Related
Hi,
I'm playing with ROM building recently and I when building 2.1 ROM, everyone say "We can't fix X issue because we don't have kernel sources".
I was shocked seeing all great hardware support is on the Eris leak based ROMs.
Why thoses ROMs have better hardware support ? I thought when we port a ROM, we take a working boot.img (kernel + drivers) and the new system.img together. So if I'm not wrong, what make thoses ROMs better ?
I'm probably missing some key understanding. If you can help me, I'll really appreciate.
Regards,
mik
Eris is basically Verizons Wireless's re-branded version of Hero.
The hardware and everything is same, just the physical appearance.
So our new kernel base is now this one ?
I'm asking because I'm building AOSP (cyanogenmod) ROMs so if this new kernel+drivers is the way to go, I'll start wirking with this as base and not the old HERO2.1 one
mik- said:
So our new kernel base is now this one ?
I'm asking because I'm building AOSP (cyanogenmod) ROMs so if this new kernel+drivers is the way to go, I'll start wirking with this as base and not the old HERO2.1 one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The kernel of the Eris is different to the Hero, they are still using the old kernel on the Eris port
l0st.prophet said:
The kernel of the Eris is different to the Hero, they are still using the old kernel on the Eris port
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So why the hardware support is so good ?
hardware driver...
Isn't all of this supposed to be open source anyway? Like, if the official kernel has better hardware support, why isn't it in the Android Open Source Project (AOSP), if Android is GPL-licensed Free Software? Is there a violation of the GPL going on here?
FunkTrooper said:
Isn't all of this supposed to be open source anyway? Like, if the official kernel has better hardware support, why isn't it in the Android Open Source Project (AOSP), if Android is GPL-licensed Free Software? Is there a violation of the GPL going on here?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because the official kernel isn't officially available, it's still technically in development. They are under no obligation to release it until they release it to the public, by which point we will have it anyway
FunkTrooper said:
Isn't all of this supposed to be open source anyway? Like, if the official kernel has better hardware support, why isn't it in the Android Open Source Project (AOSP), if Android is GPL-licensed Free Software? Is there a violation of the GPL going on here?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Common misconception number 1 - Android is *not* licensed under the GPL, it is licensed under the Apache Software License (ASL). This license is not a copy left license so OEMs who modify the Android source are under absolutely no obligation to make their modified source code available.
However, the Linux kernel upon which Android runs is licensed under the GPL, so HTC must provide the source for any *shipping* software that uses said kernel. Since HTC have not officially released their version of Android 2.1, again they are under no obligation to supply kernel source. The second that they official ship the update, this changes and they are obliged under the terms of the GPL to make the kernel source available.
Regards,
Dave
And I hate to be a complete noob, but are these drivers that provide the nice hardware support part of the kernel?
If not, what difference would it even make if we didn't have the official kernel sources?
Since the Eris has the exact same hardware as the Hero, why can't we use the same kernel as the Eris rom ?
Latoc said:
Since the Eris has the exact same hardware as the Hero, why can't we use the same kernel as the Eris rom ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because it isn't the same hardware.
The Eris is close, but not identical to the Hero. The major difference is it's CDMA, not GSM. And, it uses touch buttons instead of physical buttons.
Other than those two, I'm not sure if there are any other significant differences. Point being that those differences are enough to warrant a different kernel.
e.japonica said:
hardware driver...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So if I understand correctly, the Eris leak based ROM use the old kernel (2.6.29) but newer hardware drivers so my question is correct ... Should we use any Eris based ROM as base to make new AOSP ROMs ?
This way, we will keep the old kernel but new drivers ...
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
mik- said:
So if I understand correctly, the Eris leak based ROM use the old kernel (2.6.29) but newer hardware drivers so my question is correct ... Should we use any Eris based ROM as base to make new AOSP ROMs ?
This way, we will keep the old kernel but new drivers ...
