Related
Right, I have some serious development-related questions.
Firstly, has anyone managed to compile AOSP for the SGS yet?
If so (and assuming that they are not willing to share their final efforts), then how have people gone about setting up the dev environment? I'm no coder, but I want to try rolling my own build if nobody else is willing to give it a go. All I need is to know how to set up the environment to build something that will work on the SGS (even without the proper hardware drivers, if need be) and I'll go from there.
Are Samsung's drivers really encrypted? I've heard conflicting reports on this.
I'm not seeing anything that is blatantly preventing people from rolling custom ROMs; the bootloader is (apparently) unlocked and unencrypted, and the drivers are (again, apparently) open-sourced. Granted, the SGS is a brand new device and thus we shouldn't be expecting the amount of ROMs available for it that the HTC Dream/Magic has, but I can't see a reason why it shouldn't get there soon.
I'm posting this thread because as far as I can see, there's been no serious talk of custom ROM development for the SGS. Every thread is just "lulz, where r the romz?" or "where can I get ringtonez"? or threads of equal use to those.
http://github.com/CyanogenMod/android_vendor_cyanogen/blob/froyo/CHANGELOG.mkdn
Check out the devices at the bottom.
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc...jTnA5ekFWRzNxX2c&hl=en&authkey=CNf7ie8G#gid=0
And the time table.
It seems someone for the samsung S vibrant has already started working on a cyanogen mod for their phone. Wonder if it will be able to be port over to our phones?
Unless I'm mistaken, there now is only one Dev out there that has stuck by Captivate code. As someone who places a high value on the Audience voice chip on the AT&T devices, I am very interested to see if more devs will look at this newly released source and make something of it, either new or port their existing top-notch work. I've tried, and liked, many of the I9000-based ROMs, but I keep coming back to the Cappy-based ones due to the voice quality.
So Devs... any interest? I'm sure that I'm not alone from a user perspective.
I would like to see a kernal based off the released source that also has the voodoo sound added to it. I am sure there is a lot that can be done and it will take some time.
I was thinking of flashing to something new, but with the source available, I think it's time to be patient. Can't wait for a semi-up to date ROM with full captivate compatibility!
this belongs in Q&A section
I believe whole heartedly that the ROMS the DEVs are putting out are fantastic and do everything I want and need in a ROM.
OTHER then the audiance chip support. It would be cool to have in the roms as an ability but not necessarily required.
See sig below - this post doesnt belong here. *facepalm* The devs will do what they do, when they decide they wanna do it - noobs coming in here constantly asking for sh*t only irritates them and pushes them away from bringing us the good stuff....
bames said:
this belongs in Q&A section
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought about that, but I put it here for two reasons:
The developers come here regularly, and not necessarily the Q&A section
This is a question directed directly at the devs, not necessarily the user community
Make sense?
Devs still read the Q&A - how about reading the forum rules and abiding.... this is un-needed clutter in the Dev section
dalewest said:
I thought about that, but I put it here for two reasons:
The developers come here regularly, and not necessarily the Q&A section
This is a question directed directly at the devs, not necessarily the user community
Make sense?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Regardless, if you feel the need to post about this topic in this section, there is already a thread about it. Post your question in there. No need for another thread.
jgc121 said:
See sig below - this post doesnt belong here. *facepalm* The devs will do what they do, when they decide they wanna do it - noobs coming in here constantly asking for sh*t only irritates them and pushes them away from bringing us the good stuff....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not trying to start a flamewar or anything... while I only joined last November, and my post count is indeed low, please don't assume that I'm here asking for candy. I comb these forums many times daily, and only post when I can't find the answers I'm looking for.
As for irritating the devs by asking for stuff... I've noticed that for the most part, they actually like the feedback, and want to know what the users like. I see no problem with providing input. Like I said, I posted here because the Devs come here, and not so much to the Q&A section.
Lastly (and maybe this should have been clearer in my OP), only one dev seems to be working on Captivate kernels, with the rest working on I9000 (since source has been around a long while). What with new hardware around the corner, dev interest for the Cappy might be waning. I thought it a fair question.
dalewest said:
I thought about that, but I put it here for two reasons:
The developers come here regularly, and not necessarily the Q&A section
This is a question directed directly at the devs, not necessarily the user community
Make sense?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No..does not make sense. If you read the forum rules it will be clear why it doesn't make sense.
