Database Develop

Honey Comb? 3.0

i just looked at this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4NqT6u_ODk and started looking at honeycomb. When i first looked at the froyo video the the gingerbread video i noticed how fast our devs started working on the project i was just curious if this is already being worked on or if its even been seen thanks for any replys

AFAIK, the source hasn't been released yet. Supposed to be today.

Honeycomb is for tablets only. I don't think it will work on any phone.

pfrederickjr said:
Honeycomb is for tablets only. I don't think it will work on any phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
from what ive heard it will be for phones as well

It's supposed to have some smartphone support...
http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/28/android-3-0-honeycomb-emulator-has-traces-of-smartphone-support/

Dude before we start hoping and dreaming for a honeycomb update to our phone why not lets see the gingerbread one get at least one stable release. Plus like others have said honeycomb is for tablets, for now.
From what i know, google is going to release android 3.0 as honeycomb for tablets and then later on work in and refine the smartphone side and release android 3.2 as honeycomb for smartphones.

Also, before we continue to build android updates for our hero we need a newer and more stable kernel.
S0be has been working on 2.6.35 and he's done a lot of good work, i'm pretty sure deca has also contributed to that as well and deca also maintains a 2.6.29.5 kernel.
S0be kernel
once that kernel is done then the likely hood of having honeycomb running on the hero is good.

By then there will be no devs left
--------
Sent from my Sprint SuperHero

Pocker09 said:
Also, before we continue to build android updates for our hero we need a newer and more stable kernel.
S0be has been working on 2.6.35 and he's done a lot of good work, i'm pretty sure deca has also contributed to that as well and deca also maintains a 2.6.29.5 kernel.
S0be kernel
once that kernel is done then the likely hood of having honeycomb running on the hero is good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Notice: Don't take this as gospel truth, I'm not a rom modder, just a kernel hacker
The hard part in getting up and running on a new Android release has very little to do with the kernel. For the most part, the Kernelspace/Userspace APIs have stayed the same. Where the problems lie are in the Kernelspace Helper Libraries and their connection with userspace. We do not have the source code for all these libraries, which is why it's not just *POOF* it works every time a new android release comes out. My 2.6.35 kernel just means that any direct kernel dependence new android adds will be provided, but it does NOT solve these intermediary layers. There is, in fact, the possibility that a new android release won't be compatible with our libraries, and we'll be proper focked.

Since nobody seems to check the Q&A forum [Q] Kernel compiled in Ubuntu 12.04 fails

Since nobody seems to check the Q&A forum [Q] Kernel compiled in Ubuntu 12.04 fails
So i havent worked on a kernel in a while and decided id start workin on one again. Well I recently updated to 12.04 lts and no changes to my old source I just did a test compile and it wont boot. Same toolchain, source, ramdisk, etc.
Is there some sort of issue with compiling on 12.04?
Even redownloaded the source from my github and tried the toolchain recommended by samsung, stock tool chain, and 3 others and i still get nuthin. Just trying to compile a 2.2 kernel for the vibrant. No source i download works am i missing something?
does ANYONE have any ideas? I dont care who you are just something! I been at this for a freakin week and cant figure it out, ......i've changed nuthing but the OS and i really dont want to have to redo my entire setup because it is such a huge pain

Are you sure the kernel works? What is causing it to not boot?
I build ICS kernels just fine.
Check this and update tools for 12.04 http://source.android.com/source/initializing.html

trailblazerz11 said:
Are you sure the kernel works? What is causing it to not boot?
I build ICS kernels just fine.
Check this and update tools for 12.04 http://source.android.com/source/initializing.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
100% sure it works, its the same source as my old nightly# 3 kernel which i can flash and works fine. Its a 2.2 kernel so thatd be the main diff there, and I've already done the setup of the build environment. I dont get past the vibrant logo so i have no idea what the problem is >.< its driving me nuts
i tried the linaro TC, 2 diff code sourcery, google toolchain even, and no luck
I even started a fresh kernel from scratch and added just the EXT4/voodoo stuff and my ramdisk and still nuthin
so i remade my voodoo ramdisk and that still doesnt work.
I'm out of ideas, I've quadruple checked to make sure all my tools and erthing are installed......idk what the issue is