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really, it's all going to change when we get to official Hero 2.1 ROM (and kernel,) because that's what we'll be using very soon (if we're to believe the hype about 2.1 finally coming this month.)
As for right now, it's up to you. If I were to start working on a ROM, I would use the Eris dump, although you'll have to change to the official kernel in a couple weeks anyway.
I'm not really sure what to say about using "the old kernel but new drivers. I'm not into kernel dev myself, but what's "old" and what's "new" is going to change soon anyway, so I don't think it matters too much at this point.
EDIT: Let me correct myself: If you're going to make an AOSP ROM, you won't use the Eris *ROM* as the base, you'd just use the kernel and drivers. The rest of the system would not have any HTC-ness attached to it (no Sense/HTC Mail/etc), so you'd actually use an AOSP image instead of an Eris/Hero image.
craig0r said:
Really, it's all going to change when we get to official Hero 2.1 ROM (and kernel,) because that's what we'll be using very soon (if we're to believe the hype about 2.1 finally coming this month.)
As for right now, it's up to you. If I were to start working on a ROM, I would use the Eris dump, although you'll have to change to the official kernel in a couple weeks anyway.
I'm not really sure what to say about using "the old kernel but new drivers. I'm not into kernel dev myself, but what's "old" and what's "new" is going to change soon anyway, so I don't think it matters too much at this point.
EDIT: Let me correct myself: If you're going to make an AOSP ROM, you won't use the Eris *ROM* as the base, you'd just use the kernel and drivers. The rest of the system would not have any HTC-ness attached to it (no Sense/HTC Mail/etc), so you'd actually use an AOSP image instead of an Eris/Hero image.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I know. Sorry to not being clear enough. When we build AOSP build, we take an existing ROM to extract kernel and drivers to make the AOSP code working. When I say take Eris leak based Roms as base, I mean just the kernel/drivers part. I know the whole system will not be taken into account.
Eris and AOSP 2.1 roms
After looking at the previous 2.1 roms that were being used to cook and the Eris now being used by everyone, although both being 2.1 they do appear to be different versions of the same product
The Eris appears to be a cut down version of the ASOP 2.1 version, the mail app is still based around the 1.5 version HTC mail, rather than the mail app that is on ASOP which gives you global address list search etc on exchange, and new features on incoming mail for normal mail accounts.
Are features like this built into the kernel themselves ? or things like mail, dialers just apk files
A few forums are now reporting that the new official version of 2.1 for the hero will be a basic version compared to the versions running on desire and nexus. Which would be a disappointment
Hi guys,
it's my 1st thread started at xda, so if it's in wrong place or anything, let me know and i'm sorry.
As I'm not a developer myself I just follow up stuff here to see all u guys good work... but when I saw this news and noticed that it's not here... I'm sure some of you can make good use of this info.
HTC release the source code for Hero (and some others) on their developer centre, it seems like a straight download which should help the devs get nicer drivers (Froyo ???) and smoother running ROMs.
news via: http://www.androidcentral.com/htc-developer-site-updated-kernel-sources-evo-4g-and-htc-hero
HTC dev site: http://developer.htc.com/
Optimized HTC Sense UI coming?
Go go devs.
Nothing new though. At least not for Hero benefits anyhow.
We've had hacked together kernel sources for 2.6.29 for a while now, so this isn't as big a deal as the original kernel source release. Hopefully the devs here can still make use of it.
Hi
nothing really new ?
IIRC, "Github for the untouched original kernel source: hxxp://github.com/toastcfh/CdMa-HeRoC-2.6.29" is another device kernel src reverse for the Hero from a forgotten patch file in the archive ?
so this "really" original kernel source may be newer with last correction from htc ?
thx help me understand
Az'
from what I understand (After a bit of toying with toast's kernel sources myself) this is what's done:
(correct me if wrong):
They took a supplied 2.6.29 kernel source as the base. Don't know if it's from Nexus, Desire or Legend, but some anroid-2.6.29 base kernel that was already available.
