ice cream sandwich roll out - Dell Streak 7

hey saw this and figured it was intresting maybe some one can get there hands on this and port it over to ds7
http://www.droid-life.com/2011/11/1...sandwich-source-will-be-released-november-17/

It will be ported, don't worry.

Keep in mind that 3.2 -> 4.0 adds relatively little, it's huge news for 2.3 -> 4.0 as all the goodies in hc will finally be ported over to phones now.
Very little of the new stuff in 4.0 will apply to the s7 since a lot of it is hardware dependant (or simply not as relevent like the data useage tracker for wifi s7s)
Yea who wouldnt want ICS if given the chance? but realistically I wouldnt expect it to add much to the s7, also the ICS source is uploaded/uploading now to google's source right now.

I heard ICS is considerably faster. Is this not correct? HC (stock) seems to move like a pig for me. I would love to speed it up.

TheManii said:
Very little of the new stuff in 4.0 will apply to the s7 since a lot of it is hardware dependent (or simply not as relevant like the data usage tracker for wifi s7s)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Personally I'm most interested in ICS not for the Hardware goodies, but because it is the version most developers are likely to target going forward. Even though we have powerful chips in our phones, I'd be concerned that a lot of apps we SHOULD be able to run would be listed as unable to install if we don't get some version of ICS on the Streak.

There's not going to be any apps that REQUIRE 4.0.x any time soon, they'll merely have features that can take advantage of it.
Back during the first half of 2011 there's very few apps that required 2.3/3.0 as their population was very low. Now there's a small amount of apps that require it and many that can take advantage of it but dont require it.
I'd imagine 4.0 would be the same, many apps that are 3.x capable are about what you'd expect from a 4.0 app and by summer there will be many apps that will have new 4.0 features. But just as much very few will outright require 4.0 to work.
Goog's been working on this for a while now anyway, they have compability libs available so you can use some of the new features on old devices anyway. One example are the fragments api that can run on 2.2 devices even though it's part of 3.0

10chars to post

I would assume that an ICS port would require a developer, and The Manii is our only go-to guy and he doesn't even own a DS7, if I recall correctly. I don't think an ICS port is coming very soon. Most of the developers we had have moved on to newer devices.
Sent from my Dell Streak 7 using Tapatalk

WookieFan said:
I would assume that an ICS port would require a developer, and The Manii is our only go-to guy and he doesn't even own a DS7, if I recall correctly. I don't think an ICS port is coming very soon. Most of the developers we had have moved on to newer devices.
Sent from my Dell Streak 7 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1355729
Currently we are working on developing a 2.6.39 kernel for the Dell Streak 7 because ICS seems to want that or greater version to work properly. DJ_Steve has made quite a bit of progress with it and he just isn't ready to release any build yet to anyone. Heck, I help him out a lot and I don't get to see it.
What we REALLY need is a kernel developer since I am horrible with programming and he says he isn't the greatest on that part either.

giveen said:
What we REALLY need is a kernel developer since I am horrible with programming and he says he isn't the greatest on that part either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have built custom Linux kernels before (Ubuntu and others). I presume there are similarities. If you can point me to a decent guide to doing an Android kernel in general, I'd be happy to take a crack at it. I presume I want to start over at the AOSP site?

Really its just a ARM build of the linux kernel. This is where I am currently stuck at
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/...s-incomplete-element-type-compile-for-android
I would love to have you look at some code problems we are having.

giveen said:
Really its just a ARM build of the linux kernel. This is where I am currently stuck at
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/...s-incomplete-element-type-compile-for-android
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is the code snippet you posted there from the common.c module or from the header defining the module. The error is claiming that your definition is incomplete, which could be you, or could be a mismatch by NVidia.
You might find this posting helpful as well:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2274550/gcc-array-type-has-incomplete-element-type
I will see if I can't spend some time tonight getting a tool chain setup. I haven't done this for a while, but I suspect I can still "make menuconfig" with the best of them.

Well I commeted that line out and got it down to really one error
Code:
arch/arm/mach-tegra/common.c:123: error: array type has incomplete element type
arch/arm/mach-tegra/common.c:309: error: expected identifier or '(' before '{' token
make[1]: *** [arch/arm/mach-tegra/common.o] Error 1
make: *** [arch/arm/mach-tegra] Error 2

giveen said:
Well I commeted that line out and got it down to really one error
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A couple things. First off, on a read over of this again, I notice that there is no } after the #ENDIF. Is there one in the original file? If not, then it would be trying to define the next method internal to this one, which likely would be a problem.
Also, not sure what the latest repo is you hit for the kernel, but found this link in my archive from late August, which could cause a similar issue if it wasn't part of your include:
http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1108.2/00006.html
FWIW...

https://github.com/EnJens/android-tegra-nv-2.6.39
https://github.com/EnJens/android-t...-tegra-nv-2.6.39/arch/arm/mach-tegra/common.c
This is the kernel we are using. Rayman actually did it for the Notion Ink.
---------- Post added at 11:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:43 PM ----------
http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1108.2/00006.html ......didn't fix anything.

FWIW, I would still be sure to include the errno.h (not erron as was erroneously mentioned in that email) just to be safe.
Getting a look at the rest of the code of common.c is a big help
Error message is trying to tell us that there is something "funny" about the definition of the struct "common_clk_init_table" which is supposed to be of type "tegra_clk_init_table". My first question is whether that's really what is meant here, or should these be the other way around (IOW tegra_clk_init_table is the definition and "common_clk_init_table" is the type)? In which case just changing the order in the line is your solution:
static __initdata struct common_clk_init_table tegra_clk_init_table[] = {
Also, I would be hesitant to have a structure that uses numeric values for the third element on each row suddenly having a macro "ULONG_MAX" - which if it was undefined would cause an error also. Would it be possible to just define this to "600000000" which matches the largest number used anywhere else in this struct?
I will see if I can't get a little further on this myself tonight, but feel free to drop me an email, or post again on here if you get further and have questions.
Thanks for giving me something interesting to do!

