positive sense. But maybe it came out wrong.
And I'm talking about porting. Framework. Not building from source. They are actually doing same thing. I'll have to give it some time though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I know what you are trying to say with porting L. Actually, there would be a few things that would break:
1. The YUV color palette support (fixable with our hwcomposer, gralloc etc)
2. GPU drivers - this is the "best" part. L is precompiled, and I think it uses the libRS override, which doesn't work on our huashan because of a kernel difference (if we could build from source, we could just not enable it). There are a few other things that aren't compatible. So even if we got it to boot, it would just show black screen, and I assume by "just booting" you mean actually seeing the effort
3. The whole "thing" is built off AOSP repos, not CAF ones. Idk if SP's stock kernel would play nicely with the whole different stuff.
These are just my assumptions, in the end everything could work just fine. If you have the sufficient time, it's nice to try. Just deleting the mako proprietary stuff, and adding the needed huashan blobs + adding correct ramdisk would get it to the bootable/half working state (or there is a chance that the "build" wouldn't even boot.). I guess it's not done yet for a reason.
Anyway, I have to squash one last bug in my CM builds. If it will work, I could also try porting the magical "L".
Related
So talking to my buddy about all the "junk" loaded on the Samsung, he kept raving about how his old Nexus One was just the way I would like it. I would like to have a "plain" version of Android 2.1 on my phone. I have a coworker friend that's a Linux guru that's willing to help. Here's my questions.
Can I take take the Samsung released source for the hardware drivers and compile it with a stock Android 2.1 platform? I'm not asking for step by step. More of a 10,000 foot how to. Is that possible?
Can you leave the CSC and Modem info the same and just install a PDA ROM with Odin? Or would you be overwriting all of that info on the phone?
Thanks and if this has been answered before, please fill free to say "search is your friend" and give me the links...
hallfleming said:
So talking to my buddy about all the "junk" loaded on the Samsung, he kept raving about how his old Nexus One was just the way I would like it. I would like to have a "plain" version of Android 2.1 on my phone. I have a coworker friend that's a Linux guru that's willing to help. Here's my questions.
Can I take take the Samsung released source for the hardware drivers and compile it with a stock Android 2.1 platform? I'm not asking for step by step. More of a 10,000 foot how to. Is that possible?
Can you leave the CSC and Modem info the same and just install a PDA ROM with Odin? Or would you be overwriting all of that info on the phone?
Thanks and if this has been answered before, please fill free to say "search is your friend" and give me the links...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I unfortunately haven't the answer but I'd like to add that I am curious about this too.
dalingrin said:
I unfortunately haven't the answer but I'd like to add that I am curious about this too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll second this and ask that if you do figure it out, please share with the community.
I think that vanilla Roms are a little further away in the future. First step in the process right now would be for someone to be able to compile a kernel from the Samsung released source code that works. Unfortunately the current Captivate kernel source code, when compiled, causes issues (voices garbled, lag when waking up the phone) that are not present in the stock precompiled kernel. These bugs are apparently not present in the other versions of the source code. Once these initial bugs are ironed out, we can truly start down the path of having custom fixes, and the devs can start to focus on bigger challenges, like making the vanilla Eclair or Froyo Roms to start working with our kernel. Good thing about this phone is that there are going to be so many versions of it, that parallel development is happening on multiple platforms. This will likely produce independent breakthroughs that could be theoretically ported between the platforms, but unfortunately it also slows down the development of each platform due to the quirks that have to be overcome. I hope that, in the future, we get to a place where all the source codes are merged into master repository that has all the necessary improvements and the ability to overcome individual platform quirks, so that the development can proceed more rapidly.
hallfleming said:
So talking to my buddy about all the "junk" loaded on the Samsung, he kept raving about how his old Nexus One was just the way I would like it. I would like to have a "plain" version of Android 2.1 on my phone. I have a coworker friend that's a Linux guru that's willing to help. Here's my questions.
Can I take take the Samsung released source for the hardware drivers and compile it with a stock Android 2.1 platform? I'm not asking for step by step. More of a 10,000 foot how to. Is that possible?
Can you leave the CSC and Modem info the same and just install a PDA ROM with Odin? Or would you be overwriting all of that info on the phone?
Thanks and if this has been answered before, please fill free to say "search is your friend" and give me the links...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check out this wiki from cyanogen:
http://wiki.cyanogenmod.com/index.php?title=Main_Page
On the bottom right you will see an advanced section that explains how to build from source code. (aosp)
Good luck!!! It's definitely not for me, not with kids and a full time job!