Not a developer but wouldn't downgrading to an older Ubuntu fix the problem? Btw I loved your gingerbread kernels and I hope you can get back to the top again Aim for 400mb ram with 720p and you will achieve something high

helikido said:
Not a developer but wouldn't downgrading to an older Ubuntu fix the problem? Btw I loved your gingerbread kernels and I hope you can get back to the top again Aim for 400mb ram with 720p and you will achieve something high
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Id rather not but it seems that might be the case -_- I gotta look into how well older versions of ubuntu suppport the BullDozer cores before i do i guess.....
also I only made GB kernels for the NS4g i think ? o .o Vibrant I had been workin on it but I like being able to have MSAA in my games and what felt like greater stability, so i scrapt the new projects in favor of specific features i use :3

Ecotox I really wish you or another dev could make an updated CM7.2 kernel with Voodoo Color, OC/UV, and performance tweaks since Glitch is outdated and probably won't be updated for CM7.2. I know most devs have gone to ICS kernels, but CM 7.2 is still snappier and better for gaming then ICS.

hurtz777 said:
Ecotox I really wish you or another dev could make an updated CM7.2 kernel with Voodoo Color, OC/UV, and performance tweaks since Glitch is outdated and probably won't be updated for CM7.2. I know most devs have gone to ICS kernels, but CM 7.2 is still snappier and better for gaming then ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've been gone working on a game project, so I really haven't been doing much android stuff in months. If I get some time I might but can't make promises. Don't take this the wrong way but I'm looking for some help if anyone has any ideas not requests or compliments on previous work (though both are appreciated)
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Can you use windows xp to compile kernels?

helikido said:
Can you use windows xp to compile kernels?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no
10 char

No but ty for the try....looks like imma have to revert back to 11.10...so let it be known for best results on compiling android use Ubuntu 11. If u have Ubuntu 12 and it works fine then leave it and good for u
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2

Hey there! Try downgrading gcc and g++ to version 4.4. If that doesn't work you can always just set up a dev VM in xen or vmware instead of blowing away the whole box. Hope that helps.

[INFO] Android 4.3 JSS15J&JSS15Q vs. JWR66V&JWR66Y, Custom Kernels and Graphic Issues