You wanna help with the kernel? You actually seem to know what you are doing and I can ask, lol. Its just a matter of DM @DMonsterProd on Twitter.
---------- Post added at 12:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:31 AM ----------
EwanG said:
FWIW, I would still be sure to include the errno.h (not erron as was erroneously mentioned in that email) just to be safe.
Getting a look at the rest of the code of common.c is a big help
Error message is trying to tell us that there is something "funny" about the definition of the struct "common_clk_init_table" which is supposed to be of type "tegra_clk_init_table". My first question is whether that's really what is meant here, or should these be the other way around (IOW tegra_clk_init_table is the definition and "common_clk_init_table" is the type)? In which case just changing the order in the line is your solution:
static __initdata struct common_clk_init_table tegra_clk_init_table[] = {
Also, I would be hesitant to have a structure that uses numeric values for the third element on each row suddenly having a macro "ULONG_MAX" - which if it was undefined would cause an error also. Would it be possible to just define this to "600000000" which matches the largest number used anywhere else in this struct?
I will see if I can't get a little further on this myself tonight, but feel free to drop me an email, or post again on here if you get further and have questions.
Thanks for giving me something interesting to do!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PM sent to you.

I think a good friend of mine will help to. So dudes, theres hope

exebreez said:
I think a good friend of mine will help to. So dudes, theres hope
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope so I know the streak isn't the newest. But I have one and would be very grateful
Sent from my HTC Glacier using xda premium

Lockdo6307 said:
I hope so I know the streak isn't the newest. But I have one and would be very grateful
Sent from my HTC Glacier using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, i have an x8, if that old bit*/&) can get ICS, the streak will get it!

Related

Question for developers 2.0>G1?

So the blogger over at 'Android and me' has speculated that older devices will not receive the 2.0 update.
This guy has done this before, he also said 1.6 was too big for the G1 OS partition and of course we all know this was wrong.
I want to know what the dev's think, once all the bull**** is striped and the 2.0 source code is at stock for the G1. How large will it be? And how much room will be left over for downloading apps?
Thank you for your time.
And how much room will be left over for downloading apps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Shouldnt be too much of an issue if you are running apsd.
They already have 2.0 running on G1's, i havent used it myself, but it is running, so I presume it fits.
vixsandlee said:
Shouldnt be too much of an issue if you are running apsd.
They already have 2.0 running on G1's, i havent used it myself, but it is running, so I presume it fits.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, I know... I had 2.0 running for a time and it was great. I used apsd and linux-swap. What i want to know is conclusive evidence that the guy over at Android and me is full of ****.
He always speculates that the G1 will not get updates and is usually wrong. What i am wondering is how large the stock 2.0 for the G1 will be. The Dev's may have an idea.
the guy at androidand me is EXACTLY CORRECT.
What you are failing to see is the guys over there are writing for non-rooted phones. They have said in previous posts that this was a moot point for rooted phones and admitted they were already running the upgraded OS.
Both htc and t-mobile have officially stated that the dream is still getting the 2.0 upgrade. As somebody else said, the point is moot for rooted users because we can always port the newer code to our aging phones, but there's a hitch: the moment htc stops supporting the device, we're on our own.
I've yet to see somebody build the android code for the dream without help from the pre-configurations found in the aosp for dream, and now that the sapphire is officially the adp2, i smell the demise of the dream near.
The biggest enabler of the custom firmware movement was the fact that the dream was also the adp1, so there was a lot of interest on making building the platform easy. We just piggybacked on that.
Take one look at has been accomplished with the hero so far. I still remember the whole "let's make htc give us our hero kernel code" because all thought it would open the door for custom hero firmware. they couldnt have been more wrong. without htc's support, all they got was a fancy linux kernel that they had no idea what to do with, and also discovered how little the kernel had to do with android.
There's now a grand total of two aosp roms for the hero, and they're both so broken that they're really just novelties.
What I'm going at is that once htc drops the dream, people are going to realize knowing linux will only take you so far and you'll have to know android if you plan to get at least a botched android build working on the device.
So eventually, even being rooted will not be enough to ensure continued ability to run the best and latest, unless, ofcourse, we get real devs (again, I'm not claiming to be one myself) in here.
Oh, and.... a bigger android install wont mean less app space... learn to android...
The android system belongs in the 70 mb system partition and, on a factory, official build, doesnt spill into the /data partition where you install your apps. And if you do have root and a2sd, what do you care how big the system is, you can always make your ext bigger, so it should't be a worry for a rooted user.
Really... learn 2 android...
s15274n said:
the guy at androidand me is EXACTLY CORRECT.
What you are failing to see is the guys over there are writing for non-rooted phones. They have said in previous posts that this was a moot point for rooted phones and admitted they were already running the upgraded OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know that the guy at Android and Me has been wrong on this exact issue before right?
When 1.6 was still in the pipes he had a pie chart and everything explaining why it was physically impossible for 1.6 to fit on a G1 (non-rooted). Then 1.6 was pushed to everyone....
http://androidandme.com/2009/08/news/t-mobile-g1-owners-dont-expect-any-future-android-updates/
^^
He was using his best guess at the time after speaking with t-mo, htc and the lead developer from google. He also assumed we would get a VERSION of OS 1.6. Everything he stated then seemed logical... don't fault the guy for not predicting the future man.
What it all boils down to is this;
Whether a device will get an update or not has virtually NOTHING to do with the device specifications and/or storage space. There is LOTS of space available on the device, despite what some chicken little's speculate based on a moronic look at the "free space in /system" (which has VERY little meaning). What determines whether a device will get a particular update or not has everything to do with what the MANUFACTURER WANTS TO DO.
In other words, this is *all* in the hands of HTC. Even tmobile has hardly anything to do with this since tmobile themselves don't have the source for the proprietary binaries (which happens to be the stumbling block) -- although tmobile can say "not for ours" if they want, HTC can still build the binaries and/or system image for DREAM/ADP1. Fully in their hands and nobody else's.
Which leads to a couple of options for updates;
1) modify the current state of AOSP to remain compatible with existing HTC binaries,
2) reverse engineer HTC proprietary binaries so they're no longer needed.
I vote for #2. The replicant project seems to have this aim, but I don't know if they are still alive or if they died along with the open android alliance... http://trac.osuosl.org/trac/replicant/wiki

Nexus 1 Updated to 2.2.2 Nexus S 2.3.2 What about Galaxy S ?