Good info. I haven't seen a post on people testing out the source code testing and their experience. Can you IM or point me to that?
Thanks!
rajendra82 said:
I think that vanilla Roms are a little further away in the future. First step in the process right now would be for someone to be able to compile a kernel from the Samsung released source code that works. Unfortunately the current Captivate kernel source code, when compiled, causes issues (voices garbled, lag when waking up the phone) that are not present in the stock precompiled kernel. These bugs are apparently not present in the other versions of the source code. Once these initial bugs are ironed out, we can truly start down the path of having custom fixes, and the devs can start to focus on bigger challenges, like making the vanilla Eclair or Froyo Roms to start working with our kernel. Good thing about this phone is that there are going to be so many versions of it, that parallel development is happening on multiple platforms. This will likely produce independent breakthroughs that could be theoretically ported between the platforms, but unfortunately it also slows down the development of each platform due to the quirks that have to be overcome. I hope that, in the future, we get to a place where all the source codes are merged into master repository that has all the necessary improvements and the ability to overcome individual platform quirks, so that the development can proceed more rapidly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also for clarification, when you bought a Nexus One straight from Google for AT&T, was it considered "Vanilla"? Is the build on that phone just like someone downloaded the source for 2.1 and compiled it with the hardware drivers and that's it? I'm wondering what all comes on a "basic" Andriod ROM straight from the source.
hallfleming said:
Also for clarification, when you bought a Nexus One straight from Google for AT&T, was it considered "Vanilla"? Is the build on that phone just like someone downloaded the source for 2.1 and compiled it with the hardware drivers and that's it? I'm wondering what all comes on a "basic" Andriod ROM straight from the source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nexus One is as Vanilla as it comes. Just straight up Android! I don't think there is anything added to stock 2.1 or 2.2 on the Nexus.
hallfleming said:
Good info. I haven't seen a post on people testing out the source code testing and their experience. Can you IM or point me to that?
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most of the kernel compiling struggles are documented here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=740747
Mimocan himself has started some work on it here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=747040
There are also people having success mixing Vibrant ROM on the Captivate with some GPS crash issues:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=746466
I am trying to follow those threads, and since I am not a developer, I can't personally contribute to the process. But it is interesting to me anyway.
I've seen these before. I thought they were just edited versions of ROM's sucked off a existing phone. Are these compiled from scratch?
rajendra82 said:
Most of the kernel compiling struggles are documented here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=740747
Mimocan himself has started some work on it here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=747040
There are also people having success mixing Vibrant ROM on the Captivate with some GPS crash issues:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=746466
I am trying to follow those threads, and since I am not a deveoper, I can't personally contribute to the process. But it is interesting to me anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hallfleming said:
I've seen these before. I thought they were just edited versions of ROM's sucked off a existing phone. Are these compiled from scratch?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The first two are attempts to recompile the kernel to put in the ext3/ext4 mimocan fix. The third one I believe is a script for boot logo animation hack to achieve the same thing.
I forgot to mention one more thread:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=739823
So we've got the source code with drivers and know which ones to use from the T959 for fixing the voice issue. We've got the stock kernel. What's left to creat a plain jane captivate?
hallfleming said:
So we've got the source code with drivers and know which ones to use from the T959 for fixing the voice issue. We've got the stock kernel. What's left to creat a plain jane captivate?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm guessing not too much. There are somethings that would need to be edited such as handling the capacitive buttons. The i9000 roms handle buttons differently regardless of the kernel so, its apparently an OS level config.
I've been wanting to work on this but I've been neck deep in source code from work.
Here is a good how to: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=704561
Thanks for the link. The US codes out there so we don't need i9000 port
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
hallfleming said:
Thanks for the link. The US codes out there so we don't need i9000 port
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point was that given the I9000 rom needs source level changes in order to work as expected(haptic feedback on certain buttons, etc) then running an AOSP build may require some source level changes as well. It may not be as simple as building and flashing.
Yo peeps,
Code:
[COLOR="Red"]For people who say I will wait for official update STAY OUT![/COLOR]
So i was trying to port the G2's Lollipop update to G1. Many of you may think itz quite useless, well i just decided to try because i am a big dev here to compile AOSP or CM12 roms without a proper device tree. So while we wait for Official Update or until CM/AOSP becomes stable i thought maybe i could try porting. So i managed to get the system and boot.img made a zip and now the problem seems with the kernel. I get a fall through to fastboot mode when i use their kernel and when i use ours it gets stuck on bootlogo. Both the kernels are of 3.4.42 and i am not good at kernels like the way i am at kang so if someone could help me with the kernel part maybe we can get L earlier.