Not trying to start a flame war either was just trying to redirect you and prevent further endless flaming if you continued to post in the wrong section.
Last thing I wanted was to tick people off
But it seems that's exactly what happened.
Apologies to those that I irritated, especially the Developers to whom this thread was directed.
Out.
dalewest said:
I thought about that, but I put it here for two reasons:
The developers come here regularly, and not necessarily the Q&A section
This is a question directed directly at the devs, not necessarily the user community
Make sense?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So just coz it says "Hey devs" means it should go to the Dev section?
I thought the development section was actually for development... Apparently I was wrong
uuugh..
bames said:
this belongs in Q&A section
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree completely!! Dev(s) do read other forums
I have question about the source code that was just released. How do I implement it into my build enviroment?
I mean ok I extract the file. Then read the readme file. It says to overwrite the modules I want to build. Is there a general rule to what should and should not be over written. I have compiled the generic code but nothing device specific.
OMG! You DARE to post here?
dalewest said:
But it seems that's exactly what happened.
Apologies to those that I irritated, especially the Developers to whom this thread was directed.
Out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL. No apologies needed. This thread that you started is essentially the same as opcow's, except that he posted the news before you did. All that followed in his thread, however, was very similar to the responses in your thread.
Similar, but different - different because the hall monitors didn't flame anyone in that thread! Why not?? Because, methinks, for the most part, those in the other thread were more "senior" than thee, Mr. Dalewest. Get it? There's a pecking order here that must not be violated.
Strange, but I didn't notice any ROM devs complaining in your thread or Opcow's. I did, however, see some silliniess in the other thread, such as "Charlie Sheen throwing some pixie dust" into the new ROMs, but no cries of outrage over that. Then come some self-appointed spokespersons for the devs in your thread saying the devs this, the devs that, "Ooh, the devs are going to get upset," etc. [Sigh]
The source of KB1 dropping has been mentioned since yesterday or before in various threads here, and I didn't see any devs getting upset about it. The KB1 source dropping is certainly related to development. IMO it's perfectly fine to post it in Development. Your are not asking a general question - you are asking what the devs have in mind vis a vis development, now that KB1 has dropped.
That said, given that there was already another thread, you shouldn't have started another one. Consider your wrist slapped, ha, ha.
dalewest said:
But it seems that's exactly what happened.
Apologies to those that I irritated, especially the Developers to whom this thread was directed.
Out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no worries.
not ticked here. my original post was just to redirect you and try to help you avoid the flood of responses and/or flames that were sure to come.
Hi everybody,
Firstly i'm not on the CM page so i don't want people who come just to say "stop asking or anything". I'm here to search a solution with everybody.
So, recently the gingerbrread rom for G2X, Atrix 4g, and a leak for O2X has been released. The A2DP is working in all of its. Isn't it possible to extract the A2DP drivers from one of those rom and to inject in the CM kernel? What's the problem? I think that the atrix, the O2Xand the G2X had a later update to gingerbread because of nvidia not LG or Motorola.
Thanks for reading and helping
Sorry for my bad english
1 - use search
2 - This has nothing to do with the version. If I build CM6 for the O2X I'll have the exact same problem.
3 - I'm getting pretty tired of hearing about how magic binary releases will fix ****, on this or any other devices. Read the brazillion existing posts about it. Until source appears, you won't get A2DP unless you use stock (straight or cooked).
@aremcee, we're many O2X and G2X owners around, eagerly hoping for the source to be released. I think it won't, but still one can wish, right? ;-)
Ordered a new car with a A2DP enabled stereo. That's why I so badly wants this in CM7. Going back to stock is just not good enough ;-)
Can't you just extract the files from the HTC Desire ROM to make it work..it has bluetooth too????????
...sarcasm
Op is only asking, no need to be rude. He doesn't want to read 7,124 replies in the CM thread, and neither would I. A simple No it can not be extracted from the GB leak and used in CM would be the answer he was looking for. If you're really that tired aremcee then simply IGNORE the post.
I dont really understand why cooked roms, gingerbread or otherwise, can use the binary A2DP app/driver, while CM7 cannot.
