Related
Has anyone tried it yet, what was the outcome?
Is it possible?
Please share your ideas, views and suggestions here.
I think i read somewhere about it, but the project is not continue, unfortunatelly :/
search, maybe you'll find something
Hey Abhishek...
Why do you need to create another thread...??
There are two ongoing threads on the same topic... And if you are interested please head on to those to find out the info about porting android on bada..
Dont create unnecessary threads.... I suggest delete this... or after sometime all we will see in the Bada Section is useless threads....
*facepalm*
Read other topics WWW.ANDROIDPORT.NEt there is the wavedroid project.
Go away and come back when you have some progress for us wavedroid.
Still wondering if wavedroid is a money making exercise or a genuine attempt at getting Android over. The delays don't help the impression this is an exercise being led by folks more eager than actually having the skills to accomplish the task.
I'll be the first to eat my hat if this ever comes to fruition, but I won't be donating anything to something that at this point seems to have only updates on various delays.
Hows this for an interesting post on the JetDroid website...
Not sure why you need the expensive software, it is nice and would help but 95% of the works is already completed for you guys.
To start:
Look for phones with same hardware then use that parts from their android and put the parts into a custom version. You can reuse the /sbin and /system folders from the android sdk virtual machine or if you want better performance use the /sbin and /system of a similar hardware phone android version and just add your init , init.rc , zimage and package this into a rom or dual boot like we do.
CPU:
The wave / Samsung-Intrinsity S5PC110 cpu is much more supported than our s3c6410 and used even by Apple so look at idroid , samsung crespo , HTC 4G android , samsung i9000 for sources for your android files to start from.
Screen:
The screen is possibly the same as S8000 or Spica, wave 3.3" the rest is in other samsung opensource files you just need to mix and match parts.
Obstacles:
The biggest problem might be the cpu and screen + andreno or powervx or Mali display driver but android.so will work until you get to the video driver.
Camera:
Camera is in M910 samsung opensource files / other 5MP camera, there is only a few 5MP camera from that samsung uses so might need to work on the code if you can not find it from a same camera android phone version that is already working.
Now make a good WaveDroid version:
Once you have all this and have it working then you can build a clean custom version of android optmized for your phone. CM for HTC 4G phones might work with almost no or little changes possibly just in the kernel.
The samsung opensource website has the SCH-W850 / SPH-W8500 / SPH-W8550 , this could share some hardware with Samsung Wave as well, similar number codes. Look for a recent code release nov/dec 2010 or later.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
After reading that, I felt I could almost make an android port myself lol. Clearly there are some very knowledgeable and experienced persons out there.
What really bugs me is the Wavedroid folks have been asking for money for months, yet have shown not a shred of proof they have accomplished anything. Secondly, folks have been asking (rightfully so), why you have not implemented a Paypal widget so people can see just how much money you have raised so far. I know you are using illegal software and thus don't want to let everyone into your inner circle to see the progress, but you have shown and proved absolutely nothing. There are more doubts than positive feelings at the moment.
Please don't let this thread grow to one of two-three pages which is worth nothing, there is already another one just for this purpose
Android port is stuck because programmers dont have any programm to edit the bootloader of wave,so they can not do the port...
If anyone knows any free programm to edit ARM 7 files (like IDA 5.7) please give it to them.
But if nobody knows any programm for this case the have to wait until they have enough money form donations to buy the IDA 5.7
(sorry for my english)
This is outrageous, the fact that you need commercial tools to do what your looking to do clearly denotes your level of incompetence. Look at idroid. i didnt see them asking people for money to buy tools?? And i would say that Apple did a much better job locking down the i range then samsung did with the Wave. If you have stumbled at the starting block just forfeit the race.
Prove to us that you know what the f**k your doing and then you can have your donations.
Generally i supported this project, but then you asked for money. Money changes everything.
sabianadmin said:
This is outrageous, the fact that you need commercial tools to do what your looking to do clearly denotes your level of incompetence. Look at idroid. i didnt see them asking people for money to buy tools?? And i would say that Apple did a much better job locking down the i range then samsung did with the Wave. If you have stumbled at the starting block just forfeit the race.