Already having a 2.6.29 base with most HTC-ish hardware available, the hard part was merging in all the cpu centric files (board files, for the MSM720x platform) from the already released 2.6.27-htc sources.
So starting with a htc-ish 2.6.29 base, and slowly and trial-and-error moving stuff over from the 2.6.27-htc sources (which is harder than it looks. 2.6.27 -> 2.6.29 had quite some changes in the linux world) until it boots and until all hardware worked.
He did this for the CDMA hero. From there it wasn't too long (or did it work directly?) until it worked for the gsm hero. Someone just had to notice his work I believe .
_So_, that means that our 'godmode-2.6.29' sources aren't really 'hacked together' that much. The support files are still from HTC, only they are the same as the 2.6.27 (android 1.5) drivers. _Maybe_ HTC updated or optimized some things and thus the official-2.6.29 might contain newer or better working support for the hardware.
The way to check this is out is to compare the **** in the source files (which people are probably doing already) to see the differences HTC did to toast's version.
The other method is to 'try' and feel what's different. This _never_ works in the XDA community because there is a _huge_ placebo effect in what all the users are feeling. The same as compcache, swap, bfs or not, etc... opinions and preferences are all over the place.
Only if benchmarks or other hard numbers make one version better than the other, it remains something of preferences for the users and creators of the roms.
(Is there already a simple recompile somewhere with overclocking enabled of the HTC 2.6.29 sources? Because then the testing can begin ).
so no current roms are built from the official kernel (the 2.6.29 kernel from HTC)?
As far as I can understand the GoDmOdE kernel sources are based on a leak of 2.6.29 kernel sources for multiple HTC devices, including a CDMA hero kernel source. And the sources for all our 2.6.29 GSM hero kernels are based on this.
The official 2.6.29 are very new, but I am sure that now that they are released we will see kernels based on these sources as well.
Hi,
I would like to learn how to create my own custom ROM. Any reference you have on the topic would be great. I have successfully built my own kernel from source and have made a guide here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1516051
Now I would like to build my own custom ROM. I noticed that when I downloaded the kernel source code from Samsung it also included the platform source code. I have read somewhere that I wouldn't be able to compile the Stock ROM just because a lot of the stuff is proprietary (like touchwiz). If this is the case, how are developers including the proprietary stuff?
Is it possible to build stock ROM from source?
Are custom ROMs more about tweaking existing configurations and apps, as oppose to compiling from scratch?
Thanks for helping a noob. I really want to learn the stuff.
Hello.
I'm a bit confused. What is the purpose have two different sections on this forum, if both of them get CM/AOSP and such roms?
Shouldn't roms based on Samsung roms be posted in the "Original" section and CM/AOSP/AOKP so on in the "non-original" (or vice versa)?
Right now having these two sections seems to be redundant...
[email protected] said:
Hello.
I'm a bit confused. What is the purpose have two different sections on this forum, if both of them get CM/AOSP and such roms?
Shouldn't roms based on Samsung roms be posted in the "Original" section and CM/AOSP/AOKP so on in the "non-original" (or vice versa)?
Right now having these two sections seems to be redundant...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Original is more for kernels and such. Though I agree with you that in practice it isn't always working as planned I can see the thought process behind it
Post deleted.....
Edit:....Kenny got it...and has the qualified answer...
Thank you Kenny......g
The sticky in Original Development explains it.
As anyone can compile from CM supplied source how can that be original? What Original work was done? Original Development is to present the hard work of developers and teams to make 1000's of lines of original code to produce something not previously available for that device. A cherry picked CM ROM is NOT original and is building off of another teams or developer's Original work, therefore NOT Original.
It has NOTHING to do with TW versus AOSP. The very first TW custom ROM for a new device would qualify for original with all the smali edits.
kennyglass123 said:
The sticky in Original Development explains it.
