Related
Hello guys
Based on my investigation several time ago,,I was look up some ROM and development for Triumph n X6 from several forums
For now,,development of Moto Triumph stepping far from Huawei X6,,I was looked some new update ROM especially ICS ROM
I want asking to someone who know about development
What different Triumph from X6?just CDMA >< GSM or more??Is Motorola have individual brand build?
Is possible to get flash ROM based from Triumph??
I'm asking because I found Triumph have AOKP ICS developers
Since edowar who develop AOSP ICS gone,,X6 device development for AOSP ICS stuck at alpha5,,
Sorry if I like blaming or flaming developers,,but I just want to know if X6 can use Triumph ROM or not
Sent from my CSL-MI410 using Tapatalk 2
I don't agree with you. Triumph not stepping far from X6. Both features have the same progress, even triumph camera capturing still not work on ICS while ours already work.
Some devs... Tj and ardX still in progress for AOSP ICS for our device, we also have a step forward for camera. Zuk also available to port it, and I think he will definitely port it to any other rom for this ICS. But be patient, they're working on it. They work to make camera work perfect with video and not interfere with wifi functionality also. After that, here... will be more ICS roms port and mod... Zuk, elol and other porter will get additional spirit to port and may be me also .
X6 can use Triumph rom, but it will not get the signal and may be you can't use touch screen also. Need some touch to port it, but then the features still lack of camera. Camera is a must for me and for some of us. I can't use ICS if camera not work.
CacingKalung said:
I don't agree with you. Triumph not stepping far from X6. Both features have the same progress, even triumph camera capturing still not work on ICS while ours already work.
Some devs... Tj and ardX still in progress for AOSP ICS for our device, we also have a step forward for camera. Zuk also available to port it, and I think he will definitely port it to any other rom for this ICS. But be patient, they're working on it. They work to make camera work perfect with video and not interfere with wifi functionality also. After that, here... will be more ICS roms port and mod... Zuk, elol and other porter will get additional spirit to port and may be me also .
X6 can use Triumph rom, but it will not get the signal and may be you can't use touch screen also. Need some touch to port it, but then the features still lack of camera. Camera is a must for me and for some of us. I can't use ICS if camera not work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
whatabout u8800? zuk has some roms from there as well. and u8800 has ICS based on u8860 (huawei honor).
huawei honor's chipset is MSM8255T, mi410 is MSM8255. I've posted the link to the files, but the firmware is only in .app file.. no idea how to extract or turn it into .nb0 to extract the libs and stuff..
cheezzzz said:
whatabout u8800? zuk has some roms from there as well. and u8800 has ICS based on u8860 (huawei honor).
huawei honor's chipset is MSM8255T, mi410 is MSM8255. I've posted the link to the files, but the firmware is only in .app file.. no idea how to extract or turn it into .nb0 to extract the libs and stuff..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The features here meant for hardware related with the kernel. Any port need specific kernel to those device it self, including ours. Ofcourse we can use some library from identic device hardware, but kernel drive them.
CacingKalung said:
The features here meant for hardware related with the kernel. Any port need specific kernel to those device it self, including ours. Ofcourse we can use some library from identic device hardware, but kernel drive them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so does this mean to get a working ICS rom lets say aurora ICS which is derived from U8860, we need to rebuild our kernel that will function on our devices? because kernels are device specific right?
if that's the case how do people port across different OS ie SE mini pro running eclair with an unofficial GB port? is it because the kernel remains the same?
cheezzzz said:
so does this mean to get a working ICS rom lets say aurora ICS which is derived from U8860, we need to rebuild our kernel that will function on our devices? because kernels are device specific right?
if that's the case how do people port across different OS ie SE mini pro running eclair with an unofficial GB port? is it because the kernel remains the same?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct me if I'm wrong....
Kernel need to build to work on specific device and specific android version, what ever kernel version is, that's so far what I know. Some drivers integrated in kernel, one of them is touch driver which related with touch panel hardware type.
To port rom from another device, we "just" pull the framework of the source rom and push it to the our android version which the framework will work. Of course with some additional "touch" to make it perfect.
To develop a rom from another device, not just port but we have to customize (made change and build from source) our device kernel to work with a destination android version. Also build from source for some libraries and drivers because of related things.
What things should be customize in kernel or libraries... well... I'm not a dev.
Owh I'm sorry mate,,actually I just looking for development team for Motorola,,they have development team focus on ICS build
Sorry if I mistake because I don't know much about this,,our device have many developers to port/make ROM and modified something
But so far I looked,,our device doesn't have development team like Triumph,,sorry if I wrong
I just want to know,how much important development team works/personal developer for ROM build
Cz I think it would be better if our device have development team
Once again mate,sorry if I wrong and asking fool
Sent from my CSL-MI410 using Tapatalk 2
Arya_3RDNumber said:
Owh I'm sorry mate,,actually I just looking for development team for Motorola,,they have development team focus on ICS build
Sorry if I mistake because I don't know much about this,,our device have many developers to port/make ROM and modified something
But so far I looked,,our device doesn't have development team like Triumph,,sorry if I wrong
I just want to know,how much important development team works/personal developer for ROM build
Cz I think it would be better if our device have development team
Once again mate,sorry if I wrong and asking fool
Sent from my CSL-MI410 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're not asking fool... I agree with you if it will be great if we have devs team to work and focus on ICS... but we can't push devs, since they also have their real work in real world . But what we have now are Tj and ardX are still on the path of developing ICS for our device. So for now, they are already a team.