Prove to us that you know what the f**k your doing and then you can have your donations.
Generally i supported this project, but then you asked for money. Money changes everything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with U
Asking for money, without providing any scrap of proof that anything is even going on, is what irks people here. Not even a simply paypal donation widget exists so folks can see what the $ count is too.
Too many red flags on this one. I know I'm not the first to ask for proof, or even just something other than "we are working it, it'll be done soooooon, give us all your moneys roflwtflolbbq"
So many other android ports happened without need for this software. And also may I point out what seems total ineptitude on the wavedroid team's part. The Galaxy S contains pretty much the identical hardware as the Wave does. In fact you find me a phone that has identical hardware, one running android, the other something else, and tell me we already have as near an android phone as you're going to get. Compared to other port projects, this should have been done in a weekend to be honest.
wavedroid are bogus, and will accomplish nothing just like all the so called Android to Wave projects and groups previously.
I agree with sabian. I don't know a **** about how difficult or easy is this, but i'm pretty sure that there are good developers around here. Why couldn't you start a new project?
I aggre with you guys,it is very odd that they ask for money without doing anythink...
I just posted that if you know any free software that works with ARM7 files it would be good to inform then...
But they have a very good reason to ask for money because if they can not edit the bootloader they can not load anythink else from bada...if they do that the project it would be almost done because wave and galaxy s have similar hardware so with some fixes to scripts they will have a very good androidport to wave..
Was the app built on top of open sourced code? Is it coming back? I've got a bad feeling, like we're not going to see a properly functioning HDMI app any time soon ...
not sure what the issue is but the official thread is here
http://forum.androidcentral.com/htc...llhdmi-official-fullhdmi-beta-discussion.html
xeren said:
Was the app built on top of open sourced code? Is it coming back? I've got a bad feeling, like we're not going to see a properly functioning HDMI app any time soon ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I've gleaned the only open source stuff he modified had to do with the HDMI chip in the kernel. As far as I know he has released source to those particular bits.
He _NEVER_ has to release the source to the APK if he doesn't want to. (As more than likely it is an "in-house" effort.)
Fair & square, he did the work.
If he wants cash, he'll get it.
If he wants reputation, he'll get it.
(Although I doubt it will take people very long to see what he's doing and release an entirely free implementation IF he has in fact released the source for the kernel modifications he made. If not, http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html is one click away.)
Supply and demand
EDIT: Just checked and as of 3/3/11 at 10:03 PM central time, he has _NOT_ released his kernel source modifications (gee, wonder why) and is in direct violation of the GPL.
Even androidcentral has forced him to take his links down to his "illegal" kernels.
In my opinion, this guy needs to get his act together. He's pulling a solo-Samsung and doing nothing but hurting the development community.
Here's a quick page for everyone to digest to understand what exactly he is doing that is against the GPL and its terms and could put him at the peril of a lawsuit: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2721290/propietary-modules-within-gpl-and-bsd-kernels
To sum everything up, I see one of four things happening from this current scenario:
A) He releases the source modifications, and goes on living a semi happy life that will always be plagued with people remembering his defiance to follow the GPL.
Within weeks of his modifications being released I predict another individual developer will code up some hooks to link in with his kernel modifications, and bam: Free (hopefully) HDMI output app for everyone from a past or new XDA dev, and paid app for the chumps that support GPL violators or people that truly believe what he was doing is correct.
B) He realizes that once his kernel modifications are out that his apk will be useless, so he chooses not to release the mods at all thus ending this chapter in HDMI development. (And possibly ending litigations against him that may have been initiated at the request of people notifying the GNU foundation on him. Although it is rare that they would file suit against someone not CURRENTLY taking payments for GPL'd code (note he hasn't "released it" for pay yet))
C) He pulls an nvidia/samsung with his kernel module, creating two portions. One LGPL that he releases the source to and must be compiled alongside the kernel, and he includes a binary kernel module that MAY or may not kernel panic your kernel when you attempt to modprobe it. (But I don't think he can do that as he didn't create the entire work of the HDMI driver source. The license for that particular file is GPL, so he MUST release it as far as I can see.)