As anyone can compile from CM supplied source how can that be original? What Original work was done? Original Development is to present the hard work of developers and teams to make 1000's of lines of original code to produce something not previously available for that device. A cherry picked CM ROM is NOT original and is building off of another teams or developer's Original work, therefore NOT Original.
It has NOTHING to do with TW versus AOSP. The very first TW custom ROM for a new device would qualify for original with all the smali edits.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Avatar, Root Box and Xone and PACMAN should be moved to Android Development not Original. All are CM or AOKP based.
CARBON NIGHTLY | CABIN FEVER WHISKY
I have done a little searching and cannot find an answer. Why in some device forums are there a "[DEVICE NAME] Android development" and "[DEVICE NAME] Original Android Development" sub-forums? I don't get the different between the two. Can anyone shed some light?
DRatJr said:
I have done a little searching and cannot find an answer. Why in some device forums are there a "[DEVICE NAME] Android development" and "[DEVICE NAME] Original Android Development" sub-forums? I don't get the different between the two. Can anyone shed some light?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Original" in this sense are only ROMs that are compiled from source, so AOSP, AOKP, CM Versions. Additionally SOME Sense-Roms may be inducted here, if they include truly extraordinary development. This decision is to be made by moderators.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what the sticky in some of the HTC device forums say. Original, meaning, it can't be based on some one else's ROM. So , ports , themed ROMs, tweaked ROMs, modified stock ROMs, etc are some of the stuff that are NOT included in original android development. Some kernels which are based on some other kernel source which was developed and have no or less significant unique features are also NOT original android development.
Hope this clears some part of it for you.
Red Devil said:
This is what the sticky in some of the HTC device forums say. Original, meaning, it can't be based on some one else's ROM. So , ports , themed ROMs, tweaked ROMs, modified stock ROMs, etc are some of the stuff that are NOT included in original android development. Some kernels which are based on some other kernel source which was developed and have no or less significant unique features are also NOT original android development.
Hope this clears some part of it for you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So the ORIGINAL "tag" just means that all of the development work in the thread is COMPLETELY original correct?
So would this mean the official releases of ROMs like CM, Paranoid Android, etc, would be in the original thread? Or just the regular thread?
Also, why are some root methods in the original, and some in the regular thread?
Thanks!
DRatJr said:
So the ORIGINAL "tag" just means that all of the development work in the thread is COMPLETELY original correct?
So would this mean the official releases of ROMs like CM, Paranoid Android, etc, would be in the original thread? Or just the regular thread?
Also, why are some root methods in the original, and some in the regular thread?
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Official ROMs will be in original android development , as it would mean it would have been built by a maintainer.. i.e. he may have contributed to the actual ROM source code.. also some unofficial builds of ROMs which are extraordinary may be included in it. I can't exactly explain why some root methods or some ROMs are in original development .. it is on the discretion of the moderators who manage the particular forums.. There's no particular superiority of a ROM being and a ROM not being in original. I just am informing you about what it is supposed to be.. there maybe exceptions depending upon the various moderators. Also , I must mention , you should not judge a ROM by its position in the forum. Judge them on how you like them and the amount of effort put in it by the various developers of the ROM.. Hope that clears your doubt.
Red Devil said:
Official ROMs will be in original android development , as it would mean it would have been built by a maintainer.. i.e. he may have contributed to the actual ROM source code.. also some unofficial builds of ROMs which are extraordinary may be included in it. I can't exactly explain why some root methods or some ROMs are in original development .. it is on the discretion of the moderators who manage the particular forums.. There's no particular superiority of a ROM being and a ROM not being in original. I just am informing you about what it is supposed to be.. there maybe exceptions depending upon the various moderators. Also , I must mention , you should not judge a ROM by its position in the forum. Judge them on how you like them and the amount of effort put in it by the various developers of the ROM.. Hope that clears your doubt.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah I don't judge ROMs by their position. All of the phones I've had only had one Android Development forum. Lol.