[INFO] Android 4.3 JSS15J&JSS15Q vs. JWR66V&JWR66Y, Custom Kernels and Graphic Issues
So, since this issue pops up often in various threads ever since 4.3 was released, I thought I'd make a thread I could point people to instead of repeating the same explanation over and over.
This has been discussed greatly in various Kernel/ROM development threads and I've been even getting PM's about it so I'll try explaining everything here. Most info is taken from discussions made on CyanogenMod-related threads, Franco kernel thread, thracemerin's WiFi-fix thread, and Google-related sources, so thanks also goes to everyone who participated.
On to business...
Background:
When Google released Android 4.3, it came in a few forms. One is the familiar OTA update zip and factory images. This is what people refer to as 'stock'. The build number for that stock release is JWR66V, also known as Android 4.3r1. This was later updated to JWR66Y (Android 4.3r1.1).
As you all know, Android is open source, which leads us to the Android Open Source Project (AOSP). This is where the source for Android located, and one could build the operating system/kernel (with provided drivers) from scratch and make a working flashable operating system. This is also the 'base' for custom ROMs.
AOSP has newer android revisions - Android 4.3r2.1, build number JSS15J, and Android 4.3r2.2, build number JSS15Q. These builds are newer than 'stock' JWR66V/JWR66Y, but they are official, are made by Google, and are available for anyone to build from scratch, just like JWR66V/JWR66Y. The differences are Google Apps, such as Google+, YouTube, Gmail, etc, which will not be included in an AOSP build, but could be downloaded from the store (or available as a flashable zip) anyway. AOSP also has a different browser while 'stock' comes with Google Chrome (which you could manually download if you wanted to). The system itself is still the same Android. If one decides to build Android from the older JWR66V/JWR66Y revisions, they will have the same system as someone else who flashed stock.
Why didn't Google release JSS15J as stock?
A Google employee mistakenly thought that JSS15J only has changes related exclusively to the new Nexus 7 device. He later apologized and acknowledged his mistake. JSS15J has an updated Nexus 4 kernel with dozens of GPU commits/improvements.
Which build is better?
Depending on who you ask. If newer is better, JSS15Q is better. If factory images are better, JWR66Y is better.
Which build should I use?
People who like factory images will stay with factory images. People who like the stock experience but care less about "factory images" could use a clean non-customized JSS15Q build. In a way, JSS15Q could be considered 'stock AOSP' if it's not customized. It's even more minimalistic than what comes with the factory images, because applications such as Google Keep/Earth/Maps and so on are not forced as system apps, and can be optionally installed from the store only if you want them.
Any other differences besides the updated kernel/GPU commits?
Most changes are under-the-hood. There was an updated network setting found in JSS15J/Q that doesn't exist in JWR66V/Y.
I heard something about a Wi-Fi change though?
There is indeed a major difference related to Wi-Fi. I won't get into many details here as there is a dedicated thread with months of discussions, but in short, JWR66V & JWR66Y still have the Wi-Fi notification delay issue that 4.2.2 had. This is because Google turned off ARP offloading for those builds, but later turned it on in JSS15J & JSS15Q. It was also on in JWR66N, the leaked unofficial build that we got prior to the official release.
If Google were to build a new factory images now from JSS15Q, it would have ARP offloading on, and Wi-Fi notification delays fixed. The change is only to an .ini file and the drivers are the same, so while a fix is needed for JWR66V/JWR66Y, it's a simpler fix. If you use JSS15Q you don't have to flash any Wi-Fi fixes at all.
What does this mean for Custom ROMs?
Custom ROMs are usually synced with the latest AOSP revisions and changes. CyanogenMod's Android build is JSS15Q, and the same goes for rasbeanjelly, Carbon, and most custom ROMs. Clean or clean-ish JSS15Q AOSP builds are also available for those who still want both the newest revision and the stock experience, just check the development threads.
HELP! My screen is stuttering and/or has weird green colors and/or doesn't respond properly to touch and/or is yelling at me!
That is mostly why this thread was needed. As mentioned before, JSS15J&JSS15Q have an updated kernel with some GPU fixes. This means that your kernel MUST match your ROM for the issue to go away. There are workarounds, such as disabling hardware overlays, but that is not really a solution. No hardware overlays = reduced performance and possibly other issues.
The basic rule is this:
If you use JWR66V/JWR66Y, either stay with its stock kernel, or MAKE SURE the custom kernel you flash was based on JWR sources.
If you use JSS15J/JSS15Q, either stay with its stock kernel, or MAKE SURE the custom kernel you flash was based on JSS sources.
This is of course a headache for kernel developers, as they need to either drop support for one version, or release two versions each time. Many kernel developers are already offering two version of their kernels - one for JWR-based builds and one for JSS-builds.
This means that if you use the AOSP build or most custom ROMs, you will have the screen issues if you use JWR-based kernels.
So there you have it. Unless some other solution is found, there will have to be 2 kernels - one for each build.

Well done
Wayne Tech Nexus

Anyone have links to a pure AOSP build with literally no alterations?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

jaju123 said:
Anyone have links to a pure AOSP build with literally no alterations?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are two I know of, they do have some very slight changes you could read about in their threads, I don't know of one with literally zero alterations whatsoever, but again the changes are very minor:
[ROM][JSS15J] aosp 4.3 for Nexus 4
[ROM][28/07/2013] AOSP JSS15J KALO v3.0

Cheers for the clear up, was doing my head in with all the weird builds
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

Is there any way we can (nicely) ask Google to release a factory image from the JSS build? I think that would be the perfect solution, and I don't think it is really too hard for them to push it.

redsmith said:
Is there any way we can (nicely) ask Google to release a factory image from the JSS build? I think that would be the perfect solution, and I don't think it is really too hard for them to push it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They could definitely do it if they wanted to, probably somewhat easily too. The OTA is being pushed slowly for a reason - not just for bandwidth purposes, but so that if some mistake happened, not all devices would be affected. It's probably not a very high priority for them like what happened previously with the December bug, but they could release a JSS15J-from-JDQ39 OTA to devices that haven't been updated yet, and JSS15J-from-JWR6V for those who did update. Posting factory images is easier, and the binaries are already good for both JWR6V and JSS15J. If they chose to release it, we'd forget about this whole thing 1-2 weeks later. But it's hard to say if they'll listen. Might be worth a try as long as it's done in nice/acceptable ways and not by spamming/yelling/threatening and so on.