CacingKalung said:
You're not asking fool... I agree with you if it will be great if we have devs team to work and focus on ICS... but we can't push devs, since they also have their real work in real world . But what we have now are Tj and ardX are still on the path of developing ICS for our device. So for now, they are already a team.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes mate,,,absolutly great since I know some device with lower quality than our device got ICS ROM (Before using CSL,I'm Galaxy Ace user and I look at SGA forums,they have Both ICS AOSP&AOKP Build n some ICS ROM Ported)
It's mean if ICS running on our device,absolutly more perfects than the other device
Ardx said,,he still resync repo,,I also asking about this on andro-id forum
Bro Ardx was told me it's repo AOKP
It means he fully rebuild this ICS project,am I right?
Sent from my CSL-MI410 using Tapatalk 2
Arya (quite Indian Name) ... there is one team, what CK mention already who is working on ICS and that is of TJ and adrX, there is another team for our device, that is of ZUK and Whyzee, they worked together for many GB ROMS . May be after getting custom kernel for ICS from Napstar and after getting ICS ROM from adrX, they can port other ICS ROM too. Even elol may team up with them.
Also we can expect MIUI ICS from CK and FR. for FCKR software they already worked together ...
vivekb said:
Arya (quite Indian Name) ... there is one team, what CK mention already who is working on ICS and that is of TJ and adrX, there is another team for our device, that is of ZUK and Whyzee, they worked together for many GB ROMS . May be after getting custom kernel for ICS from Napstar and after getting ICS ROM from adrX, they can port other ICS ROM too. Even elol may team up with them.
Also we can expect MIUI ICS from CK and FR. for FCKR software they already worked together ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes mate,,,most important is "together",,I just want to know(sorry maybe I really2 fool) how much best dev team / personal dev.
Now I know althought we haven't real dev team,at least we have people who cares with they great works to develop our device,,
Sadly I can't doing anything to develop our device,,because I have many limitation mate,,maybe next time I just can be tester
Sent from my CSL-MI410 using Tapatalk 2
All,
I decided to create an open thread for DEV's from both XDA and Android Forums and where ever else, so we can all communicate back and forth on CM products for our phones. Since I know we have many sister phones which all basically have the same hardware I think it's time we all come together to help one another. Here is the known list of our sister phones.
- Motorola TRIUMPH
- Huawei U9000 IDEOS X6
- Viewsonic Viewpad 4
- Cherry Mobile Magnum HD A400
- Spice CSL Mi 410 - Slim
- WellcoM A99
- CSL Blueberry Mi 410
- Olive Smart VS300
- Axioo Vigo 410
- Huawei Ascend X
To start off the thread I will be answering a question from
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=31460961&postcount=51
g60madman said:
X6 DEV's,
I see that rcset forked over our device files from MTDEV-CM10 right now rukin is using his own branch called rukin check in there for current updates, our main branch jellybean is still going through some growing pains. Also not sure if you guys have seen but QUALCOMM released updated egl drivers for Jelly Bean. For what it's worth I replaced all our Video drivers from QUALCOMM for CM9 with their ICS update for arm7 and it made a huge difference in performance. Our original egl drivers from CM9 came from edowar's github so it maybe worth to update all your CM9 ROM's and test that out. Just wanted to pass this on to all you devs. Since our phones are so similar I think it's worth the continued communication between devs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Arya_3RDNumber said:
Thanks g60madman,,thats great info for devs,,sure JB will more completely than ICS which stunning many devs
Sent from my Spice Mi-410 using Tapatalk 2
---------- Post added at 07:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:35 PM ----------
Ah,,I forget something,,is proximity sensor could be fixed??need it for brightness setting
Sent from my Spice Mi-410 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My pleasure
Yes our proximity sensor/light sensor seems to be working fine in CM9 for the Triumph, I have not tested this in CM10 yet. I notice it works as long as you turn it on by going to Settings < Display < Brightness and check mark "Automatic Brightness". Also while on a phone call when you pull the phone from your face the screen also turns on.