Do we lack the header files needed to know what functions to call in said binary?
stevvie said:
Op is only asking, no need to be rude. He doesn't want to read 7,124 replies in the CM thread, and neither would I. A simple No it can not be extracted from the GB leak and used in CM would be the answer he was looking for. If you're really that tired aremcee then simply IGNORE the post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
aremcee said that you (or he) should NOT read all 7,124 replies in the CM thread, but rather just use the search button, i understand him because everybody just ask the same question every hour...
destilant said:
aremcee said that you (or he) should NOT read all 7,124 replies in the CM thread, but rather just use the search button, i understand him because everybody just ask the same question every hour...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but sometimes just using the search is not the best option because everything is out of context, thats what I meant. Although us with a little bit of technical knowledge can follow it, those that are not as technically minded might not be able to pick up the searched conversation as easy. I do agree that people should use the search MORE than they do.
those technically inexperienced shouldn't be posting QUESTIONS in the DEVELOPMENT SECTION in the very first place.
The thread title is misleading users of this forum into thinking that he has some solution to the problem.
I follow since the beginning the CM and i thought that with the recent leaks the situation will change... I don't think that somebody on this forum has already asked if with the recent leaks it were possible to make it work. Maybe You don't take the time to read my ask because i'm not a developer.
@fallout0: too funny you should be a big contributor with that kind of answer...
xpicom said:
I don't think that somebody on this forum has already asked if with the recent leaks it were possible to make it work
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Many have. The answer has always been no.
xpicom said:
I follow since the beginning the CM and i thought that with the recent leaks the situation will change... I don't think that somebody on this forum has already asked if with the recent leaks it were possible to make it work. Maybe You don't take the time to read my ask because i'm not a developer.
@fallout0: too funny you should be a big contributor with that kind of answer...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe the title of the topic can also be misleading and should instead be in the Q & A
Mike_52 said:
Maybe the title of the topic can also be misleading and should instead be in the Q & A
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think moderator should delete this thread instead - it is totally misleading. A short note on aremcee's CM7 Nightly thread 1st post about the A2DP should suffice. Whoever wishes to have CM7 on this device should at least read aremcee's 1st post on that thread (if aremcee chooses to post it).
temasek said:
I think moderator should delete this thread instead - it is totally misleading. A short note on aremcee's CM7 Nightly thread 1st post about the A2DP should suffice. Whoever wishes to have CM7 on this device should at least read aremcee's 1st post on that thread (if aremcee chooses to post it).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are right.
Haree, if you read this, could you close this thread or something, as the question has been answered and further posts aren't needed?
I dont mind if the title is changed to reflect the fact that it is a question and not a project in development. And it can even be locked since its purpose has been served. However, I dont ever agree with thread deletion. Its not a transparent method of moderation.
Ancalagon_ZA said:
I dont mind if the title is changed to reflect the fact that it is a question and not a project in development. And it can even be locked since its purpose has been served. However, I dont ever agree with thread deletion. Its not a transparent method of moderation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not against the OP or anything.
This thread should not have started in the first place. aremcee had said one too many times and there were several not too positive posts in the nightly thread when I replied someone that A2DP question will be ignored. - exactly what aremcee said and I do agree with him to certain extend.
When it is ready, I'm sure aremcee will announce it. He is actually rather active in giving us insights on what's happening especially with regards to tegra and whats not. Not forgetting correcting us when we were wrong on some comments.
Oh...and yeah probably you are right. Lock this thread may be an alternative choice.
Totally agree with Temasek, if anyone make a thread for asking question in dev section, this will be a mess like CM7 nightlies thread in the samsung galaxy s2 dev thread ...
Last question
Okay guys,
Let me a chance to ask a little question, is one of you able to explain me why the phone bluetooth call il working well and the audio part no ?
I mean is there is two chipset one for audio and one for phone call ?
By the way, for frustating guy who are angry for my question, please just ignore it !
Regards
In a nut shell, the bit that passes the audio is missing.
Thanks for your answer, so it seems to be clearly a problem of software. I mean dev need to have the original code for the audio connexion with the chipset.
So we are all waiting Nvidia and the talent of all android dev to solve the issue...
I know it has been announced only a few hours ago and the source is not available yet. But, when Google finally releases the source code, will there ever be a ROM for the original Galaxy Tab?
I am curious because the answer to this question will help me resist the new tablet temptation
Having a hard time with HC, I doubt it with ICS....even the GB ROMs are not very polished, like Overcome causes warming up problem....
It can be short...