There is also an option D - he mans up and releases _ALL_ of his work and is revered & cheered for being a good soul. Although he will still suffer from some discredit because of his GPL folly.
In my opinion, the only reason he is not releasing the kernel modifications is because once they are released, ANYONE will easily be able to make an apk to control the output, thus ending any form of possible revenue from this "project" for him.
My gut feeling says he intended to release the kernel modification source AFTER he had racked up some sales. (Which would have been atrociously dumb from a legal stand point)
Whew!
I have been following all of his work, and he did attempt to make the modified kernel drivers public to any kernel devs that wanted to use them and incorporate them into their kernels. Not realizing that it was a violation to modify without posting source code, he soon after voluntary removed the kernel link. He has been very busy developing his work and will release source code with all the new kernels in his next free public beta release due out very soon. If you want to know more you can read the op posted on A/C.
Sent from my mobile HDMI device
Even though it was said that the Fairphone will be completely open, the sourcecode of the MediaTek chip (MT6589M) is still not available (update: that was true for the time of writing. Luckily as of now, sourcecode is available and a custom ROM is in the making, see Developtment and Original Development Subforums). The link to the linux sourcecode except for the MediaTek part is here:
joemier said:
Here's our next step in providing developer resources. Happy to present to XDA: Fairphone OS Linux kernel source code package. Please let us know issues, problems, questions!
We've put together this package with all our downloads of Fairphone OS and stock Android 4.2.2.
We're eager to see what you all can do with it. Thanks for your patience as we got it up. Enjoy!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great to see that. However, we need MediaTek sourcecode for custom ROMs if we don't want to reverse engineer (which is a lot of hard work and may even be considered a gray area on legality, I think)
Thanks to @dbrgn for bringing this up:
dbrgn said:
@joemier any plans to release the mediatek sources? Without them, not much will happen here...
If I'm not mistaken the mediatek kernel modules were written explicitly for Linux/Android. In which case, according to Linus Torvalds, they would have to be licensed under the GPL license:
That doesn't mean that I would accept just any kind of binary-only module: there are cases where something would be so obviously Linux-specific that it simply wouldn't make sense without the Linux kernel. In those cases, it would also obviously be a derived work, and as such the above excuses don't really apply any more, and it falls under the GPL license.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
(source linuxmafia.com/faq/Kernel/proprietary-kernel-modules.html)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So
Petition for MediaTek to release the sourcecode
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/aosp-support-for-mediatek-devices/
Does anyone know if it's possible to persuade MediaTek to release the code, because they use Linux (GPL)?
Why don't they release the code? Can it be exploited or do they think there is a risk this can be used against them by other companies? Or do they just not care to do a little work?
Sony has managed to release the sourcecode of the MediaTek inside the Xperia C
http://developer.sonymobile.com/dow...es/open-source-archive-for-build-16-0-a-0-36/
So we and Fairphone can do it too!
(Mistake by me, it's just the kernel. Thanks chrmhoffmann for pointing it out)
Yes, we definitely need the full sources. One of the reasons why I bought the Fairphone was its alleged openness. If we can't get the Mediatek sources, the promise of a "completely open phone" is nothing but empty words.
That Sony code is just the kernel. It's clearly stated on that page you link to.
Chris
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
More threads about this:
Operation RMD - To Support & Reward our MTK SoC Developers: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2164959
OmniROM For MTK Devices: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2483238
MTK 6577 Sources [Complete]: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2560714
MediaTek Contact URL: http://www.mediatek.com/_en/08_info/03_contactUS.php
You guys have to remember any device out of China is not going to be held to the GPL.
Bat cave One
dbrgn said:
Yes, we definitely need the full sources. One of the reasons why I bought the Fairphone was its alleged openness. If we can't get the Mediatek sources, the promise of a "completely open phone" is nothing but empty words.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Promising openness and choosing an MTK chip are completely conflicting right now.