Based on edowar's github I see he is coping over the sensor file
https://github.com/edowar/android_device_fb0/blob/ICS/device_fb0.mk#L246
The other thing to look at is TickerGuy's original commit to android_frameworks_base for CM7
https://github.com/tickerguy/android_frameworks_base/commit/8e748c9a692eb82a9374af398ecea63c7b1944df
It looks like it was included in CM9 by matera
https://github.com/MTDEV-CM9R2/andr.../android/server/PowerManagerService.java#L315
Also the other thing you may need to do is hack on the kernel as well, here is Tickerguy's original commits for light sensor and changing the LUX values to handle the difference in direct sunlight outdoors and also the lower light of being inside.
https://github.com/tickerguy/WX_435_Kernel-Tickerguy/commit/cc6431239094150c6d4d854afcb47ff5a4c19d7c
These changes have also been included in our 2.6.32.59 kernel which Mantera patched for CM9/CM10
https://github.com/MTDEV-CM9/MTDEV-KERNEL-CM9/blob/ics/drivers/i2c/chips/ltr502als.c
As for the proximity sensor not working while on a phone call I patched this in our CM7 Kernel 2.6.32.9 from mantera
[urlhttps://github.com/MTDEV-KERNEL/MTDEV-KERNEL-CM7/commit/96f11d9478c8043095a8b77e20414d91dd2742ce[/url]
This is also patched in our current ICS kernel as well 2.6.32.59
https://github.com/MTDEV-KERNEL/MTDEV-KERNEL-CM9/blob/ics/drivers/input/evdev.c
If you have any other questions please feel free to use the thread
good to see triumph developer in here,,
i don't know there is will be a problem or not when triumph still using .32 kernel base and our gsm phone using .35 kernel in almost our lattest rom.. even we know our diferent is just in ril libs.. may be you can try to compile .35 kernel for triumph from TJ or EDOWAR source.. but you have to port andro-id rc3.nb0 first as base..
Sent from my FIH-FB0 using xda
Good day FIH-FB0 devs Sir g60 and Sir aben.
It seems like this is the first time the head devs of the GSM and CDMA units of FB0 come in contact.
Maybe you two should communicate often, but so as not to infringe your right of choice you are free to do otherwise. Just an unsolicited suggestion anyway.
I just would like to ask what is hacking a kernel, or parts of it, in the context of sir g60's post above?
I would like to compile kernels too.
Thanks.
(⊙o⊙)
---------- Post added at 12:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:25 PM ----------
um, one more thing.
i think, in the spirit of a formidable alliance between GSM and CDMA devs, we should first be unanimous on what kernel version to put forward.
There are only two choices at the moment:
a. 2.6.32
b. 2.6.35
As the two of you are head devs, i would like to suggest that you two make a decision on this matter, but again feel free to do otherwise.
Thanks.
^▁^
abenagiel said:
good to see triumph developer in here,,
i don't know there is will be a problem or not when triumph still using .32 kernel base and our gsm phone using .35 kernel in almost our lattest rom.. even we know our diferent is just in ril libs.. may be you can try to compile .35 kernel for triumph from TJ or EDOWAR source.. but you have to port andro-id rc3.nb0 first as base..
Sent from my FIH-FB0 using xda
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
abenagiel, yes we have been working on the kernel source. Mantera was able to get it to boot once but as of right now it's not working. I updated all our kernel sources and newly modified build script today and set it up under a new organization https://github.com/MTDEV-KERNEL/
aeoi said:
Good day FIH-FB0 devs Sir g60 and Sir aben.
I just would like to ask what is hacking a kernel, or parts of it, in the context of sir g60's post above?
I would like to compile kernels too.
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you would like to get involved in modifying your kernel we have some instructions on setting up your build environment using Linux 10.04 at http://mtdev.us in the wiki area. Also you can download the build kernel script we have created at https://github.com/MTDEV-KERNEL/MTDEV-BUILD-KERNEL and then you can download your kernel by tjsyte at https://github.com/tjstyle/android_kernel_fih_msm7x30. Make sure to read the instructions in the README as you will need the config in the kernel directory.
Thanks sir g60.
^▁^
I thinks g60madman you only should port recovery V5.0.0.2.7 when you want to use kernal V.35..
Man I wonder if that all it is. I will check this out tonight!
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
g60madman said:
Man I wonder if that all it is. I will check this out tonight!
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gud luck man,hope you will get it...
GPS?
elol said:
Gud luck man,hope you will get it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
elol,
How is the overal GPS lock speed on CM9? I was checking some permissions and I simply guessing, however I assume your GPS locks are really slow or non existent? Let me know as I may have a fix for you guys.
g60madman said:
elol,
How is the overal GPS lock speed on CM9? I was checking some permissions and I simply guessing, however I assume your GPS locks are really slow or non existent? Let me know as I may have a fix for you guys.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bro GPS get locked very smoothly over all CM9 rom without an issue.... thanks for the offered help
vivekb said:
Bro GPS get locked very smoothly over all CM9 rom without an issue.... thanks for the offered help
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a hunch, was looking at your permissions for the kernel and while gps works for you, when we made changes based on your kernel permissions our GPS stopped working.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
g60madman said:
elol,
How is the overal GPS lock speed on CM9? I was checking some permissions and I simply guessing, however I assume your GPS locks are really slow or non existent? Let me know as I may have a fix for you guys.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See this link myb this will help you..
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1266525
elol said:
See this link myb this will help you..