They won't release new factory images...
Jean-Baptiste Queru said so...
He said both branchs are the same with the only difference in JSS15J being the new stuff for Nexus 7...
The new GPU commits are from the other branch... So that both matchs and don't give tearing effects or other problems...
Enviado do meu Nexus 4

He had some update statements since. Here they are:
In theory, JSS15J should work just as well as JWR66V for the existing devices. In practice, I expect that there could be minor differences (except for the new Nexus 7 where there are big differences), so if you're targeting a single device you might as well use the source code that matches the retail version the most. Personally, I like to live more on the bleeding edge, so when I carry an AOSP device I'm more likely to be running the master branch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's an long-ish explanation of what happened:
-For a number of reasons, the kernel is built separately from the Android tree. We submit binaries of the kernel in the Android tree.
-Those binaries are large. In Google's internal tree, there are 1.5GB of Nexus 4 kernel binaries. With the way our tools work, that's 1.5GB of data that needs to be downloaded and stored by each user in each source tree. At the same time, the binaries don't have any significant value, since the value is in the source history, which is stored separately.
-To avoid making every AOSP user download gigabytes of unnecessary kernel binaries, starting with Nexus 4 (and now also in the new Nexus 7), we've been storing kernel binaries in dedicated projects, and I maintain a parallel history for AOSP that only contains the binaries that are necessary. Right now for Nexus 4, that tree is 31MB (to compare to 1.5GB).
-The retail release process of a new version is actually different for existing devices and for the new Nexus 7. To better reflect that, they each got their release branch, with existing devices in the JW branch (jb-mr2-release) and the new Nexus 7 in the JS branch (jb-mr2.0-release). JW entered final stabilization earlier than JS, which means that the jb-mr2-dev branch and the master branch in AOSP are closer to JS than to JW.
-To save space in the AOSP kernel projects, I try to have as few kernel binaries as possible in there, which means that I prepare those branches at the last minute (in this case I did that on Monday). During testing, I don't stage those projects and I manually use kernels directly from the development branches. For Nexus 4, when I did the final staging on Monday, I only included into the AOSP what ships to end users, i.e. from the JW branch, so I explicitly didn't include the kernel from the JS branch and I used the kernel from JW everywhere instead.
-Since the only changes in JS (compared to JW) were supposed to be related to the new devices, I assumed that the N4 kernel would be the same between the two (without actually checking), and I did all my testing of jb-mr2.0-release, jb-mr2-dev and master with the JS kernel (which was easier as it allowed me to use the same process for Nexus 4 and for the new Nexus 7). One of the changes done for the new devices was in the GPU code, in a way that required a new kernel for Nexus 4.
-The fix was to add the JS kernel to the relevant branches in AOSP.
So, there you have it: I mistakenly assumed there there'd be no kernel changes for N4 between JW and JS, and from there I did all my testing with the wrong kernel.
Sorry about that.
JBQ
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

markd0wn said:
He had some update statements since. Here they are:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So peolple who are on stock are outdated and still not enjoying all the gpu optizations?
Correct me if im wrong
typed from my NeXuS 4 tasting some revamped Jellybeans (stock 4.3).

C4SCA said:
So peolple who are on stock are outdated and still not enjoying all the gpu optizations?
Correct me if im wrong
typed from my NeXuS 4 tasting some revamped Jellybeans (stock 4.3).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically you are not wrong. It's a fact that JSS15J and its kernel has GPU optimizations/commits that are not included in the JWR66V build.

markd0wn said:
Technically you are not wrong. It's a fact that JSS15J and its kernel has GPU optimizations/commits that are not included in the JWR66V build.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So this 4.3 update is a huge fail for nexus 4 owners... And i was thinking that i wasnt going root it again...
Google messed up this time
4.3 is almost all about the gpu opt. and now people dont have it all on stock? ? ?
typed from my NeXuS 4 tasting some revamped Jellybeans (stock 4.3).

C4SCA said:
So this 4.3 update is a huge fail for nexus 4 owners... And i was thinking that i wasnt going root it again...
Google messed up this time
4.3 is almost all about the gpu opt. and now people dont have it all on stock? ? ?
typed from my NeXuS 4 tasting some revamped Jellybeans (stock 4.3).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know how huge those optimizations are. I'm sure someone will do some GPU-specific benchmark comparison between the builds at some point and see. But yes, a mistake did occur. The average person will be updated to JWR66V (at least at this point) only. Others could install JSS15J manually from one of the threads mentioned in the previous page.