This thread is for only people who can encourage and try helping! Others please excuse.
I unpacked both the boot.img made a zip of it and uploaded so that it would be easier for people to help. I dont mind testing it numerous times. Willing to listen and try anything and everything that can make it boot. So here are the kernels.
Hope to find help!
@VictoriousShooter
@rr46000
@S0bes
@yajnab
I think it is impossible without kernel source... This way you can play with Ramdisk only. Moto g2 has little bit different hw..
only difference is screen size and camera, the processor, graphics chip, ram, battery and sensors are the same. so it is possible to port g2 update to g1.
AgentChaos said:
only difference is screen size and camera, the processor, graphics chip, ram, battery and sensors are the same. so it is possible to port g2 update to g1.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The ROM itself-yes
Kernel-no.
I know almost nothing about kernels and all related with it things and even do not know why I was mentioned by OP
But I have a question. Can we just flash firmware from G2? Can it brick our device completely in a worse way?
Why am I saying such a bool****? Read first line in that post again
Never the less I remember guys who flashed android 2.3 on samsung galaxy gio from galaxy ace and phone booted and even hadn't critical bugs...
S0bes said:
I know almost nothing about kernels and all related with it things and even do not know why I was mentioned by OP
But I have a question. Can we just flash firmware from G2? Can it brick our device completely in a worse way?
Why am I saying such a bool****? Read first line in that post again
Never the less I remember guys who flashed android 2.3 on samsung galaxy gio from galaxy ace and phone booted and even hadn't critical bugs...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have flashed ZTE warp cm10 on ZTE v9a with kernel built by myself and it was also working... But with warp kernel there was no chance to boot v9 device up.
I think with flashing g2 lollipop over g1 shouldn't brake your phone permanently, unless you are not flashing modern etc. (just flashing system and kernel). But I cannot promise nothing will be broken
Try using a CWM flashable version of the G2 rom along with the CM12 kernel? You might be able to get some kind of result from it?
Justice™ said:
Try using a CWM flashable version of the G2 rom along with the CM12 kernel? You might be able to get some kind of result from it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cm kernels wouldnt work on stock roms bro.. tried it.
fabus said:
I have flashed ZTE warp cm10 on ZTE v9a with kernel built by myself and it was also working... But with warp kernel there was no chance to boot v9 device up.
I think with flashing g2 lollipop over g1 shouldn't brake your phone permanently, unless you are not flashing modern etc. (just flashing system and kernel). But I cannot promise nothing will be broken
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
S0bes said:
I know almost nothing about kernels and all related with it things and even do not know why I was mentioned by OP
But I have a question. Can we just flash firmware from G2? Can it brick our device completely in a worse way?
Why am I saying such a bool****? Read first line in that post again
Never the less I remember guys who flashed android 2.3 on samsung galaxy gio from galaxy ace and phone booted and even hadn't critical bugs...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@S0bes i thought you may know something so kinda tagged u bro btw i tried flashing g2's stock firmware image it doesnt brick or anything but since they have a different kernel it still goes to fall through to fastboot mode even on g2's stock roms. the main difference is that 5.0 uses ART and ours DALVIK and hence i believe that what the issue.
yeshwanthvshenoy said:
i tried flashing g2's stock firmware image it doesnt brick or anything but since they have a different kernel it still goes to fall through to fastboot mode even on g2's stock roms. the main difference is that 5.0 uses ART and ours DALVIK and hence i believe that what the issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do not believe so. Neither Android 4.4.4 Moto G LTE nor, Moto G (2014) Kernels (or ROMs) boot on Moto G (2013.)
@yeshwanthvshenoy I know you stated you are a big dev, but since you are, you already know kernels can't be ported from an image. You need the source code. Unless you have a magical way of changing code without needing to decompile.
Still... if you are having fin making zips, go ahead, don't let my words discourage you. But... this is a dead end.
Agreed with @fermasia
if porting kernel without source was such an easy task by this time we had so many kernels
Only way is directly flash 2nd gen kernels to try our luck if some things work
All the best [emoji4]
reversegear said:
Agreed with @fermasia
if porting kernel without source was such an easy task by this time we had so many kernels
Only way is directly flash 2nd gen kernels to try our luck if some things work
All the best [emoji4]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont think there will be any luck since G 2014 has a different MSM board and that has to do with the result you will get. So if you manually flash XT1064 firmware on an XT1032 just expect a beautiful soft brick in the best of the cases... Just wait for official OTA, there are just days left for it!!! Next week we will se some news.
for this you need a new kernel for G1, which we dont have. (and even if we had it then we had the ROM too)
you will have to use the old kernel with the new ROM. which will obviously create tons of error.
have you tried CM12 kernel with the ROM?