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1266525
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks elol I sent this to my other team member that has been fixing gps.
HEX-RAYS
Dev's I wanted to share a tool that has been helping us a bunch lately that I found here on xda
http://www.hex-rays.com/products/ida/support/download_demo.shtml
This tool allows you load lib files and finds which files should be associated with it. Recently in making changes to our CM7 ROM we have increased our egl from 11fps to 19fps by using the Sharp Gingerbread libs. Prior to this tool we where never able to use these libs as we didn't know which libs where dependent on others. Anyways I wanted to pass this along. Also while this it's listed as a demo version the demo portion only works on ARM technology so for us developers of Android this is basically a full version for us! It's nice to know that sometimes open source gets a break :laugh:
CM9 Major Improvements!
Dev's,
I have added in the Code Aurora Qualcomm libs which I found from TwistedUmbrella and also Lloir's git hubs. Here is the commit I added
https://github.com/MTDEV-CM9/vendor/commit/0970ca0a148088ffcb945549689d7cc317ebedbe
Disregard the first four files of the commit as they are Triumph specific files.
cm/prebuilt/common/bootanimation/vertical-480x800.zip - CM10 Boot animation
motorola/triumph/proprietary/hostapd - Triumph specific file
motorola/triumph/proprietary/hostapd_cli - Triumph specific file
motorola/triumph/proprietary/sensors.triumph.so - Triumph specific file
The remaining code, and lib's should do wonders for your CM9 ROM and really give it a face lift in terms of speed and overall performance!!!
g60madman said:
Dev's,
I have added in the Code Aurora Qualcomm libs which I found from TwistedUmbrella and also Lloir's git hubs. Here is the commit I added
https://github.com/MTDEV-CM9/vendor/commit/0970ca0a148088ffcb945549689d7cc317ebedbe
Disregard the first four files of the commit as they are Triumph specific files.
cm/prebuilt/common/bootanimation/vertical-480x800.zip - CM10 Boot animation
motorola/triumph/proprietary/hostapd - Triumph specific file
motorola/triumph/proprietary/hostapd_cli - Triumph specific file
motorola/triumph/proprietary/sensors.triumph.so - Triumph specific file
The remaining code, and lib's should do wonders for your CM9 ROM and really give it a face lift in terms of speed and overall performance!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks man.. i will take alook the commit,,
#oh its 3.30am on my country,, i'm very sleepy
Question
Hi to all
I have downloaded the 20121013 CM9 rom for motorola triumph.
Can I just replace the lib files of any of our cm9 roms from MT rom to improve performance.
If it is possible, which are the main lib files which I should replace?
Please help
If you look at the GitHub link I posted all the files are in the system folder. You can download the zip from GitHub and pull out all the files you need. If look at this file it will tell you which files you need and what folder they go into.
https://github.com/MTDEV-CM9/vendor/commit/0970ca0a148088ffcb945549689d7cc317ebedbe#L43R185
The way to read the XML is after the : it will tell you the folder
:/system/etc/firmware/a225_pfp.fw
So that says a22_pfp. fw goes in system/etc/firmware.
If you have further questions please feel free to post
Wi-Fi Hidden Network?
I was going to ask, do you guys have any issues with connecting to hidden networks with Wi-Fi? Just wanted to check, as I added in edowar's updated wi-fi settings and I can not connect to hidden wi-fi, just wanted to check.
Here are drivers for ICS/JB from the Xperia Play forums.
Can this do any good for games (HD games?) As far now I am on cm10. All is working well . I do not want yo get screwed up now. If this will for sure improve gaming performance I would like to tty. But please advice this will not effect other performance......
Sent from my A99 using Tapatalk 2
leoaeries said:
Can this do any good for games (HD games?) As far now I am on cm10. All is working well . I do not want yo get screwed up now. If this will for sure improve gaming performance I would like to tty. But please advice this will not effect other performance......
Sent from my A99 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Backup CWM first
Sent from my Spice Mi-410 using Tapatalk 2
I don't think this will work, because as far as i know these are not actually drivers but shared objects *.so (much like dll files in windows). The gpu drivers are actually compiled within the kernel and the version of these *.so files must match with the version of the gpu drivers compiled within the kernel. So unless those match i don't see these working for us. However i may be wrong, devs can throw more light on this.
nayneshdev said:
I don't think this will work, because as far as i know these are not actually drivers but shared objects *.so (much like dll files in windows). The gpu drivers are actually compiled within the kernel and the version of these *.so files must match with the version of the gpu drivers compiled within the kernel. So unless those match i don't see these working for us. However i may be wrong, devs can throw more light on this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually all version of CM7 / CM9 for Motorola Triumph, and edowar's have not been built from source. All files have been copied over and built with the source code. Here is a few examples of the code copying
CM7 MTDEV
https://github.com/MTDEV-CM7/vendor/blob/cm7/motorola/triumph/triumph-vendor-blobs.mk#L82
CM9 MTDEV
https://github.com/MTDEV-CM9/vendor/blob/ics/motorola/triumph/triumph-vendor-blobs.mk#L206
CM9 edowar
https://github.com/edowar/android_device_fb0/blob/ICS/device_fb0.mk#L230
Yes i understand that. But afaik edowar had built a 0.32 kernel with newer gpu drivers which is used in bumblebee rom ported from whyzor's cm7. If u use the same gpu drivers(*.so) in any other 0.32 based rom then they won't work without using the same edowar kernel. And i think the sources for more recent gpu drivers are taken from code aurora forum.