Just read the news about these two getting the update that fixes the SMS bug but no mention of any other 2.2.x O/S'd phones getting it. Can't be far off surely?
http://phandroid.com/
I just want that SMS fix, I've seen two I9000Ms do it. I pinged Samsung Canada on Twitter, we'll see what their response is.
v.2.3 2012
v2.4 2022
v3.0 2050
maybe
My20 said:
v.2.3 2012
v2.4 2022
v3.0 2050
maybe
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
maybe ayes maybe naws
My20 said:
v.2.3 2012
v2.4 2022
v3.0 2050
(American variant releases not guaranteed)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fixed that for you.
i somewhere read that we can expect 2.3 for SGS for the end for the first quarter of the year...but are you people using stock ROMS ? i think Darky's ROM is working on a multi-device able to detect and flash devices accordingly, shouldn't that fix your sms problems ?
ps: i have the i9000, but what is "the sms problem", i don't think i have it..
Everybody bug samsung to skip 2.3 and prep for 3.0.
With carriers charging 15-20¢/SMS and having a free replacement (google voice, google talk, emails)
I really couldn't care less about SMS. I should even remove the SMS app from my phone.
Why do y'all want honeycomb (3.0), it's for tablet, not SmartPhones :|
t1mman said:
Why do y'all want honeycomb (3.0), it's for tablet, not SmartPhones :|
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's for both.
t1mman said:
Why do y'all want honeycomb (3.0), it's for tablet, not SmartPhones :|
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So wrong, it hurts.
rumor
the rumor is here :
i like the way they say
"site called SamFirmwares – one we’ve never heard of before."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
they better all listen to these site ! i wonder how these big companies would react to
all the amazing roms out there !
JCopernicus said:
So wrong, it hurts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it? Then prove me wrong...
From google:
Honeycomb is the next version of the Android platform, designed from the ground up for devices with larger screen sizes, particularly tablets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2011/01/sneak-peak-of-android-30-honeycomb.html
That's the reason Google is naming "honeycomb" 3.0, and later Tablet optimisez releases will be 3.x where smartphone will stay on 2.x
Before saying crap at one another, do some research...
t1mman said:
Is it? Then prove me wrong...
From google:
http://googlemobile.blogspot.com/2011/01/sneak-peak-of-android-30-honeycomb.html
That's the reason Google is naming "honeycomb" 3.0, and later Tablet optimisez releases will be 3.x where smartphone will stay on 2.x
Before saying crap at one another, do some research...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's literally hurting my brain that you think that. Check back after 3.0 line is cut and put up on AOSP, you'll see all the honeycomb roms(for phones) floating around.
JCopernicus said:
It's literally hurting my brain that you think that. Check back after 3.0 line is cut and put up on AOSP, you'll see all the honeycomb roms(for phones) floating around.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can get rom floating around of about anything, doesn't mean it's made for it... You can even get a whole Linux distrubution working on SGS, still it's not "official" or optimised...
Still, nothing will be official and Honeycomb is still optimised for Tablet. I don't know why your "brain hurts", but when google sais their thing is optimised for something, since they made the thing, you'd better beleive them!
hell, you can put a Corvette engine in a Civic, still it's not meant or optimised for.
t1mman said:
You can get rom floating around of about anything, doesn't mean it's made for it... You can even get a whole Linux distrubution working on SGS, still it's not "official" or optimised...
Still, nothing will be official and Honeycomb is still optimised for Tablet. I don't know why your "brain hurts", but when google sais their thing is optimised for something, since they made the thing, you'd better beleive them!
hell, you can put a Corvette engine in a Civic, still it's not meant or optimised for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-3.0-highlights.html
Honeycomb adds "tablet" (ie big screen) specific support. It's not an independent branch, feature sets will trickle down accordingly to phones, they will both be 3.0.
P.S. A rom built from AOSP is as official as you can get in regards to Android.
JCopernicus said:
http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-3.0-highlights.html
Honeycomb adds "tablet" (ie big screen) specific support. It's not an independent branch, feature sets will trickle down accordingly to phones, they will both be 3.0.
P.S. A rom built from AOSP is as official as you can get in regards to Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't read title can't you?
"New UI designed from the ground up for tablets"
The reason it's (honeycomb) taking another number (3.0) instead of following the same (2.x) is because it's for tablets...
as far as AOSP vs. Official, their's a huge difference between official source code (from google) vs official rom (from samsung).
I can't tell the future, but I can most certainly say that Kies would offer 2.4 hell before 3.0 for our devices (which are smartphones, not tablet).
t1mman said:
You can't read title can't you?
"New UI designed from the ground up for tablets"
The reason it's (honeycomb) taking another number (3.0) instead of following the same (2.x) is because it's for tablets...
as far as AOSP vs. Official, their's a huge difference between official source code (from google) vs official rom (from samsung).
I can't tell the future, but I can most certainly say that Kies would offer 2.4 hell before 3.0 for our devices (which are smartphones, not tablet).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The large screen views (which never existed) are built from the "ground up" because, guess what? They never existed in the first place.
The reason it's taking 3.0 is because it's a huge jump in feature set, and qualifies as a version realease and not just a point release.
If a device has a certain feature it can access certain API from the android OS. If a device doesn't, then it can't. It's that simple.
"tablets" have the big screen feature and they can access the nested view API's. You don't know how android works. there is ONE line, which sits at 2.3.2, and it's device independent.
Just like the Nexus S can access the NFC api's because it has an NFC chip.
AOSP is the code that google/samsung/moto/acer/etc pull from, and build more on top.
Cyanogen roms are on par and equivalent(better actually) as google's roms, you can't get more "official" than AOSP. MFG roms are actually less true to AOSP as they are modified. You probably won't see 3.0 on the current galaxy line at all, but that has nothing to do whether it works on there or not.
Chill out dude! Take a deep breath....
This is getting nowhere, running in circle...
I'm pretty sure we won't see Honeycomb as a release by the makers (Samsungs, Motorola, LG, HTC, name em) on any smartphone. Don't know why this is such a big deal for you and what you don't get on the whole deal but if you want,
You can bookmark this thread and if you see an official honecomb as an official release by samsung or LG or HTC or google on a Smartphone, revive it from the archives and rub it on my face, I'll gladly take the fall...
Chill out? I think I'm just typing normally on a keyboard? Maybe I'm smashing keys, and don't recognize it?
You don't understand how android works if you think it won't appear on phones, we're not going around in circles. You're just wrong.