For the kernel, try following and check if there is some progress.
Decompile both the kernels with dsixdia kitchen. You will get ramdisk and Zimage for each kernel. Try following combination.
4.4.4 Zimage (G1) + 5.0 Ramdisk (G2) + Modules (G1)
If no, try using init.rc of G1 and give another try.
I'm not planning on helping you do this, but the g2 and g1 use the same kernel. You only have to enable certain things in the defconfigs...
Somcom3X said:
I'm not planning on helping you do this, but the g2 and g1 use the same kernel. You only have to enable certain things in the defconfigs...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are using the kernel source, but even kernel source for g2 hasn't been released so far...
fabus said:
They are using the kernel source, but even kernel source for g2 hasn't been released so far...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't really need it, decompile the boot.img and replace the zimage inside with a compiled one.
I don't recommend doing this. Porting in this case is pointless.
By the way, kernel source was released a while ago.
Good luck on the kernel. Though I highly suspect that Motorola will give us Lollipop on the Moto G before anyone is able to come up with a working port.
Somcom3X said:
You don't really need it, decompile the boot.img and replace the zimage inside with a compiled one.
I don't recommend doing this. Porting in this case is pointless.
By the way, kernel source was released a while ago.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for the info and help all of u are extending i know maybe this may not work out but itz just a try. and @Somcom3X can u please a little more of the above statements u said about changing defconfigs and few other stuff. Should i use G2's zimage and G1's ramdisk or any file that u think would make it boot? Can u specify the file name if so.
Get the basic source of the G1. Match the changes made to G2 for the L. Best to getthe old G1 kernel source and modify the things needed for the L. Test and Go.
Unless its creating changes in filesystem its good to play with.
---------- Post added at 03:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:13 PM ----------
yeshwanthvshenoy said:
thanks for the info and help all of u are extending i know maybe this may not work out but itz just a try. and @Somcom3X can u please a little more of the above statements u said about changing defconfigs and few other stuff. Should i use G2's zimage and G1's ramdisk or any file that u think would make it boot? Can u specify the file name if so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
G2 device board name differs. It will be just foolish and waste of time
Hi friends. Can you check this kernel source's is real or useless?
https://github.com/nofearnohappy/android_vendor_xiaomi_hermes
https://github.com/lbule/android_device_xiaomi_hermes
This isn't a kernel source, it's a device tree for build CyanogenMod
~ Xiaomi Redmi Note 2 Prime ~
SkiFire13 said:
This isn't a kernel source, it's a device tree for build CyanogenMod
~ Xiaomi Redmi Note 2 Prime ~
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ho great so cyanogenmod is comming?
tailslol said:
ho great so cyanogenmod is comming?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We will see, it is very hard to port when kernel is not given. There are people working on it and doing a very good job!
Sadly, the complete kernel (custom kernel with drivers) was leaked for a short period and a few devs have it.. but they are afraid to use or publish it because they don't want to be sued.
tailslol said:
ho great so cyanogenmod is comming?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For now someone built it but it's very unstable
~ Xiaomi Redmi Note 2 Prime ~
Sad news about this device's kernel source.
is this usefull?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/cro...al/marshmallow-source-codes-mediatek-t3218602
chris5932 said:
We will see, it is very hard to port when kernel is not given. There are people working on it and doing a very good job!
Sadly, the complete kernel (custom kernel with drivers) was leaked for a short period and a few devs have it.. but they are afraid to use or publish it because they don't want to be sued.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow didnt know that, really the full source kernel was leaked??? And some devs have it D:?. If its true i hope they decide one day to make a nice ROM build, i guess everyone of us would wait for that
chris5932 said:
We will see, it is very hard to port when kernel is not given. There are people working on it and doing a very good job!