Sent from my FIH-FB0 running fantastic gingermia (which needs an update) using xda app-developers app.
leoaeries said:
Can this do any good for games (HD games?) As far now I am on cm10. All is working well . I do not want yo get screwed up now. If this will for sure improve gaming performance I would like to tty. But please advice this will not effect other performance......
Sent from my A99 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey leo,
What HD games can you play on our ICS and JB ROMs?
Thanks.
^_^
nayneshdev said:
Yes i understand that. But afaik edowar had built a 0.32 kernel with newer gpu drivers which is used in bumblebee rom ported from whyzor's cm7. If u use the same gpu drivers(*.so) in any other 0.32 based rom then they won't work without using the same edowar kernel. And i think the sources for more recent gpu drivers are taken from code aurora forum.
Sent from my FIH-FB0 running fantastic gingermia (which needs an update) using xda app-developers app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are correct there is some changes for those specific drivers based on the kernel (forgot to mention that ) here is the commits needed for the kernel
https://github.com/Whyzor/WX_435_Kernel-CM7/commits/master
Look at all the commits from Mar 01, 2012 and that will get you in business with those specific drivers.
Actually these libs work fine. tested in cm10 and cm9 for our device
nachiketa.ramesh said:
Actually these libs work fine. tested in cm10 and cm9 for our device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the libs work fine then, i don't expect any differences, cause the versions will be the same.
Hey guys, I'm thinking of compiling a CM ROM from source next month (have to wait for data cap to reset) and was wondering what you guys would prefer, a significantly more stable CM9, or a more buggy (and more headaches for me) CM10 ROM? I personally would prefer to do a CM9 ROM since it would be easier to support and fix bugs on, since we already have relatively stable, working builds of AOSP ICS. CM10 would be great as well, but it would be much harder for me to support, since I would be the second dev for the Inc S to build a JB ROM from source for us. I just don't think I have the know-how to be the only one working on it, and the only one fixing bugs and whatnot, without any already working source code to view and compare.
So I could compile CM9.2 stable, and we would have the latest CM9 code using kaijura's IceColdSandwich as a reference. I would have an easier time supporting the ICS ROM since I would have working source code to compare and review. Also, it would be significantly more stable simply due to the fact that multiple devs for our device have already worked on it. I'm sure I'd be able to fix bugs and support it fairly easily, other devs are the best resource around
Or I could compile a CM10 ROM. I would have to take device proprietary files from nik's JB ROM's, which would mean my compiled ROM would share a lot of the same bugs our current JB ROM's already have. I could support and fix bugs in CM10, it would just take longer and be harder to do. Nothing's impossible though, so if that's what the community wants, then that's what I'll build!
So what do you guys think? CM10 or CM9?
It's your time and effort you do what Rom you want to do. Any Rom would be great!
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk 2
vizzy said:
It's your time and effort you do what Rom you want to do. Any Rom would be great!
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm torn between the two! On the one hand, I want a stable ROM which would be CM9, but I also love that JellyBean goodness. I've also seen some people here that simply want a stable CM9 that's up to date, and other's that want the latest CM10 despite bugs. That's the point of this thread
I would tell u is that first for cm9 when we get a stable awesome cm9 for sure it will be easy to get a cm10... btw are u going to build a kernel?
My vote goes towards CM9! been using codename for the past couple months and although i'm enjoying all the new features, i still find myself yearning for a rock solid & stable ASOP based build.
Sent from my Incredible S using Tapatalk 2
linezero said:
I would tell u is that first for cm9 when we get a stable awesome cm9 for sure it will be easy to get a cm10... btw are u going to build a kernel?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I could give it a try, but if nik and others couldn't get a 3.0 kernel up and running for AOSP, then I'll have a damn hard time. I'd prefer to have someone else make the new kernel, I don't know much about compiling them. Till then, I would just use X-ICS4.0 for the kernel.
Make a CM9, CM10 would have in the end too much bugs and they would just chance again. I'm waiting for a stable cm9 anyway
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
Kernel 3, Cm10 got my vote
sent from my jellybean device
ZaySk said:
Hey guys, I'm thinking of compiling a CM ROM from source next month (have to wait for data cap to reset) and was wondering what you guys would prefer, a significantly more stable CM9, or a more buggy (and more headaches for me) CM10 ROM? I personally would prefer to do a CM9 ROM since it would be easier to support and fix bugs on, since we already have relatively stable, working builds of AOSP ICS. CM10 would be great as well, but it would be much harder for me to support, since I would be the second dev for the Inc S to build a JB ROM from source for us. I just don't think I have the know-how to be the only one working on it, and the only one fixing bugs and whatnot, without any already working source code to view and compare.