[Q] Android L (5)

How soon do you guys think a ROM will be made for Nook HD/HD+ after Android L releases? Any guesses? Cyanogen have done a great job with 4.4
That's just going to be a lot of assumptions
sandsofmyst said:
That's just going to be a lot of assumptions
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably why you were the only one to reply xD Thanks man
Just don't like to see 0 replies. That said, there's one now and then that I won't reply to. However, L is of much interest to me and some of the supposed improvements will hopefully be great. Plus L on the nooks would hopefully be even better. So I share your enthusiasm.
The release time could be shorter or longer depending on the amount of porting work to be done. There's other variables too. But someone else might also before cyanogenmod which would be fun.
Thanks for the reply, I agree on L being even better on the Nook varieties. Can't wait!
I was finally starting to look into bumping stock off og my HD9 and saw this... guess I can wait 4-6 months for this to all take shape... I wouldn't want to lose my progress in PvZ2 at this point anyhow
My question is whether or not upgrading to L will be a performance boost or if it'll just be bloat on the hardwwre. Won't know til it gets here though.
Goggles2114 said:
My question is whether or not upgrading to L will be a performance boost or if it'll just be bloat on the hardwwre. Won't know til it gets here though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With the nook being the nook... you could be right. The latest tech really makes android smooth, not android on the older tech.
OSs don't tend to get faster as they get fancier and the latest tablets and phones have much faster hardware (and more RAM).
Well I mean take a look at the iPhone 4S, it used to be able to run IOS 5 and now it's up to IOS 8 and it's still pretty fast. These companies need to focus as well on making the newer OS work well with older devices. I mean the HD/HD+ is only 2 years old...
Corkerman said:
the HD/HD+ is only 2 years old...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It might be 2 years old but the hardware was never really all that great as it wasn't a top-of-the-line tablet when it came out.
Anyway, that's why I'm hoping 5.0 does something to improve performance, but wouldn't expect miracles from it if anything at all. Android just does better on newer hardware.
_________________________
Looks like cm11 m12 improved responsiveness a noticeable amount and finally too. Still not the same amount newer hardware would cause but a welcome improvement.
Goggles2114 said:
My question is whether or not upgrading to L will be a performance boost or if it'll just be bloat on the hardwwre. Won't know til it gets here though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I upgraded my Nexus 7 2013 to 5.0.0_r2, and it is noticeably faster than 4.4.4_r2. With kitkat, art sped up menus and navigation, but not really much else. Lollipop is all art - no dalvik option - and not only are menus and navigation faster, but it seems to speed up apps as well, mainly the Chrome browser. I've been using Lollipop for a couple of weeks now, compiled 5.0.0_r2 with 4.4.4 blobs, and I've been pretty impressed. I just built 5.0.0_r5 from source yesterday with the new 5.0 blobs they released. I haven't had time to install it, but I would imagine the performance to be the same as 5.0.0_r2.
Unfortunately, the Nook HD depends heavily on CM source, and quite frankly, it's a little above my expertise. So I'll just have to wait for verygreen, bokbokan, and leapinlar to give us a lollipop build for the Nook HD and HD+.
cahrens said:
I upgraded my Nexus 7 2013 to 5.0.0_r2, and it is noticeably faster
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's great to hear it's indeed faster even though it's on a Nexus! Great job and hopefully the three guys can work some magic into the HD's
Corkerman said:
I mean the HD/HD+ is only 2 years old...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In consumer products, that's an eternity.
I've been working with Lollipop builds for a few weeks now, so I have a fairly decent idea of what is involved.
1) sensors.c (touchscreen) requires a minor rewrite.
2) hdmi_audio.c requires a symbol to be dropped (or qcom hardware specified, either/or)
3) selinux rewrites... blehch!
4) hwc, domx ... dunno yet, there's apparently working lollipop compatible source available
5) Changes to build/core/Makefile cause most builds to hang on imgdiff, some reversions are required to get around this.
OK, even with all this, I've only had one build boot enough to get some logs. Ironically it was my very first build.
http://pastebin.com/CNBrENWD
I did end up adding libcorkscrew. Anyway every subsequent build I've done reboots even before being able to get a last_kmsg. I'm at the point now where I believe our kernel will need to be patched to handle gcc 4.8. Changing the build to use gcc 4.7 is doable, but isn't very pretty or nice (too many headers have changed).
Anyone have any other hints or suggestions?
Jon Lee said:
I've been working with Lollipop builds for a few weeks now, so I have a fairly decent idea of what is involved.
1) sensors.c (touchscreen) requires a minor rewrite.
2) hdmi_audio.c requires a symbol to be dropped (or qcom hardware specified, either/or)
3) selinux rewrites... blehch!
4) hwc, domx ... dunno yet, there's apparently working lollipop compatible source available
5) Changes to build/core/Makefile cause most builds to hang on imgdiff, some reversions are required to get around this.
OK, even with all this, I've only had one build boot enough to get some logs. Ironically it was my very first build.
http://pastebin.com/CNBrENWD
I did end up adding libcorkscrew. Anyway every subsequent build I've done reboots even before being able to get a last_kmsg. I'm at the point now where I believe our kernel will need to be patched to handle gcc 4.8. Changing the build to use gcc 4.7 is doable, but isn't very pretty or nice (too many headers have changed).
Anyone have any other hints or suggestions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it were me, I'd look here http://forum.xda-developers.com/kindle-fire/development/rom-kernel-unofficial-cm12-0-otterx-t2958155 or here http://forum.xda-developers.com/kindle-fire/development/slimpop-otterx-t2957450 for some guidance.
Hashcode is a legend on XDA and he has almost single-handedly kept the very old, TI OMAP 4430 Kindle Fire alive. As for lovejoy777, currently, he has been the most active, hard working dev for that same KF. Hashcode has CM12 working and lovejoy777 has Slimpop.
Since our device is so similar to the KF and Hashcode has contributed to the Nook in the past, looks to be a good resource??? Then again, verygreen could also pop in sometime down the road.
Mike T
It was because of installing CM on a Kindle Fire 2 for a friend that I decided to purchase a Nook (wanted an OMAP).
I checked both threads over but didn't immediately find any lollipop android_device source available.
I was right about the kernel (arm/lib/memset.S?). Only took me a week to figure it out.
I'm not quite sure yet what to make of the second set of logs, but this is where I'm at now.
http://pastebin.com/EXnJpp3L
Jon Lee said:
It was because of installing CM on a Kindle Fire 2 for a friend that I decided to purchase a Nook (wanted an OMAP).
I checked both threads over but didn't immediately find any lollipop android_device source available.
I was right about the kernel (arm/lib/memset.S?). Only took me a week to figure it out.
I'm not quite sure yet what to make of the second set of logs, but this is where I'm at now.
http://pastebin.com/EXnJpp3L
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One of my first android devices was the 1st gen KF and Hashcode helped make an inexpensive E-reader a very viable android tablet. I would PM Hashcode and/or lovejoy777. Hashcode is usually very busy but he has always been helpful towards other devs, I know he gave some assistance to lovejoy777 with SlimPop.
As for lovejoy777, he's fairly new at development but seems to be very helpful. I think he also may have gotten some help/guidance from MwisBest who built a LP rom for the OMAP 4460 Galaxy Nexus. I mention this because I believe he knows the importance of cooperation among devs. As an aside, while reading his thread I think I read that he was in the process of "cleaning up" his github. So, he could be a good source.
Maybe also PM killersloth. He built quite a few nice roms for our Nooks last year and just recently expressed some interest in trying to get LP on our device. Maybe if you contact him, you guys can make something happen. I'm an old fashioned XDA'er that believes cooperation amongst devs and end users is essential in the community. Every little bit can help.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=57255968&postcount=14
Anyway, you seem to be a very sharp guy. I wish you luck in getting LP to the Nook. I wish I could contribute more but I'm more of a file swapper and modder of existing work than a dev. :laugh:
Mike T
Moving to Texas in three days, been hectic around here lol.
I had major issues with hwc, selinux, and our old configs. Hashcode must have plowed through it if its running on otter. I'd check his commit history for some tips.
We needed this for prebuilt boot image before
http://review.cyanogenmod.org/#/c/36813/1
I needed it a few weeks back when attempting to build. They might have brought up their own method since then.
I wish they would have called it SlimPop instead of SlimLP ??
A 5.0 build for hummingbird would be nice. Hopefully it won't be hard to modify an ovation build since all the devel appears to be on ovation.