Sadly, the complete kernel (custom kernel with drivers) was leaked for a short period and a few devs have it.. but they are afraid to use or publish it because they don't want to be sued.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sued? The ones to be sued are mediatek and/or xiaomi for not complying gpl license
adaltavo said:
Wow didnt know that, really the full source kernel was leaked??? And some devs have it D:?. If its true i hope they decide one day to make a nice ROM build, i guess everyone of us would wait for that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At least someone has it.. I am not so sure on how many have it. Don't be too excited yet, we might not get it (soon). The source can not just be published to the public, the one who does will face some problems.. (see what happened to incomplete source).
chris5932 said:
At least someone has it.. I am not so sure on how many have it. Don't be too excited yet, we might not get it (soon). The source can not just be published to the public, the one who does will face some problems.. (see what happened to incomplete source).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
May i ask what happened?. And i know is not that easy, what i meant is that he (or they) could make a nice ROM build with that source, maybe as an anonymus guy or something like that, is not necesary to publish full source code. Our another hope is wait for MTK to release it , but it wont be soon, even could never happen
adaltavo said:
May i ask what happened?. And i know is not that easy, what i meant is that he (or they) could make a nice ROM build with that source, maybe as an anonymus guy or something like that, is not necesary to publish full source code. Our another hope is wait for MTK to release it , but it wont be soon, even could never happen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We can build roms ourselfs, just need proper kernel. Just let me say that much: I have a reliable source that told me someone has it. I don't think (anymore) it was leaked to the public ever, all kernel leaked on git were incomplete.
All kernel sources I've seen for X10 are not for our device. Another thing is the AOSP sources are very buggy and unfinished.
I finally made progress on my AOSP 5.1 and fixed the slow app launch (maybe you've seen one youtube video posted here - this is my build).
Unfortunately I don't have kernel source for Redmi Note 2 and it is impossible to build a custom kernel, so I'm trying to finish the ROM and will use prebuilt kernel.
If you think it is easy as porting, then you're wrong. Compiling something from source and fixing all bugs is completely different animal.
CM 12.1 also booted, but a lot of work needs to be done there too.
https://github.com/omlet05/MediaTek-HelioX10-Kernel
yay?
tailslol said:
https://github.com/omlet05/MediaTek-HelioX10-Kernel
yay?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check the date and please stop posting same thing again and again. This is the original broken half source that was leaked over 2 months ago now.
I.nfraR.ed said:
All kernel sources I've seen for X10 are not for our device. Another thing is the AOSP sources are very buggy and unfinished.
I finally made progress on my AOSP 5.1 and fixed the slow app launch (maybe you've seen one youtube video posted here - this is my build).
Unfortunately I don't have kernel source for Redmi Note 2 and it is impossible to build a custom kernel, so I'm trying to finish the ROM and will use prebuilt kernel.
If you think it is easy as porting, then you're wrong. Compiling something from source and fixing all bugs is completely different animal.
CM 12.1 also booted, but a lot of work needs to be done there too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What is time to wake? On miui time is long :/ On our last phone (A820) time to wake is much better.
How aboute "tap to wake"? What is result on antutu? When you publish rom?
AOSP boots up and works faster than MIUI and also has much much better ram management, although it would be good if we could make a custom kernel.
Tap to wake normally needs to be supported in kernel, so the answer is "no".
Antutu score is irrelevant, but normally I get about 48K with the basic model. I've seen higher, seen lower.
It also depends on kernel.
Don't forget that for A820 I have a custom optimized kernel.
Hello
When you share rom? How to progress?
Known XDA rule, don't ask for ETA He'll tell us when ready
bumcykcyk said:
Hello
When you share rom? How to progress?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It will be shared when it is done.. Ussd/BT working but camera still doesnt
I am trying to build an image for angler. Looking for make files to build the image for angler (Nexus 6P) Where can i find the vendor/make files to build the image.
How do I see the angler option when I do lunch?
Do a quick search on Github, it should have everything you need.
Thanks for the reply. I looked at the git hub. But I saw so may files. Not sure, which files I need to make the build.
debby_8 said:
Thanks for the reply. I looked at the git hub. But I saw so may files. Not sure, which files I need to make the build.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Trying to build the kernel myself, would also appreciate some info. Samsung always at least always includes some help file to specify the toolchain needed etc.
to build angler you need all the device files from android_devie_huawei_angler im fairly sure. Iv gotten my new handset and been working with a guy whos helped me to get a booting port of Omni Rom up and running other than that im not sure exactly how to help.
if your trying to build a image you surely know what files you need to use?
mehmehmen said:
to build angler you need all the device files from android_devie_huawei_angler im fairly sure. Iv gotten my new handset and been working with a guy whos helped me to get a booting port of Omni Rom up and running other than that im not sure exactly how to help.
if your trying to build a image you surely know what files you need to use?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well in my case, at this point I just want to build the kernel. It's really too bad that XDA doesnt accept posts like this on their 'development' forum. On this general FAQ forum I dont think it reaches the right audience and hence no reponse from anybody yet, to this fairly simple question. I wish XDA would support developers a bit more and would allow development questions on the development forum.