So I could compile CM9.2 stable, and we would have the latest CM9 code using kaijura's IceColdSandwich as a reference. I would have an easier time supporting the ICS ROM since I would have working source code to compare and review. Also, it would be significantly more stable simply due to the fact that multiple devs for our device have already worked on it. I'm sure I'd be able to fix bugs and support it fairly easily, other devs are the best resource around
Or I could compile a CM10 ROM. I would have to take device proprietary files from nik's JB ROM's, which would mean my compiled ROM would share a lot of the same bugs our current JB ROM's already have. I could support and fix bugs in CM10, it would just take longer and be harder to do. Nothing's impossible though, so if that's what the community wants, then that's what I'll build!
So what do you guys think? CM10 or CM9?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cm9 bro! because ics kernel source is out and bugs can be fixed!
Yeah. CM9 would be OK for me too. I can help with testing if needed.
But what would be those great JB features we would be missing out? Sry I haven't been following the differences between 4.0 and 4.1.
IncS community is desperate for at least one fully functional, bugless AOSP ROM, so my vote goes for CM9
CM9 bro..wishing for bugless one.. gud luck..
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
My 2 cents.
CM9. Kernel sources for ICS has been release by HTC and ANY AOSP rom that is stable would be very welcome in our community.
(I know there is gingerbread roms.. But.. Its ginger bread..)
Jelly Bean is nice and all,
But the odds of getting a stable AOSP rom are much higher with cm9.
CM9 I would say. I hope you can fix data problems for Vodafone NL users. We always have problems with data connection on AOSP ROMs.
CM9 would be great....!!
Its great to see devs are enthusiasticaly working on Roms..!!
You are the one dude...
Jst for info u might already aware of
This thread
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1914015
CM10 test build
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
my vote a CM9 ASOP rom and bugless
Sent from my Incredible S using xda premium
naathaanb96 said:
cm9 bro! because ics kernel source is out and bugs can be fixed!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Totally agree. I don't like much sense ROMs, CM9 with working camera and camcorder would be perfect!
Thanks ZaySk
CM9!!!!
ZaySk said:
Hey guys, I'm thinking of compiling a CM ROM from source next month (have to wait for data cap to reset) and was wondering what you guys would prefer, a significantly more stable CM9, or a more buggy (and more headaches for me) CM10 ROM? I personally would prefer to do a CM9 ROM since it would be easier to support and fix bugs on, since we already have relatively stable, working builds of AOSP ICS. CM10 would be great as well, but it would be much harder for me to support, since I would be the second dev for the Inc S to build a JB ROM from source for us. I just don't think I have the know-how to be the only one working on it, and the only one fixing bugs and whatnot, without any already working source code to view and compare.
So I could compile CM9.2 stable, and we would have the latest CM9 code using kaijura's IceColdSandwich as a reference. I would have an easier time supporting the ICS ROM since I would have working source code to compare and review. Also, it would be significantly more stable simply due to the fact that multiple devs for our device have already worked on it. I'm sure I'd be able to fix bugs and support it fairly easily, other devs are the best resource around
Or I could compile a CM10 ROM. I would have to take device proprietary files from nik's JB ROM's, which would mean my compiled ROM would share a lot of the same bugs our current JB ROM's already have. I could support and fix bugs in CM10, it would just take longer and be harder to do. Nothing's impossible though, so if that's what the community wants, then that's what I'll build!
So what do you guys think? CM10 or CM9?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My request would be neither CM9 nor CM 10.... it will be great if you can work on Kernel Version 3.... Becz that is the only roadblock for us for Jelly Bean and would open doors for may developers to come up with fresh and exciting jelly bean ROMs.....Why stay behind the world guys... lets target Jelly bean step by step.....who knows if you start working on kernel it may really turn out to be good.....Try for kernel bro......all the best.. try to compile it from source....
A rock solid cm9 would be great!
Sent from my Incredible S using xda app-developers app
I've been using Codename ever since it came out but I got tired of the problems related to the Kernel and switched to ProjectX. I and I'm sure others really want to use a smooth and working JB ROM.
Is there anyone working on the 3.0 Kernel for our device? I know Nik said he contacted someone to help us out but there's been no news on that front yet.
If anyone knows how to modify Kernels, Adi_pat gave some tips here -
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=33291894
He'll probably help us out if we make some progress in booting up Codename with it at least
TheDareDevil said:
I've been using Codename ever since it came out but I got tired of the problems related to the Kernel and switched to ProjectX. I and I'm sure others really want to use a smooth and working JB ROM.
Is there anyone working on the 3.0 Kernel for our device? I know Nik said he contacted someone to help us out but there's been no news on that front yet.