Thanks for the info. I flashed the factory images last night thinking I would much rather go with official images from now on. This thread tempted me to give the AOSP builds another try.
Honestly though, I don't know important the optimizations are. Maybe it's just me. Maybe it's just my own device...... but I find the stock build smoother than the AOSP builds. I get stutters while scrolling through my mms messages, for instance. And transitions on the stock feel smoother so far.
How does one know if we have delays in our wifi notifications though?

markd0wn said:
They could definitely do it if they wanted to, probably somewhat easily too. The OTA is being pushed slowly for a reason - not just for bandwidth purposes, but so that if some mistake happened, not all devices would be affected. It's probably not a very high priority for them like what happened previously with the December bug, but they could release a JSS15J-from-JDQ39 OTA to devices that haven't been updated yet, and JSS15J-from-JWR6V for those who did update. Posting factory images is easier, and the binaries are already good for both JWR6V and JSS15J. If they chose to release it, we'd forget about this whole thing 1-2 weeks later. But it's hard to say if they'll listen. Might be worth a try as long as it's done in nice/acceptable ways and not by spamming/yelling/threatening and so on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. Any way we can contact them? Maybe in their support pages? I'm kind of lost here =D
We should definitely give it a try, we've got nothing to lose.

Why I can't boot into recovery?
I flashed factory image JWR few days ago, everything was good until today I just realized that I cannot boot into stock recovery. Everytime I enter bootloader and select recovery I only get dead android image with red exclamation mark.
Anybody experience this too?

Wonderful! I've been looking for somerthing since 25/07!
Thanks!!

simorangkir_dcs said:
I flashed factory image JWR few days ago, everything was good until today I just realized that I cannot boot into stock recovery. Everytime I enter bootloader and select recovery I only get dead android image with red exclamation mark.
Anybody experience this too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hold volume up + down and press the power button (may have to do it a few times). The stock recovery has its options hidden unless you press that combination once you get to the screen you are seeing.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

mattkroeder said:
Thanks for the info. I flashed the factory images last night thinking I would much rather go with official images from now on. This thread tempted me to give the AOSP builds another try.
Honestly though, I don't know important the optimizations are. Maybe it's just me. Maybe it's just my own device...... but I find the stock build smoother than the AOSP builds. I get stutters while scrolling through my mms messages, for instance. And transitions on the stock feel smoother so far.
How does one know if we have delays in our wifi notifications though?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can someone confirm this?

mattkroeder said:
Thanks for the info. I flashed the factory images last night thinking I would much rather go with official images from now on. This thread tempted me to give the AOSP builds another try.
Honestly though, I don't know important the optimizations are. Maybe it's just me. Maybe it's just my own device...... but I find the stock build smoother than the AOSP builds. I get stutters while scrolling through my mms messages, for instance. And transitions on the stock feel smoother so far.
How does one know if we have delays in our wifi notifications though?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same too ,i feel stock smoother than AOSP .
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

[Kernel] Shield Portable Kernel Development [Incl. Guide]

Welcome to the first custom kernel for the KitKat Shield.​
This thread is for the development and building of the Shield Portable kernel.
This is not intended to download a build, post issues, and return when fixed.
Kernel Source:
https://github.com/StarKissed/starkissed-kernel-roth
Kernel Downloads:
https://goo.im/devs/playground/shieldroth
The kernel can be built using the commands below or the included script.
Code:
make tegra11_android_defconfig -j$CPU_JOB_NUM ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=$TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX
make tegra114-roth.dtb -j$CPU_JOB_NUM ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=$TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX
make -j$CPU_JOB_NUM ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=$TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX
App & Donations:
StarKissed [SKU] on Google Play allows you to configure many of the options provided by this kernel. Issues or comments about the app can be posted at the XDA StarKissed app thread
Donations are not being collected through the forum. If you would like to donate, you may do so through StarKissed [SKU] on Google Play by using the donate options located in the top right (the green dollar bill guy).

[Kernel] Shield Kernel Development
The included ramdisk is for update 98. If you are on 72, this will most likely result in a bootloop. Using the 72 ramdisk will not work with this kernel, as the source is specific to "OTA 5" according to the Nvidia gitweb.

I recently updated the source and changed a few commands that may explain why current source resulted in non-working builds. I will be testing builds soon and then begin modifying the kernel once the core build is verified working.

Nice, I hope there will also be an overclocked kernel for 4.4. I know it's silly but I miss the 4.3 overclocked kernel.

rylen said:
Nice, I hope there will also be an overclocked kernel for 4.4. I know it's silly but I miss the 4.3 overclocked kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All the code is there, it just loops. I'm not sure what's going on with it. The shield tablet version works.