I understand what you mean, although the development forums used to get INUNDATED with questions similar to these which would usually be able to be remedied with a bit of googling and a decent amount of reading. I think you would find if you were to go to the actual angler kernel threads and be very concise and polite in asking for any help that someone would actually be happy to help at least a little bit.
You have to remember on the dev forums most people are kind of in the know of what they want to do and roughly how to do it hence why they prefer posts to remain within the realms of people contributing to thread projects and giving test feedback as opposed to asking for help on seperate (although maybe related) issues.
Im currently working on the angler with a couple of guys and we have a booting fully operational OmniRom port in testing stages now, which may end up to me then posting that as a full [ROM] thread and trying to offer support on the device for that rom. The guy that built the rom himself is very good and has helped me understand a lot, with the right attitude and willingness to learn I am sure you would be welcome in the IRC channel where I personally would be happy to try and help you get your head round some things, as the next goal for me regarding the 6p in terms of our project is going to be kernel based compiling as i want to try and get a really robust kernel built now we have a seemingly stable feature full rom built and booting.
Feel free to message me if this sounds like it may be of some help
Regards
Meh
mehmehmen said:
although the development forums used to get INUNDATED with questions similar to these which would usually be able to be remedied with a bit of googling and a decent amount of reading.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That happens on any forum.
I think you would find if you were to go to the actual angler kernel threads and be very concise and polite in asking for any help that someone would actually be happy to help at least a little bit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure but that would be going off topic on someone's thread.
You have to remember on the dev forums most people are kind of in the know of what they want to do and roughly how to do it hence why they prefer posts to remain within the realms of people contributing to thread projects and giving test feedback as opposed to asking for help on seperate (although maybe related) issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everybody has questions, regardless of their level. I was the maintainer for Cyanogenmod Note 4, so if the above would be true, I wouldnt be here I'm sure I can figure out myself how to get the Angler kernel compiling but it would save me, and others who will try the same in the future, quite a bit of trouble if someone who had done it would just post the used toolchain etc.
Anyway you used a lot of words without helping at all. That's exactly my point, when posting on a general forum you can expect these kind of replies. That's why I'd love to see a true development forum here on XDA, not just a 'developer' forum where people just support their projects. Giving support to a project, has not much to do with development.
Nah, I could have expected this. I'll figure it out myself. Thanks but no thanks.
*EDIT* I guess this will work, using toolchain 4.6 like they recommend, it's probably the latest anyway (?)
https://source.android.com/source/building-kernels.html
They dont mention Angler, but I'll try this anyway, I think it might work. And I'll let people know if it worked or not, so someone in the future who reads this thread will know how too. Although I kinda doubt a developer will search the general FAQ forum here ...
Might wanna try asking that on a kernel development thread in Dev section - kernel developers are usually friendly to people willing to rightfully use (and maybe improve) their work. They should be at least give you a vision on how go get the basic Angler kernel up and running.
As for me... I build CM, everything on the CM wiki is mostly enough for me.
Sent from Google Nexus 6P @ CM13
[WARNING: XDA One have not implemented "mark forum as read" - do not use]
Use googles 4.9 aarch64 toolchain for kernel to start off. Any questions feel free to hit me up, better on hangouts though as I forget about XDA sometimes ha. Pm me for email.
rustyjay said:
Use googles 4.9 aarch64 toolchain for kernel to start off. Any questions feel free to hit me up, better on hangouts though as I forget about XDA sometimes ha. Pm me for email.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks mate ! That's what I was looking for, will try that one.
---------- Post added at 03:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:03 AM ----------
Ok and it's building !
Steps I took:
1) Download angler kernel here: https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/msm/+/android-msm-angler-3.10-marshmallow-dr
2) Download toolchain with: git clone https://android.googlesource.com/platform/prebuilts/gcc/linux-x86/aarch64/aarch64-linux-android-4.9
3) add the toolchain to the path, in my case: export PATH=~/android/toolchains/aarch64-linux-android-4.9/bin:$PATH
4) go to the unpacked kernel dir
5) export ARCH=arm64
6) export SUBARCH=arm64
7) export CROSS_COMPILE=aarch64-linux-android-
8) make angler_defconfig
9) make
Thanks again @rustyjay for the toolchain info !