If anyone knows how to modify Kernels, Adi_pat gave some tips here - http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1899335&page=38
He'll probably help us out if we make some progress in booting up Codename with it at least
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Upon the exit of JB roms ago, were used GB modified kernel, now with source code maybe will be possible to compile a fully working kernel, but afaik there are no 3.x kernel for JB, maybe someone is working out of xda on irc channel but don't known..
Sadly I do not have much competence, plus I don't have the phone it's to repair....
There is kernel 3 for incredible 2 and desire s..may be someone can port it..
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
I might be crazy, but I remember reading a post not too long ago about a dev that was writing the 3.0 kernel from source for our phones. I haven't heard an update since then, but I remember hearing it was someone with relation to the cm9 team. It sounded promising, but that development was very slow.
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
TheMegosh said:
I might be crazy, but I remember reading a post not too long ago about a dev that was writing the 3.0 kernel from source for our phones. I haven't heard an update since then, but I remember hearing it was someone with relation to the cm9 team. It sounded promising, but that development was very slow.
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Off the top of my head I seem to recall Noverbose saying he was trying to write a 3.0 Kernel. I also remember at least one other person mentioning something similar to, so there are people working on this. From what I understand it's not easy - I doubt we'll see anything this side of Christmas tbh. I hadn't realised that the Inc 2 and DS had a 3.0 Kernel though. Anyone know if they are actually a made from source version, rather than the same hacked version that we have in Codename, for example?
Well tbh honest a working GB kernel would do too.
Like the front camera and chrome and screen flickering etc.
Damn I wish kaijura was here
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
CyanideJack said:
Off the top of my head I seem to recall Noverbose saying he was trying to write a 3.0 Kernel. I also remember at least one other person mentioning something similar to, so there are people working on this. From what I understand it's not easy - I doubt we'll see anything this side of Christmas tbh. I hadn't realised that the Inc 2 and DS had a 3.0 Kernel though. Anyone know if they are actually a made from source version, rather than the same hacked version that we have in Codename, for example?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes those 3.0 kernels are compiled from source. I checked out AOSP ROM threads in the Desire S and Inc 2 section that had 3.0 kernel, then looked up the creator of the ROM on github and found the sources. I was going to try tackle the 3.0 kernel to get a hang of the make system before building CM9, but I don't have enough monthly data left to download the kernel toolchain! Nov 1st is close, so I can get to work soon! :highfive:
The best way to build an AOSP 3.0 kernel for our device would probably be to look at the source code for 3.0 kernels on our sister devices, and figure it out from there.
ZaySk said:
Yes those 3.0 kernels are compiled from source. I checked out AOSP ROM threads in the Desire S and Inc 2 section that had 3.0 kernel, then looked up the creator of the ROM on github and found the sources. I was going to try tackle the 3.0 kernel to get a hang of the make system before building CM9, but I don't have enough monthly data left to download the kernel toolchain! Nov 1st is close, so I can get to work soon! :highfive:
The best way to build an AOSP 3.0 kernel for our device would probably be to look at the source code for 3.0 kernels on our sister devices, and figure it out from there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well holy crap, dude, get on that! Seriously though, getting a working 3.0 kernel for our device would go a long way to making JB a usable ROM for our device. Would it be possible to port JellyTime or a similar JB ROM to our device as well?
The source doesn't need changing, it is the ramdisk that is the problem. I have been trying to get help, but so far no luck, adi_pat said he would take a look, but it is hard for me to test as I no longer have an inc s
CyanideJack said:
Well holy crap, dude, get on that! Seriously though, getting a working 3.0 kernel for our device would go a long way to making JB a usable ROM for our device. Would it be possible to port JellyTime or a similar JB ROM to our device as well?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm gonna worry mainly about compiling CM9 from source once November hits, that's gonna take up the majority of my time. After I get the first release of CM9 out, I'll start work on a 3.0 kernel if it hasn't been done yet. I have no experience whatsoever dealing with kernels though, except for small ramdisk edits, so don't expect any miracles.
It should be possible to port other JB ROM's over using one of nik's ported JB ROM's as a base and reference point, the only problem is I don't know exactly what files I have to substitute to port a ROM. I've PM'd nik about that a few hours ago, so hopefully I'll get some more information on the subject. Nik has been a big help to my dev efforts as a whole.
l0st.prophet said:
The source doesn't need changing, it is the ramdisk that is the problem. I have been trying to get help, but so far no luck, adi_pat said he would take a look, but it is hard for me to test as I no longer have an inc s
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting, if it's only the ramdisk that needs changing, couldn't you look at the ramdisk from one of niks JB ROM's? Or is it not as simple as that? I'm assuming the latter, seeing as if it were that obvious I'm sure someone would've done it by now. If you ever need help testing, send me a PM I'd be more than willing to test for you.
ZaySk said:
I'm gonna worry mainly about compiling CM9 from source once November hits, that's gonna take up the majority of my time. After I get the first release of CM9 out, I'll start work on a 3.0 kernel if it hasn't been done yet. I have no experience whatsoever dealing with kernels though, except for small ramdisk edits, so don't expect any miracles.
