Today on slashdot I stumbled upon an item of (potentially) considerable interest: it would seem some clever folks have succeeded in getting monitor mode to work on Android devices using certain broadcom based WiFi chipsets, including the bcm4330... They only released precompiled APKs for the Nexus One and SGS2, (which won't do us much good), but they also hosted the source on a googlecode project. SO, in theory (if I understand things correctly) all we should need is for someone with a working AOSP build environment for our phone set up to compile the code. I'm new to the dev scene and therefore highly unqualified lol, but I'm sure there are a handful of experienced devs out there with the knowhow to get this up and running!
Here's the link: http://bcmon.blogspot.com/
And the source: http://code.google.com/p/bcmon/source/checkout
This is not my work; I take no credit, just saw it hadn't been posted and thought the community might be interested. At the moment, I am trying to get a build environment set up as a learning experience. (i.e. I would love to compile CM10 from source, thought it would be a great project to get a better understanding and start doing some developing.) Although I haven't hit a wall yet (i've only just begun and still have a lot to learn), as far as I know there are no device-specific guides on how to do this for our phone...any suggestions for good reference material?
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.
I wasn't sure how to send questions to the official LineageOS people, so guess I post here and hope it makes its way over.
I have many old devices and no new ones, these include some that are no longer supported by LineageOS (Samsug Galaxy Tab 2.0 7", "Tate" Kindle, LG G3 "985" ...)
My question is this: I used to do builds for projects (such as the IRIX Nekoware project), and would consider doing it for these but need to make sure I don't get in over my head too much, as IRIX is "the way things were done in 1998" and Android definitely isn't. It would help if there were a Wiki page or similar with notes on why support was dropped so I can figure out if it is practical for me to try and resurrect them.
I'm following several devices for some time now. Lack if support has many reasons. Most of them are personal reasons. At the moment we see a generation change in LOS team. The new people have new devices. Would be fine to have a old school guy like you in that team. This thread is not the right place for getting into contact. Sorry.
saq-xda said:
I wasn't sure how to send questions to the official LineageOS people, so guess I post here and hope it makes its way over.
I have many old devices and no new ones, these include some that are no longer supported by LineageOS (Samsug Galaxy Tab 2.0 7", "Tate" Kindle, LG G3 "985" ...)......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have never built a ROM before myself but, Devices that are no longer maintained by the Lineage Team (that actually had Official LineageOS Builds released) are still kept in places like Github as well as the Device information within their Official Wiki page.
For example, you had mentioned interest for the LG G3 VS985 device. The following is the device information page for this device...
https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/vs985
The following is the information regarding the instructions for individuals who are looking to work on their own builds...
https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/vs985/build
The following is the LineageOS Github page for that specific device.
https://github.com/LineageOS/android_device_lge_vs985
With that clarified for you...
Also keep in mind that when the LineageOS Team updates various areas for devices that ALSO applies to one, that's no longer maintained, it also gets applied to that device because of those being shared with other applicable devices but, if an update that ONLY applies to a device, that's no longer maintained, it will probably not be bothered with (though, I can't state this specific item 100%).
I hope that this was helpful and I do wish you the best of luck!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I DO NOT provide support via PM unless asked/requested by myself. PLEASE keep it in the threads where everyone can share.
I figured that, but they have occasional notes in the updates about why support is being dropped, and if it is some variant of "we can't get drivers anymore" or "new version of Android will not work with hardware X without major rewrite" I figure it's probably outside of my league.
If it's dropped just because the former maintainer was too busy that's another kettle of fish and much more manageable.
I guess it's either the IRC or Reddit to get in touch with them based on their site info. For some reason I guess I just have trouble considering Reddit as a platform for anything serious.
saq-xda said:
I figured that, but they have occasional notes in the updates about why support is being dropped,.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I understand, a device is dropped, typically, because of 1 of the following reasons...
1) There's a limited number of Maintainers and they get stretched very thin as to keeping up with the amount to devices they maintain.
2) This is the more likely reason... The Maintainers must possess the actual device in order to ensure the stability and such for the devices they maintain. If a Maintainer no longer possesses that device, they are no longer able to maintain it and the device has to be dropped.
I've seen, on a few occasions, where a device is added back again but, this doesn't happen that often.
Good Luck in your pursuit to develop!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I DO NOT provide support via PM unless asked/requested by myself. PLEASE keep it in the threads where everyone can share.
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.