---------- Post added at 03:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:23 AM ----------
AndyYan said:
As for me... I build CM, everything on the CM wiki is mostly enough for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As much as I love CM (I was maintainer for the Note 4), I don't particularly see the point of running it on a Nexus device. I just want some kernel tweaks (for example that damn fuel gauge is giving me wakelocks), so I think l wont jump onto CM. But who knows ...
---------- Post added at 03:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:32 AM ----------
Build completed So I guess I just insert the resulting Image.gz-dtb into the boot.img (with android image kitchen for example), right ? Will try tomorrow, but I think that should work. off to bed now ...
Yeah what it basically does when I build aosp, don't know too much about kitchen.
rustyjay said:
Yeah what it basically does when I build aosp, don't know too much about kitchen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok I used android image kitchen to replace the Zimage, flashed it and ... it boots
Cool, so that's easy. Now for the next part: building the whole rom ! Any idea on how to do that ? Or where to even download the code ? Is there even a whole ROM to build, including the blobs etc ? I think i saw google releasing a device tree but not the whole ROM, right ? I must say I havent really googled myself this, will look into this today myself too.
*EDIT* yeah here's the device tree: https://android.googlesource.com/device/huawei/angler/ but I dont think it's the whole ROM, going to download it now ...
*EDIT2* No this definitely isnt the whole ROM,not even the device tree There's not a lot in there !?!
*EDIT3* Info here: https://source.android.com/source/running.html
*EDIT4* So as per the link above, it turns out that most drivers are blobs ! Hmm that's a bit disappointing. You buy a Nexus because supposedly it's 'open source', turns out most of it is not.... Anyway so it seems it's just a matter of compiling the sourcecode that IS there and then adding the blobs.
*EDIT5* So this section explains the whole process of setting up the environment, downloading, syncing and building: https://source.android.com/source/requirements.html looks very similar to the CM install/build process indeed !
To me its easier than cm but aosp is what I do the most. And to build for aosp you'll need angler device tree and vendor blobs. Ive been using the huawei vendor from pure nexus github.
Aosp out of the box is really unfinished though to me so it takes some work with cherry picks to get everything slick.
rustyjay said:
To me its easier than cm but aosp is what I do the most. And to build for aosp you'll need angler device tree and vendor blobs. Ive been using the huawei vendor from pure nexus github.
Aosp out of the box is really unfinished though to me so it takes some work with cherry picks to get everything slick.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for all your info, much appreciated. Currently syncing to AOSP like explained on that page I linked, will take a few hours I guess.
BTW, what are you exactly building this for ? Just some tweaks ? I saw this kernel wakelock qpnp_fg myself, I just disabled CONFIG_QPNP_FG=y in the defconfig, the wakelock is gone but like I expected, the battery gauge doesnt work anymore neither, lol. Will need to look into it for a real fix I guess.
Also I'm planning to make an option to default MTP as USB connection. It's just plain crazy Google left that out in 6.0 !
I've been building for myself for like 2 years now, kernels I just started really messing with about 6 months ago. I just had a hard time finding a ROM with stuff I like and not a million other mods added to it. Now its just hard for me to stay on stock or a ROM I didn't cook up.
rustyjay said:
I've been building for myself for like 2 years now, kernels I just started really messing with about 6 months ago. I just had a hard time finding a ROM with stuff I like and not a million other mods added to it. Now its just hard for me to stay on stock or a ROM I didn't cook up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's my first Nexus and am just loving it already. I mean, getting CM to run on a Samsung device is of course fun, but it's also just SO much work. I dont think I could do it all over again on another non AOSP device.
Now on nexus, just syncing directly from google and building it, what a breeze this is !
Oh yeah if your into building, nexus is really the only way to go. My first nexus was the ns in '10 and have had a nexus phone ever since
OK, so I don't know anyone else with a 6p but want a second opinion on my rom/kernel so far. I do not want to start and maintain a thread, why I'm posting this here.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_f86wvdx8LKUm12NHpxSVBhVEk/view
Its not a kitchen sink rom, if there's interest I'll make a changelog with the proper credits to people and probably upload builds to my drive.
rustyjay said:
OK, so I don't know anyone else with a 6p but want a second opinion on my rom/kernel so far. I do not want to start and maintain a thread, why I'm posting this here.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_f86wvdx8LKUm12NHpxSVBhVEk/view
Its not a kitchen sink rom, if there's interest I'll make a changelog with the proper credits to people and probably upload builds to my drive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are your main changes ?