It should be possible to port other JB ROM's over using one of nik's ported JB ROM's as a base and reference point, the only problem is I don't know exactly what files I have to substitute to port a ROM. I've PM'd nik about that a few hours ago, so hopefully I'll get some more information on the subject. Nik has been a big help to my dev efforts as a whole.
Interesting, if it's only the ramdisk that needs changing, couldn't you look at the ramdisk from one of niks JB ROM's? Or is it not as simple as that? I'm assuming the latter, seeing as if it were that obvious I'm sure someone would've done it by now. If you ever need help testing, send me a PM I'd be more than willing to test for you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
About using one of Nik's JB roms as a reference
What I understood was that the rom has been built around the old 2.6.x kernel and has to be modified again to work with the 3.0.x kernel, if you guys get one up and running. If that is the case, wouldn't you be going down the wrong path if you model it around nik's existing 2.6.x roms?
We need kaijura here, he was our AOSP kernel master. Hopefully he is doing ok, and has found something else other than xda because he hasn't been online for months. At least other devs, like lordclokan and kali- have moved on and are active with other devices... kaijura hasn't been on at all. Anyone been in contact with him/her?
markj338 said:
About using one of Nik's JB roms as a reference
What I understood was that the rom has been built around the old 2.6.x kernel and has to be modified again to work with the 3.0.x kernel, if you guys get one up and running. If that is the case, wouldn't you be going down the wrong path if you model it around nik's existing 2.6.x roms?
We need kaijura here, he was our AOSP kernel master. Hopefully he is doing ok, and has found something else other than xda because he hasn't been online for months. At least other devs, like lordclokan and kali- have moved on and are active with other devices... kaijura hasn't been on at all. Anyone been in contact with him/her?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, it would be going down a pretty redundant path. If I was able to port over a JB ROM using nik's ROM's as a base, then my ported ROM would inherit all the same bugs nik's ROM's already have.
I wish kaijura was still around, I have so many questions I want to ask about compiling from source! Luckily lordclokan was a massive help to me in that regard. Kaijura's github hasn't seen action in months either, sadly.
Forgive my ignorance, but isn't the Desire HD essentially our device with a bigger screen and less memory? That being the case, could we not just port across one of the 3.0 Kernels from that?
The problem with the ramdisk that come with the official ROM's that have 3.0 kernels, is that they are built for the sense framework and don't work on AOSP ROM's. The ram disk that is included with Nik's JB ROM's is heavily modified to run a GB kernel with ICS / JB sources, so the problem is I don't have a base to work from, I am basically trying to merge the two init's to make the 3.0 kernel boot.
Saying that we need to port 3.0 kernel is probably a bit misleading, and for that I apologise, the kernel itself has very little Sense specific stuff, it's the ramdisk that is responsible for launching the kernel that is the issue here at the moment.
The only problem with the desire HD kernel would be that our front camera would not work
+ I forgot to link to adi_pat's post - http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=33291894
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
l0st.prophet said:
The problem with the ramdisk that come with the official ROM's that have 3.0 kernels, is that they are built for the sense framework and don't work on AOSP ROM's. The ram disk that is included with Nik's JB ROM's is heavily modified to run a GB kernel with ICS / JB sources, so the problem is I don't have a base to work from, I am basically trying to merge the two init's to make the 3.0 kernel boot.
Saying that we need to port 3.0 kernel is probably a bit misleading, and for that I apologise, the kernel itself has very little Sense specific stuff, it's the ramdisk that is responsible for launching the kernel that is the issue here at the moment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well you can prolly get ideas from adi ( he posted http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=33302707&postcount=387 not sure if you saw it) he seems to know what's up.
TheDareDevil said:
The only problem with the desire HD kernel would be that our front camera would not work
+ I forgot to link to adi_pat's post - http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=33291894
Sent from my HTC Incredible S using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So it looks like the furthest things got regarding a 3.0 Kernel was;
Adi_Pat said:
chan
Ok so 2.6.35 works with Jellybean. Why not pack the ramdisk with zImage compiled from 3.0.y sources(Considering you are using standard boot.img format[?]) Because to get it to boot, you would not require any hacks/changes to source, editing ramdisk(init.rc) is enough to make it boot initally.
EDIT: You may also need to change init binary.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
l0st.prophet said:
The problem with the ramdisk that come with the official ROM's that have 3.0 kernels, is that they are built for the sense framework and don't work on AOSP ROM's. The ram disk that is included with Nik's JB ROM's is heavily modified to run a GB kernel with ICS / JB sources, so the problem is I don't have a base to work from, I am basically trying to merge the two init's to make the 3.0 kernel boot.
Saying that we need to port 3.0 kernel is probably a bit misleading, and for that I apologise, the kernel itself has very little Sense specific stuff, it's the ramdisk that is responsible for launching the kernel that is the issue here at the moment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very interesting, thanks for the informative post. :good:
zaysk said:
very interesting, thanks for the informative post. :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
happy november!!!
markj338 said:
happy november!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A very happy November indeed