Quick question. Any chance you could update the usb ethernet drivers in this? Specifically, I'm suffering from this bug on an ASIX 88772 on the official kernel, and it seems their driver is rather out of date. Thanks, and keep up the good work!

bakageta said:
Quick question. Any chance you could update the usb ethernet drivers in this? Specifically, I'm suffering from this bug on an ASIX 88772 on the official kernel, and it seems their driver is rather out of date. Thanks, and keep up the good work!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Won't do much good until it boots

True enough, just thought I'd bring it up since it's a fairly easy fix. In the meantime, I threw together a stock kernel with an updated driver to get by. I had one problem after another with the latest official driver, but the good folks at LKML had already put some work in on v4.1.0 several years ago. Using drivers/net/usb/asix.c and usbnet.c from the 3.4.106 source built without problems.

Beginning to think I may have to settle for building against the full source on this one. It boots fine when doing that, but not built alone. The shield tablet builds fine alone, so there's no explanation for it.

you are going to make a new build of your kernel? if you need help with the tests i can help.

YamazakiRobert said:
you are going to make a new build of your kernel? if you need help with the tests i can help.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Things are a bit crazy, but once I can get all of the changes fixed up and it'll build clean, I'm going to try to run it over night.

Slightly off-topic, but I'll ask you since you're the only other person I know building a shield kernel. I built nvidia's kernel, changing only the two drivers associated with my ethernet, but for some reason console mode has stopped working now. Have you ran into a similar problem? Plugging HDMI in pops up the selector, but clicking on console mode doesn't do anything - it just stays on the selector screen.

bakageta said:
Slightly off-topic, but I'll ask you since you're the only other person I know building a shield kernel. I built nvidia's kernel, changing only the two drivers associated with my ethernet, but for some reason console mode has stopped working now. Have you ran into a similar problem? Plugging HDMI in pops up the selector, but clicking on console mode doesn't do anything - it just stays on the selector screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It shouldn't be related. You may need to check the proprietary drivers. I believe HDMI is one.

Didn't bother to find out what the problem was, it just stuck around because I was doing dirty builds as I tested. Once I got a few other tweaks and had some time, I did a clean build and it resolved itself. Did you manage to get your kernel booting when building it by itself? I'm sure I'm doing something wrong there too, but I've been grudgingly building the entire device, since that at least works reliably.

What is so special about this kernel compared to stock ? goodjob already btw, you're one of the few who actually have a kernel
It's really sad how not much development is going on, it's such a good device there is only like 1 release at the original section :/

Anybody out there having THEBOSS-Zeus's N960F [OREO] kernel files?

For some reason, the author of the Zeus kernel has taken down his GitHub and all the boot.img releases for his Oreo kernel, and has since moved on to developing for Pie and Q. On his Telegram group, now locked, I found the only kernel file on the net, build 1.3.107 -- a damn good kernel, perhaps the best for Oreo -- but it has deep sleep and a few other issues making it unusable after a while. A poster suggested, though, that 1.3.90 was working perfect, without any problems (here's the GitLab repo for it that I've been trying to build, unsuccessfully)...
I don't know if I'll be able to get the kernel built from source anytime soon, so what I'm hoping any of you would still have here, is a boot.img or ZIP file for the Zeus kernel, version 1.3.90 or lower.
TIA

Oh come on, nobody? It's urgent, apps keep FCing for no good reason on other kernels

Can't help you as I don't have an F model

dave678 said:
Can't help you as I don't have an F model
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you have? I believe N960F stuff is compatible across a few other Exynos variants like U, something like that. If you do have a boot image for this kernel, please send it anyway.

rottw3iler said:
What do you have? I believe N960F stuff is compatible across a few other Exynos variants like U, something like that. If you do have a boot image for this kernel, please send it anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the U version which is Snapdragon and has a locked down bootloader.

Currently the best Kernel for stock One UI 2.5 (And to be honest the only Post-October-2020 Android Q Custom Kernel for N960F right now) is the Beastmode Kernel V2. Android Q Kernels development for N960F is kind of dead and that's the only little hope we have left.
Besides, the Zeus Kernel was incredibly unstable. A real waste. It was very, very optimized and included tweaks that pushed the 9810 to its true limit. But the overclocks applied...that was the problem. They were way...WAAAY too pushed for the majority of the devices. If he dialed down the numbers, many people wouldn't have had heating and random reboot issues.