Am I the Only One Who is Upset?

I had posted earlier about no Remix 3.0 for the Mini. Am I missing something here the Mini is only a matter of maybe a few months old and they have stopped supporting it already? This seems to me like a very poor way of doing business. Could you imagine if Microsoft announced that they where going to stop supporting Windows 10 after only six months? I tried to warn them about Allwinner during the Kickstarter everything I have tried from them has been junk plan and simple. Allwinner also has terrible support. But I expected more from Jide. I also have inquired with Jide if they intend to offer a discount on the new Rockchip Mini for the Kickstarter supporters where they have pulled support after it just being released. I like Remix OS but I am now skeptical about purchasing anything more from them after this.
You are not the only one. I paid $50 for a box that is inferior(besides the flash quality) to a $36 box that is apparently supported by them, and now I see on top of the box being inferior, support will be dropped for it too.
Pretty stupid.
Also the idea that you have to hardware mod to get root? No.
I understand frustration. But I use my Remix Mini every day (I Heart Radio, Tune In Radio) and occasionally Kodi, Netflix, various TV network apps, etc. Does all I ask of it and more. For less than $50. Would it be nice to have Marshmallow, or 4k video, of faster processor? Sure, but none seem to improve what I use it for.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using XDA-Developers mobile app
I see it okay for what I use it for even though after a couple of hours of use it gets REALLY hot and SLOW, to the point where I have to restart my Mini.
I would hope that updates would help it just run smoother so the lack of support sucks and causes me to look at other alternatives. Lesson learned on a 50$ experiment.
thirdlobe said:
I see it okay for what I use it for even though after a couple of hours of use it gets REALLY hot and SLOW, to the point where I have to restart my Mini.
I would hope that updates would help it just run smoother so the lack of support sucks and causes me to look at other alternatives. Lesson learned on a 50$ experiment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah but that lesson learned netted them over 1.5 Million and now they are just dropping it and expecting people to by a new model when the old one is only 8 months, never mind that they falsely advertised the 4K and can't even reproduce the digital audio AC3 out without glitches...
I thought of that but there is not much I can do at this point. I have been thinking of just installing the RemixOS to a i5 NUC of some sort.
thirdlobe said:
I thought of that but there is not much I can do at this point. I have been thinking of just installing the RemixOS to a i5 NUC of some sort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...i have RemixOS(4PC) running on part of my (Lenovo YogaPro3 ---12GB RAM + 512SSD)...& it is ridiculous-fast!!! i love it..
----------------------
....2 the original poster: "+1 right here with ya! ...i'm a kickstarter supporter and however i use my Mini on the daily in the living room.. I use the tablet a couple times a week for small tablet-tasks. When i found out the loss of support---- i was a bit peeved but i still enjoy what i have of theirs and i'm still going to end up purchasing the new one and probably still enjoy the O.G. Mini... OR... i may just hack it to pieces with a new OS."
Unfortunately I have 3 of the Mini's and while keeping one may be okay I definately don't need the other 2 but I could not in good conscious sell the others to to somebody unless they new the remix before hand...
To anybody interested in the other 2 I would sell them for $20$us each plus exact shipping. Barely even used except to make sure that all 3 worked when I got them and give them their recent updates. For $30US each I will throw in one of those mini keyboards with the Touch mouse and backlite for each one
@thirdlobe
no point at the mo (no audio over HDMI) jide won't fix it coz its not their problem . so you might have to wait for MM release of remix to see if that's been fixed .
Darrylw said:
Unfortunately I have 3 of the Mini's and while keeping one may be okay I definately don't need the other 2 but I could not in good conscious sell the others to to somebody unless they new the remix before hand...
To anybody interested in the other 2 I would sell them for $20$us each plus exact shipping. Barely even used except to make sure that all 3 worked when I got them and give them their recent updates. For $30US each I will throw in one of those mini keyboards with the Touch mouse and backlite for each one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I may be interested in one of them, where are you located Darryl?
afgok said:
@thirdlobe
no point at the mo (no audio over HDMI) jide won't fix it coz its not their problem . so you might have to wait for MM release of remix to see if that's been fixed .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like I said, I will just pick up a NUC later on.
A9er said:
I may be interested in one of them, where are you located Darryl?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry already sold and picked up, I feel better, I got most of my money back.
wastate2014 said:
I had posted earlier about no Remix 3.0 for the Mini. Am I missing something here the Mini is only a matter of maybe a few months old and they have stopped supporting it already? This seems to me like a very poor way of doing business. Could you imagine if Microsoft announced that they where going to stop supporting Windows 10 after only six months? I tried to warn them about Allwinner during the Kickstarter everything I have tried from them has been junk plan and simple. Allwinner also has terrible support. But I expected more from Jide. I also have inquired with Jide if they intend to offer a discount on the new Rockchip Mini for the Kickstarter supporters where they have pulled support after it just being released. I like Remix OS but I am now skeptical about purchasing anything more from them after this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey wastate2014,
Really sorry to hear the disappointment evident from your post. The Remix Mini won't be getting Remix OS based on 6.0 anytime soon due to the Allwinner chip not supporting Marshmallow. This I've probably mentioned to you before.
Supporting Remix Mini is still something we're actively working on. There will be a test version going out to testers within a couple days and after it goes through testing, it'll be released as a public OTA update for all Mini users. If all goes well, I'd say testing will take around a week. Thus, we do continue to support Remix Mini, though we do have our resource challenges as a startup.
As for everything you've tried from us being junk, please let me know exactly what it is that's been bad and I'll do my best to make sure it's fixed as long as it's within my power to. Can you pass on a private email through PM here and I'll contact you about your issues.
Lastly, we will work harder to make sure our earliest backers, esp on Kickstarter, know we're listening and we value you. I'm sorry to anyone who has felt let down by us in any way.
Jason
---------- Post added at 07:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:01 PM ----------
sketchman16 said:
You are not the only one. I paid $50 for a box that is inferior(besides the flash quality) to a $36 box that is apparently supported by them, and now I see on top of the box being inferior, support will be dropped for it too.
Pretty stupid.
Also the idea that you have to hardware mod to get root? No.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey sketchman16,
Do you mind if you PM me with your email? I'd like to try to rectify the disappointment you have in us and our products.
Thanks,
Jason
RemixOS_Jason said:
Hey sketchman16,
Do you mind if you PM me with your email? I'd like to try to rectify the disappointment you have in us and our products.
Thanks,
Jason
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Email address PMed. Thanks for the response.
Sooooo, not sure what the update did, but there is a new update if you opt in to receiving the testing releases. Still no root like you get by default in MM, which the Mini won't get.
I'm really not sure how this happens, but I'm done. There's no "rectify"-ing this beyond taking returns and providing refunds I don't think. And I would not expect that, of course.
So, I'm done. Anybody want mine, PM me. It's mint, and updated to the latest FW.
sketchman16 said:
Email address PMed. Thanks for the response.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mine has been sat in a drawer for the last 2 months hugely disappointed with jide "rooting your mini will void your warranty" poor excuse. this device should have come pre-rooted simular to the way cm roms are. the people on xda are by nature tinkers and you jide actively dennying root access does not endear you. (a half pre rooted rom is still not good enough).
for most people the "P" in pc means personnal as in yours to do with or customize as YOU see fit, however in the case of the remix mini i think it means "pwned" by jide.
i had massive hopes for this device and remix but sadly have moved on.
sketchman16 said:
Sooooo, not sure what the update did, but there is a new update if you opt in to receiving the testing releases. Still no root like you get by default in MM, which the Mini won't get.
I'm really not sure how this happens, but I'm done. There's no "rectify"-ing this beyond taking returns and providing refunds I don't think. And I would not expect that, of course.
So, I'm done. Anybody want mine, PM me. It's mint, and updated to the latest FW.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How did you sign up for that testing?
I dont mind by nature. LOL
thirdlobe said:
How did you sign up for that testing?
I dont mind by nature. LOL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's somewhere around the update window. 3 dots to click that give you settings to accept testing releases. I don't really see any point, unless they will offer root on the testing releases, maybe.
And still, I won't be bothering.
Nope.. not upset
I have bought many android devices... (meson/s802h/a31s/805/3188/3288/H8 ) some cheap.. some expensive
Expensive doenst mean good.. in many cases.. (and more cores doesnt mean faster computing)
-Most android tv boxes have no support what-So-ever, But with some support from XDA\freaktab\Libre-elec... most of them got to be quite good
The Remix Mini is just a average android device.. (hardware wise) But with good support and a great User Interface
The have earnt my respect.. ( with Remix Mini support / releasing 32bit for older pc hardware...giving a new spark to android x86 project )
Here is how to be a tester: http://support.jide.com/hc/en-us/articles/218012497-How-to-be-a-tester-
---------- Post added at 05:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:20 PM ----------
don't forget to report issues using the feedback app