MTK is one of the least open source friendly chipset providers out there.
1) Their kernel is often full of binary blob modules. Sadly, in many cases, blob modules ARE legal. See the infamous Samsung FSR driver on the GalaxyS family.
2) Their kernel source code is a disorganized mess
3) If you have a friendly OEM that will leak MTK's complete Android build tree to you:
a) They will only build as-is with an oddball and VASTLY outdated Ubuntu configuration
b) They're an even more disorganized mess than the kernel sources and will cause severe brain damage if you try to read/understand them without taking breaks to work with a less screwed up source tree
c) Even their OEMs only get statically linked binaries for many components. For example their hwcomposer "source" is just a wrapper around a blob
d) They have yet to support an Android release newer than 4.2 - partly because it looks like they initially wrote stuff for Android 1.x and have never updated their sources properly to fit in with newer versions of Android. (They have been hacking Android sources to be compatible with their junk instead of the other way around). For example, they still don't use device trees.
Even with an OEM that is cooperating significantly with developers (like Oppo), working with MTK devices is slow and extremely agonizing.
Kernel Source ??
Good day everyone,
I was looking around for useful information and I stumbled over this -> https://github.com/varunchitre15/MT6589_kernel_source
Maybe I'm wrong but isn't that what everyone is looking for?
If not... well I'm sorry about pointing out the wrong stuff
Cheers,
ancdix said:
Good day everyone,
I was looking around for useful information and I stumbled over this -> https://github.com/varunchitre15/MT6589_kernel_source
Maybe I'm wrong but isn't that what everyone is looking for?
If not... well I'm sorry about pointing out the wrong stuff
Cheers,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no
Seriously, did you even bother to read the earlier posts in this thread?
Thank you very much for your kind response.
Anyone wants a Fairphone? Gonna sell mine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And it's gone Nexus 5 here I come.
There are new sources posted on the Fairphone website. See the thread with technical details.
Hope it is complete now, as the first compilation attempt failed...
FlamingoKid said:
There are new sources posted on the Fairphone website. See the thread with technical details.
Hope it is complete now, as the first compilation attempt failed...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kernel source is better than many MTK OEMs, but it'll still at best get you custom kernels. AOSP-derivative builds (CM, Omni, etc.) are right now far away.
(In case you haven't figured out - some of the Omni developers have a "complete" MT6589 source tree. I use "complete" in quotes because while it will build 4.2 on a properly configured machine, it is a mix and match of tons of blobs and all sorts of horrible hacks that result in it being a nightmare to integrate into any 4.3/4.4 AOSP-based project. Yes, even with an OEM giving us everything they have access to we're barely able to get 4.4 to boot on MT6589.)
https://gerrit.omnirom.org/#/q/status:open+branch:android-4.4+topic:mt6589,n,z for an example of the terribad hacks required to get it even to boot
Entropy512 said:
...
(In case you haven't figured out - some of the Omni developers have a "complete" MT6589 source tree. I use "complete" in quotes because while it will build 4.2 on a properly configured machine, it is a mix and match of tons of blobs and all sorts of horrible hacks that result in it being a nightmare to integrate into any 4.3/4.4 AOSP-based project. Yes, even with an OEM giving us everything they have access to we're barely able to get 4.4 to boot on MT6589.)
...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, so this is more a Mediatek issue (provided with full 'sources' it still is a lot of work)? I'm an enterprise developer (JEE) so kerneldeveloping is new to me. Will check the links in your signature though :good:
Sigh. I think that also the new kernel sources don't work. I can't get it to boot. http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=4bv6fyWw
The ringbuffer and/or ram console are quite small, so I don't really get much output. Looks like some problem with the dsi/display.
ARRGGHHH...