Anyway I just finished building the ROM myself. It ends up with system.img, userdata.img, recover.img, ramdisk.img, ramdisk-recover.img. I'd probably just flash boot.img and system.img, right ? That userdata.img, what is that exactly anyway ? If I flash that I'll lose my user partition=installed apps, I guess ?
BTW I didnt pull any blobs so I guess it wont run anyway. I guess I first need to extract the blobs ? Does the AOSP build process include the blobs automatically ?
Thanks !
So I searched the whole rom recoveries kernel section, did not see any base roms. If there isn't, where to info about pulling system to make one? Trying to get a custom OOS rom going as AOSP can suck it lol. Original software is always more stable IMO
icedventimocha said:
So I searched the whole rom recoveries kernel section, did not see any base roms. If there isn't, where to info about pulling system to make one? Trying to get a custom OOS rom going as AOSP can suck it lol. Original software is always more stable IMO
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What is a base ROM for you?
Normally pure AOSP is considered as the reference as it's Google code without modification. But people don't like pure AOSP because it's lacking many features people are used to. So even AOSP labeled ROM have some non AOSP add-ons.
If you want a 'pure' AOSP ROM you'll have to compile it.
Striatum_bdr said:
What is a base ROM for you?
Normally pure AOSP is considered as the reference as it's Google code without modification. But people don't like pure AOSP because it's lacking many features people are used to. So even AOSP labeled ROM have some non AOSP add-ons.
If you want a 'pure' AOSP ROM you'll have to compile it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Back in the days someone usually created an optimized stock Rom for different devices based off the OEMs software so that others could flash it or use it as a base for custom ROMs based off of stock.
I believe that's what he is referencing if I am not mistaken.
icedventimocha said:
So I searched the whole rom recoveries kernel section, did not see any base roms. If there isn't, where to info about pulling system to make one? Trying to get a custom OOS rom going as AOSP can suck it lol. Original software is always more stable IMO
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no base ROM for the OnePlus 6T. Its so AOSP like almost everything is done from source. I thought about posting a base ROM, as that is what I used to primarily use (and usually posted). I wasnt much into Source.
Another cool thing some devs due are make mods that can be flashed in magisk, and so long as you have the stock oos you can enjoy there version of stock oos with whatever tweaks they have done to it such as custom settings apps, etc.
Milly7 said:
Back in the days someone usually created an optimized stock Rom for different devices based off the OEMs software so that others could flash it or use it as a base for custom ROMs based off of stock.
I believe that's what he is referencing if I am not mistaken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are 100% correct
Scott said:
There is no base ROM for the OnePlus 6T. Its so AOSP like almost everything is done from source. I thought about posting a base ROM, as that is what I used to primarily use (and usually posted). I wasnt much into Source.
Another cool thing some devs due are make mods that can be flashed in magisk, and so long as you have the stock oos you can enjoy there version of stock oos with whatever tweaks they have done to it such as custom settings apps, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nailed Scott as usual. This device and how android handles files is extremely different than other phones we've both worked on as well (pretty sure that's android specific) I'm gonna have to look into the magisk thing. Never did the from source thing so that might be over my head. Don't have Linux set up on my machine either so a lot of time would have to go into just getting a stock flashable to work with.
I want to get some of the mods and themes I always post for this phone, but this might be a hurtle as I usually got a base to run with. I always try to show some love and since developers are jumping ship (because the money's not there, let's not lie and say that isn't what it's about) I know my work would be appreciated
icedventimocha said:
You are 100% correct
Nailed Scott as usual. This device and how android handles files is extremely different than other phones we've both worked on as well (pretty sure that's android specific) I'm gonna have to look into the magisk thing. Never did the from source thing so that might be over my head. Don't have Linux set up on my machine either so a lot of time would have to go into just getting a stock flashable to work with.
I want to get some of the mods and themes I always post for this phone, but this might be a hurtle as I usually got a base to run with. I always try to show some love and since developers are jumping ship (because the money's not there, let's not lie and say that isn't what it's about) I know my work would be appreciated
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The magisk modules are a great way to go because its reversible as well. Not sure if you knew that. You can uninstall these MagiskROM's just as easy as installing.
Scott said:
The magisk modules are a great way to go because its reversible as well. Not sure if you knew that. You can uninstall these MagiskROM's just as easy as installing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did, but think I'm just gonna make a flashable over stock package, too much catching up to do so gonna stick to what I know