Compiling Unofficial CyanogenMod 14.1 for Nexus 6

Hello XDA Community,
I am interested in using the unofficial build of CyanogenMod 14.1 available here, but I would like to learn how to compile on my own from the repository provided by the developer. Unfortunately, I do not know how to go about doing this. Could someone please help me out? I have looked at the CyanogenMod Wiki entry for how to compile CyanogenMod for the Nexus 6, but the information is out of date according to what I was told in a post I made on Stack Exchange's Android Q&A site. The only thing that I understand about the build process is that I need to use Linux, so I have set up a virtual machine in VMware running the latest version of Ubuntu. Where do I go from here?
Thank you,
David B.
David B. said:
Hello XDA Community,
I am interested in using the unofficial build of CyanogenMod 14.1 available here, but I would like to learn how to compile on my own from the repository provided by the developer. Unfortunately, I do not know how to go about doing this. Could someone please help me out? I have looked at the CyanogenMod Wiki entry for how to compile CyanogenMod for the Nexus 6, but the information is out of date according to what I was told in a post I made on Stack Exchange's Android Q&A site. The only thing that I understand about the build process is that I need to use Linux, so I have set up a virtual machine in VMware running the latest version of Ubuntu. Where do I go from here?
Thank you,
David B.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be honest You will be better off dual booting. Compiling with a VM normally has more issues then not.
Then I would look at Google developer page.
Also keep in mind that compiling from CM means you get all the bugs they never fixed. You would be better off going with AOSP and then finding the features you want to add and then add them yourself.
zelendel said:
To be honest You will be better off dual booting. Compiling with a VM normally has more issues then not.
Then I would look at Google developer page.
Also keep in mind that compiling from CM means you get all the bugs they never fixed. You would be better off going with AOSP and then finding the features you want to add and then add them yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would love to build my own CyanogenMod based on AOSP and then merge in the features, but I don't even know how to build directly from AOSP.
Honestly, all I really want is stock with all of the additional developer mode features that CyanogenMod has along with root access. I love the ability to use root without extra apps, and wireless ADB is sweet when I'm too lazy to go get my USB cable. And of course, I want to be able to use future versions of Android on my phone even though 7.0.1 is supposed to be the last version for Shamu. Could I somehow merge those aspects together and just pull patches from AOSP, build, and flash?
Also what's wrong with using a VM to compile? I've read that problems occur if you don't have enough RAM allocated to the VM, but I've assigned it 16GB so that should not be a problem. As for attaching my phone to the VM, I am using VMware, which has better support for removable devices than VirtualBox.
I'm sorry if I misunderstand something you said. It's probably obvious, but I know pretty much nothing about what I am doing which means I'm likely to ask lots of questions that seem ridiculous to those that are well-versed in this sort of thing.
David B. said:
I would love to build my own CyanogenMod based on AOSP and then merge in the features, but I don't even know how to build directly from AOSP.
Honestly, all I really want is stock with all of the additional developer mode features that CyanogenMod has along with root access. I love the ability to use root without extra apps, and wireless ADB is sweet when I'm too lazy to go get my USB cable. And of course, I want to be able to use future versions of Android on my phone even though 7.0.1 is supposed to be the last version for Shamu. Could I somehow merge those aspects together and just pull patches from AOSP, build, and flash?
Also what's wrong with using a VM to compile? I've read that problems occur if you don't have enough RAM allocated to the VM, but I've assigned it 16GB so that should not be a problem. As for attaching my phone to the VM, I am using VMware, which has better support for removable devices than VirtualBox.
I'm sorry if I misunderstand something you said. It's probably obvious, but I know pretty much nothing about what I am doing which means I'm likely to ask lots of questions that seem ridiculous to those that are well-versed in this sort of thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You do know that there is an app for SU built into CM right? So it is no extra apps then any other rom.
Could you yes but it will be lots of work due to what CM changes in the source code. It is one of the many reasons (on top of years old bugs that were never fixed) That many teams stopped using them as a source. The Shamu will be supported by 3rd party developers for a while to come.
Normally ram is an issue but other issues also happen.
I dont know anything about having to attach your device to VM as I have never used VM due to advise from the developers here.
Asking questions is not that big of a deal as long as you do your research. There are tons of TUT on the site about setting up a build setup. Just use the search and spend a few days reading. Mainly where the licenses are concerned. Also commit authorship. Which is you make your own rom it is very important.
zelendel said:
You do know that there is an app for SU built into CM right? So it is no extra apps then any other rom.
Could you yes but it will be lots of work due to what CM changes in the source code. It is one of the many reasons (on top of years old bugs that were never fixed) That many teams stopped using them as a source. The Shamu will be supported by 3rd party developers for a while to come.
Normally ram is an issue but other issues also happen.
I dont know anything about having to attach your device to VM as I have never used VM due to advise from the developers here.
Asking questions is not that big of a deal as long as you do your research. There are tons of TUT on the site about setting up a build setup. Just use the search and spend a few days reading. Mainly where the licenses are concerned. Also commit authorship. Which is you make your own rom it is very important.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, so I have done some research and have a solution for how to use root with stock Android, but as soon as stock Android support is dropped from the Nexus 6 I will have to compile it myself which I am not sure how to do and would like to learn. Do you have any suggestions for what to go to learn since everything I am finding is not about compiling, but is instead about using an existing build?
David B. said:
Okay, so I have done some research and have a solution for how to use root with stock Android, but as soon as stock Android support is dropped from the Nexus 6 I will have to compile it myself which I am not sure how to do and would like to learn. Do you have any suggestions for what to go to learn since everything I am finding is not about compiling, but is instead about using an existing build?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here you go
https://source.android.com/source/initializing.html
Mind you getting root is more then adding an app for it. You will also have to do some kernel edits.
zelendel said:
Here you go
https://source.android.com/source/initializing.html
Mind you getting root is more then adding an app for it. You will also have to do some kernel edits.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! I also found this. I have not really looked at it too much yet, but it seems like it has the potential to help me with what I want. Why would I need to make kernel edits? I thought all I needed to do was use TWRP to flash SuperSU after flashing the ROM.