Maybe it will arrive sooner as we think, not with cyanogenmod, even if i want it on my tab, but with MIUI, I just read on the MIUIteam fr that MIUI have the source since they have the status of developpers with the XIAOMI, and they are already work on the Mi-one and the two nexus, so maybe the us team who develop the MIUI Rom for our tab will be able to port ISC on the galaxy tab?
I just hope that we can have ISC on our tab before Christmans it will be great!
ICS
From the news:
"Gabe Cohen from Google claims that most Gingerbread devices may have an upgrade to Android 4.0, claiming that it is theoretically compatible with any Android 2.3.x device"
I would presume (going off the little snippits of info I've gleaned) that almost ANY device will be able to run ICS in some capacity or another since it is designed to be all encompassing. (Think Ubuntu for comparison) Admittedly some older devices will struggle due to the specs but this is the same for every old device.
I could be completely WAY-OFF the mark but I believe el-goog is heading down the Canonical Road and pretty soon we will have OS's that just play well together, be it on mobile, laptop, PC, TV yadda yadda yadda......and then we'll see a small moon appear on the horizon
No wait, "That's not a moon.....It's a SPACE STATION!" cue dramatic music and suddenly everyone and their dog will be screaming "IT'S A TRAAAAAP!" "TURN THIS SHIP AROUND!" but by then we'll all be caught in the tractor beam and headed for a Schwartz-off with Dark Helmet......
Jus sayin
Developers get new devices and forget about old ones. Time's working against us...
In future, post [QUESTIONS] in your separate Q&A section.
The next thread I see in the General section, that asks a [QUESTION] will be deleted, the user will receive a Warning.
I believe there will be a rom, not before Christmas tho
At least not a stable one.
Will Samsung release ICS for Galaxy Tab ??
Do you think people will port it or wait for source code.
andyharney said:
In future, post [QUESTIONS] in your separate Q&A section.
The next thread I see in the General section, that asks a [QUESTION] will be deleted, the user will receive a Warning.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How does a question not belong in general? Is the general sub forum not for General discussion. Don't mean to be rude just wondering how that does not encompass a question (heck a development thread could in theory fall under the general category), i understand that there is a specific category for q&a and trying to order the chaos; it just seems to me you can't really claim anything doesn't belong in general in order to delete and or warn a user.
themapleboy said:
How does a question not belong in general?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When you pose a question to which you would like an answer, if falls under the Q&A section.
Is the general sub forum not for General discussion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When you would like to discuss & have active engagement on a particular topic then it would fall under the General section.
Don't mean to be rude just wondering how that does not encompass a question (heck a development thread could in theory fall under the general category), i understand that there is a specific category for q&a and trying to order the chaos; it just seems to me you can't really claim anything doesn't belong in general in order to delete and or warn a user.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't worry, I understand you intent, no rudeness is taken.
The development sections are for posting active development projects. I.e ROMs, APPs & MODs & to receive feedback, help, advice & even thanks.
To use this thread as an example, the OP asked.
when Google finally releases the source code, will there ever be a ROM for the original Galaxy Tab?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is a question, even the thread title has [QUESTION] in it. The answer to this particular question is, we honestly don't know.
IF the OP had worded it similar to this.
When Google finally release the source code, do you guys think there will ever be a ROM for the original Galaxy Tab
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This, to me is open for discussion, and not a clear cut yes or no. There is a gray (British spelling ) area as you could say the General section is full of questions.
But to clarify, If I see any threads with [Q] or [Question] in the thread title or post, in the General section, it will be deleted & the user Warned, not Infracted, just warned.
If they haven't bothered checking what section they are posting in, its highly likely they haven't bothered searching for the answer either, but that is another kettle of fish
This is all so incredibly exciting... looks like an amazing release and I really hope that I can put it on my SGT very soon!
andyharney said:
Don't worry, I understand you intent, no rudeness is taken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Andy: Thank you for being awesome - lots of admins I've worked with throughout the years would probably throw a hissy over perceived insurrection when questions of protocol are asked. Your professionalism is greatly appreciated.
I am so glad that google appears to have gone with an open model this time around - it looks like they actually worked to maximize compatibility with the wide range of GB running devices and made everything pretty portable. of course we'll know more about that in a week or so when google drops the sources on us.
from what i understand, this will be the first time we've had proper public sources since the GB release.
the new feature set looks like it'll be pretty amazing so long as they optimized it well... I don't really care if newer fancier phones and tabs have more resources... more resources should allow you to do more things better, NOT an excuse to settle for sub-par optimization of code because "oh, it doesn't matter anymore, all new devices have enough ram and cpu speed to handle it!"... </rant>
andyharney said:
When you pose a question to which you would like an answer, if falls under the Q&A section.