Chris
I just don't understand the ChiCom's thinking here .... You have a small army of intelligent motivated developers willing and able to extend your code AND your hardware for free ..... and you just sh-- all over them? There is nothing going on inside a Mediatek processor that's unique, groundbreaking or proprietary that's worth protecting. I say that as someone who has been in the field of Industrial and Commercial Process Controls since 1997
It's like they don't really want to make money and I'm afraid they've picked up a bad habit that's plagued the US business community for decades
Penny wise and Dollar foolish .... Save a couple of pennies now and throw way several dollars in the future (For instance it is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS cheaper to mitigate Pollution at the source than it is to clean up the environmental and health degradation it causes, I've yet to find a single exception to this Rule and the ChiComs are going to learn it real quick the hard way in the very near future)
Can't they see why the Nexus 7 was such a hit? Can't they see how Google took a device that's Margin was so low it was obviously never meant to make real money but since it was so Open it was embraced by the WORLDWIDE community and became a money making best seller. Cripes the biggest downside to a Nexus 7 is that there are so many ROMs and Kernels out there it's hard to choose and takes a week or more of research to cull your way through them
My only conclusion that they are Thieves at heart and thus think everyone else is out to steal from them like the steal from others .... Another bad habit they picked up from US "Corporate-think" .... Or maybe they do such shoddy coding that they are embarrassed to have anyone see it ... nothing pisses off a so-called Professional more than a bunch of 'amateurs' laughing at them and showing them up ....
Plus like any Corporation it's not the better educated engineers and scientists that call the shots but the poorly educated MBA's who don't know a resistor from a capacitor and couldn't even fix a broken flashlight or change their own oil ....
longjohn119 said:
I just don't understand the ChiCom's thinking here .... You have a small army of intelligent motivated developers willing and able to extend your code AND your hardware for free ..... and you just sh-- all over them? There is nothing going on inside a Mediatek processor that's unique, groundbreaking or proprietary that's worth protecting. I say that as someone who has been in the field of Industrial and Commercial Process Controls since 1997
It's like they don't really want to make money and I'm afraid they've picked up a bad habit that's plagued the US business community for decades
Penny wise and Dollar foolish .... Save a couple of pennies now and throw way several dollars in the future (For instance it is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS cheaper to mitigate Pollution at the source than it is to clean up the environmental and health degradation it causes, I've yet to find a single exception to this Rule and the ChiComs are going to learn it real quick the hard way in the very near future)
Can't they see why the Nexus 7 was such a hit? Can't they see how Google took a device that's Margin was so low it was obviously never meant to make real money but since it was so Open it was embraced by the WORLDWIDE community and became a money making best seller. Cripes the biggest downside to a Nexus 7 is that there are so many ROMs and Kernels out there it's hard to choose and takes a week or more of research to cull your way through them
My only conclusion that they are Thieves at heart and thus think everyone else is out to steal from them like the steal from others .... Another bad habit they picked up from US "Corporate-think" .... Or maybe they do such shoddy coding that they are embarrassed to have anyone see it ... nothing pisses off a so-called Professional more than a bunch of 'amateurs' laughing at them and showing them up ....
Plus like any Corporation it's not the better educated engineers and scientists that call the shots but the poorly educated MBA's who don't know a resistor from a capacitor and couldn't even fix a broken flashlight or change their own oil ....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup. This is why Oppo has done so well in the West compared to other Chinese manufacturers despite almost no international marketing efforts outside of social media - Instead of crapping on community developers, they embraced them and we became their evangelists.
A little bit desappointed
My first fairphone is about to arrive and I've been looking for sofware news for weeks. Disappointedly, I've found FairphoneOS is not being Open Source and customizable... Is it true my research conclusion?
Thanks in advance
Lupin
Ubuntu Phone and Fairphone
If have read this article on omgubuntu.co.uk http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2014/02/bq-aquaris-ubuntu-phone-specs and if i read this correctly, the Ubuntu Phone by manufacturer bq will use a MT6589 (without M). This is essentially the same chipset as the fairphone but with a higher clocked gpu. This should ease porting ubuntu for phones to Fairphone i guess. It will be interessting how (and if) Canonical publishes Ubuntufor that phone. It might actually include sources to help porting Ubuntu to Fairphone.
What do you think?