David B. said:
Thanks! I also found this. I have not really looked at it too much yet, but it seems like it has the potential to help me with what I want. Why would I need to make kernel edits? I thought all I needed to do was use TWRP to flash SuperSU after flashing the ROM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SuperSU edits the kernel when you flash it. Most of what allows root is in the kernel.
Yes that is a great resource. Just take your time and read it. You could have a working set up and build in about 2 days (given the first sync of the source code could take more then 24 hours depending on your connection.
zelendel said:
SuperSU edits the kernel when you flash it. Most of what allows root is in the kernel.
Yes that is a great resource. Just take your time and read it. You could have a working set up and build in about 2 days (given the first sync of the source code could take more then 24 hours depending on your connection.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One thing that I still cannot figure out after all of this reading is what to do to get AOSP to build for devices that are not officially supported by it. Granted, this is not a problem for the Nexus 6 right now, but it will be eventually, and I want to know how to handle it when it does become an issue. I've started cloning the repository. My connection gets a top download speed of 60Mbps so it should be reasonably fast.
David B. said:
One thing that I still cannot figure out after all of this reading is what to do to get AOSP to build for devices that are not officially supported by it. Granted, this is not a problem for the Nexus 6 right now, but it will be eventually, and I want to know how to handle it when it does become an issue. I've started cloning the repository. My connection gets a top download speed of 60Mbps so it should be reasonably fast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At that point you will need to know what you are doing as you will have to make the code changes to make it bootable. I hate to say it but the n6 maybe doa after this as anything after 7.1 will need dual partition setup which the n6 doesn't have
zelendel said:
At that point you will need to know what you are doing as you will have to make the code changes to make it bootable. I hate to say it but the n6 maybe doa after this as anything after 7.1 will need dual partition setup which the n6 doesn't have
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's stopping the phone from being repartitioned in the same way you repartition a hard drive?
David B. said:
What's stopping the phone from being repartitioned in the same way you repartition a hard drive?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The main issue is none of the software for the n6 are made to work with it. All the drivers have to be rewritten. Also all of the new Vulcan graphics drivers won't work on the n6. This is why it didn't get all the features of 7.0
zelendel said:
The main issue is none of the software for the n6 are made to work with it. All the drivers have to be rewritten. Also all of the new Vulcan graphics drivers won't work on the n6. This is why it didn't get all the features of 7.0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had not heard of this before. I was researching it online a bit and I cannot figure out which features are missing from the Nexus 6 version of Nougat. Also, Nougat has to support older hardware for devices that don't support Vulkan, so there's no reason they can't do that for Android O, and it they don't, surely someone smarter than I will be able to hack it together.
David B. said:
I had not heard of this before. I was researching it online a bit and I cannot figure out which features are missing from the Nexus 6 version of Nougat. Also, Nougat has to support older hardware for devices that don't support Vulkan, so there's no reason they can't do that for Android O, and it they don't, surely someone smarter than I will be able to hack it together.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the thing is android O will only be official supported by devices that can use it. Remember the nexus 6 support ended in October so there won't be an official O release for it.
Will there be a hacked together set up? Oh I'm sure there will be. It will just be without the Vulcan graphics drivers and the new update system which needs the dual partition layout.
The missing features are no background updates, no Vulcan drivers among other things
zelendel said:
That's the thing is android O will only be official supported by devices that can use it. Remember the nexus 6 support ended in October so there won't be an official O release for it.
Will there be a hacked together set up? Oh I'm sure there will be. It will just be without the Vulcan graphics drivers and the new update system which needs the dual partition layout.
The missing features are no background updates, no Vulcan drivers among other things
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well if the only things I lose are Vulkan and background updates, I am cool with that. It sounds like Vulkan is intended for games, and since I hate mobile gaming, an adapted build that works with the existing graphics drivers is not a concern at all. As for background updates, I would rather not have those because I like to know when my phone receives updates.
David B. said:
Well if the only things I lose are Vulkan and background updates, I am cool with that. It sounds like Vulkan is intended for games, and since I hate mobile gaming, an adapted build that works with the existing graphics drivers is not a concern at all. As for background updates, I would rather not have those because I like to know when my phone receives updates.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Vulcan driver will be replacing the graphics drivers for everything soon. I can't think of much as I never use stock software.
zelendel said:
The Vulcan driver will be replacing the graphics drivers for everything soon. I can't think of much as I never use stock software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am sorry, but I am afraid I do not quite understand what it is that you said. What can't you think of?
David B. said:
I am sorry, but I am afraid I do not quite understand what it is that you said. What can't you think of?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There were many features that came with 7.0 like the new advanced doze and some other stuff. I dont use stock software and to be honest most of the stuff from 7.0 wasnt even really worth the update to me.
I have had a nexus since day 1 on and off and this was the first time I wasnt excited about the update. Even less with the new updates coming and google locking android down more as well as them moving most of the new stuff to closed sourced stuff. Heck even just having the bootloader unlocked is causing things not to work.
zelendel said:
There were many features that came with 7.0 like the new advanced doze and some other stuff. I dont use stock software and to be honest most of the stuff from 7.0 wasnt even really worth the update to me.
I have had a nexus since day 1 on and off and this was the first time I wasnt excited about the update. Even less with the new updates coming and google locking android down more as well as them moving most of the new stuff to closed sourced stuff. Heck even just having the bootloader unlocked is causing things not to work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? What doesn't work with the unlocked bootloader?
David B. said:
Really? What doesn't work with the unlocked bootloader?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Things like android pay and saftynet. They are now starting to look for unlocked bootloaders. then you have those that are blocking apps due to root or xposed.

Categories

Resources