When you would like to discuss & have active engagement on a particular topic then it would fall under the General section.
Don't worry, I understand you intent, no rudeness is taken.
The development sections are for posting active development projects. I.e ROMs, APPs & MODs & to receive feedback, help, advice & even thanks.
To use this thread as an example, the OP asked.
That is a question, even the thread title has [QUESTION] in it. The answer to this particular question is, we honestly don't know.
IF the OP had worded it similar to this.
This, to me is open for discussion, and not a clear cut yes or no. There is a gray (British spelling ) area as you could say the General section is full of questions.
But to clarify, If I see any threads with [Q] or [Question] in the thread title or post, in the General section, it will be deleted & the user Warned, not Infracted, just warned.
If they haven't bothered checking what section they are posting in, its highly likely they haven't bothered searching for the answer either, but that is another kettle of fish
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, I should have formulated the question better!
I apologize. Next time, questions go to Q&A section
tarantulae said:
From the news:
"Gabe Cohen from Google claims that most Gingerbread devices may have an upgrade to Android 4.0, claiming that it is theoretically compatible with any Android 2.3.x device"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree!!! More so if ICS is the hybrid between honeycomb (tabs only) and gingerbread (smartphones only), it should work on Original Galaxy(OG) tab, at least for those upgraded to gingerbread. Now we have OG 7" on 2.3, sg-tab 7 plus on 3.2 and possibly sg-tab 7.7 on ??4.0(I guess), sammy better get ICS on all otherwise it'll be hard selling all three.
afaebe said:
I agree!!! More so if ICS is the hybrid between honeycomb (tabs only) and gingerbread (smartphones only), it should work on Original Galaxy(OG) tab, at least for those upgraded to gingerbread. Now we have OG 7" on 2.3, sg-tab 7 plus on 3.2 and possibly sg-tab 7.7 on ??4.0(I guess), sammy better get ICS on all otherwise it'll be hard selling all three.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thing the original sgt7 is no longer part of the lineup i belive it has been discontinued. So the 7 plus is 3.2, as is the 10.1, and the 7.7. Samsung has settled on honeycomb for the lot but have already stated that each of these tablets will get upgraded to ics "real soon". On the flipside they all but confirmed that ics wont be coming to the original sgt7 making me very sad.
Samsung imho has really bad support for os updates in that they taje forever to release them and they are notorious for droping hardware / os support way too fast. My original sgt7 came out only about a year ago (last nov iirc).
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App
Some cyanogenmod guys are putting together CM9 for tabs in general and ours looks like its on the list.
Sent from Sprint Galaxy Tab
Dmaxx67 said:
Some cyanogenmod guys are putting together CM9 for tabs in general and ours looks like its on the list.
Sent from Sprint Galaxy Tab
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes, that's true, there is lots of private third-party ICS development going on to get a good AOSP rom up and functional. I think that's going to be most dependent on the galaxy tab ics dev thread here and then the cyanogen guys will go ahead and hack it smooth with extra features and the like as they generally do. I was specifically tallking about samsung OEM rom support.
and FIY, there is already a worked over SDK port of honeycomb for the galaxy tab 7 that seems to run pretty smooth that you might want to check out here if you're interested. the ICS stuff looks like it's shaping up, but I expect it to be at least a few months before everything becomes smooth enough for use as a daily rom.
Hi all,
The different sizes of the Tab S are largely incompatible, yet they share a forum. Can we please have separate dev forums for the variants in order to reduce any possible confusion for new owners looking for their goodies?
totally agree, +1 on that idea
This is a standard for tablets and low activity devices
with as LITTLE dev work that goes on everyone loses if it gets separated since one dev may not see progress another dev made. in this situation i have to say that very little work gets done on these tabs and if you want less for your device then separate them.
I'm not sure this is necessary, the proper use of the tag system should resolve any issues. It may be better to bring this to the attention of the tablet moderation team, rather than open a thread
O_G said:
I'm not sure this is necessary, the proper use of the tag system should resolve any issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but you'd be surprised at how easy it is to completely miss the model tag in the mess of other tags;
"[ROM+KERNEL] [DEVDB] [WIP] [SMT800] [LOLWTF] Hey, look at my ROM!"