Well, and what do you think about Neo900: http://neo900.org/#features
Yes, I consider this could be considered spam; sorry for that.
Hi all,
anybody seen/tried this: gizmochina.com/2014/03/10/finally-android-4-4-kitkat-is-available-for-mediatek-mt6589-chipset
Could that be good news?
supersn0b said:
Hi all,
anybody seen/tried this: gizmochina.com/2014/03/10/finally-android-4-4-kitkat-is-available-for-mediatek-mt6589-chipset
Could that be good news?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's new?
Search right here on xda.
There are currently two cyanogenmod builds (CM 10.2 - jb 4.3) and (CM11 - KK 4.4) for the wiko stairway MT6589.
Check the miscellaneous android development forums
Regards
We dont have paranoid rom?
The source code is out there, you can build it.
Compiling a ROM is easy but it takes time and resources. I believe MZP developers are working for updates rather building a new ROM. If you have access to Google cloud platform or a high end pc, you can compile it on your own and ask other developers for bug fixing (if you don't know how to). They are supportive and kind. There are many ROMs nowadays and it's easy to compile one. I'd personally like to build CandyOS for MZP but I don't have access to needed resources. Considering devs do this not exclusively for money, it's rather hard to say that every device can have every ROM available in the community. And you also need a good net connection with at least 100gb to spare.
Does it seem like Google is attempting to push custom ROMs away from, or off of, their newer devices (Pixel 6 Pro)? From what I can gather reading the forums there are a lot of examples of custom ROMs that have onerous problems. But, maybe that is just the nature of the business, people tend to only post when they are having difficulties.
kcv_earner said:
Does it seem like Google is attempting to push custom ROMs away from, or off of, their newer devices (Pixel 6 Pro)? From what I can gather reading the forums there are a lot of examples of custom ROMs that have onerous problems. But, maybe that is just the nature of the business, people tend to only post when they are having difficulties.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think Google cares one way or another about custom roms. I don't think they do anything with custom roms in mind.
Lughnasadh said:
I don't think Google cares one way or another about custom roms. I don't think they do anything with custom roms in mind.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This.
Google does what is in their best favor, not for the niche hobbyists. Over the years, you could see the gradual move to making ROM developers lives more complicated.
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
scott.hart.bti said:
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those were the good ol' days. I miss those times a lot.
scott.hart.bti said:
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apart from the interest Google has in open and free contributors to the code, would that be legally possible for them to privatize and "close" Android code for Pixels given it is based on Linux? Would that fit the open source license of the original Linux platform?
scott.hart.bti said:
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you all for the reply to my question. The reason I brought it up was because I was looking for any LOS 19 working for the Pixel 6 Pro. I was earlier directed to this one, but dev has changed.
neelchauhan said:
I am no longer working on this ROM. A13 blocks downgrading the bootloader. If you still want this, there are developer support images to downgrade with an updated bootloader.
To add, newer LOS19 builds don't boot on raviole, even the recovery fails.
I also switched to stock A13 for the time being.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kcv_earner said:
Thank you all for the reply to my question. The reason I brought it up was because I was looking for any LOS 19 working for the Pixel 6 Pro. I was earlier directed to this one, but dev has changed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't risk trying an a12 rom if you got a13 installed.
Custom roms are dieing for sure. The people left over are un friendly the builds nearly allways have bugs hence the amount of wingers the devs get which turns the devs into rude people. Majority of them have private sources they won't share. There dodgey ****s. I attempted to build a rom and failed and couldn't get any help. Instead every rom dev will ban u if u ask for help building there rom. Telegram is a **** storm. Mods on power trips. I have given up on the scene. Let it die with wild fire.
I start understand now a crew of 5 guys will never beat a company at there game. They might apply some patches or shot before the real devs release the proper os version but it not worth the actual bugs in the frame work. Who can trust the security of a team of guys to. They can do what they like to us from messing with the os put virus in it.
fil3s said:
I wouldn't risk trying an a12 rom if you got a13 installed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As long as the A13 bootloader is installed to both slots, the worst that could happen is the firmware would run poorly.