System Update after Factory Image - Google Pixel 2 XL Questions & Answers

I tried to unlock and root my phone, but I was unsuccessful at the rooting part. I now just want to return my pone to factory. I flashed the factory image (as well as bootloader / radio) of the latest Android 9.0 August security update. I can now rely on the system updates from this point forward, right?
I've read that after flashing images, you need to disable System Update, but I am thinking this is for outdated versions of Android so it doesn't try to apply an incompatible OTA?
Just wanted to confirm that I can use system updates again.

Related

Why downgrading bricks your device?

This is really a big topic that no one asks, everyone just asks how to fix it but I want to know what exactly happens to Android system in deep that cause hard brick and unable to start the device. Previously when I had a Chinese phone, it was so simple to downgrade and upgrade stuff without bricking because there was no bootloader at all. Everytime I check it said "Unkonwn Bootloader". I'd be happy if someone explain or just drop links about the bootloader and why hard brick happens due to downgrade. I am thinking a way to fix the hard brick device in a way that will fix it all the time with just a simple procedure, doesn't matter if you had downgraded or rekt system stuff or you're on any Android version, it will be fixed. It sounds stupid but I think there must be a way, if we go more deeper into Android system, we can make it working.
I'll have a go at answering this...
It's generally not the downgrading of stock Motorola firmware that bricks a device, often times it's the usage of OTA updates following a downgrade that causes the hard brick.
From what I've seen of many hard bricks (on Moto G4/Plus, G5 Plus, Z Play, though probably a similar scenario on other devices from other manufacturers):
1)You have your system firmware and your bootloader. E.g. The C1:14 version bootloader comes with the Feb 2018 7.1.1 stock Nougat firmware/OTA update. Normally, they would be matching (so you'd have the 7.1.1 Feb 2018 firmware with the C1:14 bootloader). Using OTA updates would be no problem.
2)If you downgrade your stock firmware (custom ROMs usually are not applicable in this case, regardless of the custom ROM security patch/version), you may be able to flash older stock firmware but your bootloader cannot be downgraded. E.g. you flashed the August 2017 7.1.1 stock firmware on a device previously updated to Feb 2018 stock firmware. You'd have the August 2017 system firmware but a Feb 2018 bootloader. Your device may run okay and the flash may have gone okay besides some 'security version downgrade' errors with the bootloader and GPT.
3)So your downgraded device runs okay and you get an OTA prompt to the Sept 2017 security patch OTA. This is where the problems start. OTA updates appear to only be verified by your system version, and looking through the updater scripts for various OTA updates, they check if your system partition, OEM, boot (kernel) etc are fully stock and are of the correct build to flash to. Tellingly, the OTA script does not seem to check for your bootloader version , I think the OTA assumes your bootloader and the system are of the same matching versions/patch levels. As you've downgraded your device, this assumption does not hold. Should there be a check for the bootloader version if it was possible? Perhaps.
4)Your device reboots and begins flashing the Sept 2017 OTA. So far, the OTA is checking and verifies your device is running the August 2017 firmware, and begins patching. However, the OTA can patch your bootloader with older images without verification, which means it applies Sept 2017 images to a Feb 2018 bootloader, corrupting the bootloader and thus hard bricking your device.
(EDIT - reading this page, it suggests that there are multiple bootloaders in your device, each one verifying each other to ensure integrity. https://forum.xda-developers.com/android/general/info-android-device-partitions-basic-t3586565 My guess is that applying the old OTA images to a newer bootloader changes the signature of the bootloader we see - e.g. changing the signature of the secondary bootloader/SBL or having an old aboot image in the newer bootloader - and so fails the upstream verification, hence a hard brick.)
I'm not sure how your old device's bootloader is different, maybe it's a lot less stringent. Was it running a Qualcomm bootloader or a Mediatek bootloader?
However, with Qualcomm bootloaders, if the bootloader image is corrupted they appear to fall back to a emergency download mode (you can read more here: https://alephsecurity.com/vulns/aleph-2017028 ). To recover, you often need crytographically signed images from the appropriate OEM (Motorola in this case) to rescue a device in such a state. As I understand it, these images - including the often requested blankflashes - include methods to communicate with your device (via the sahara protocol) https://github.com/openpst/sahara and a programmer to verify your device and bootloader are suitable for repairing, before flashing a new bootloader: https://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=62191317&postcount=2112 https://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=63490742&postcount=17 We cannot make these, and any attempts to modify them would likely break the cryptographic signatures on the files, so would be rejected (else you could inject your own compromised bootloader, or downgraded bootloader as per the paper, which would be dangerous for security). This security issue is likely why OEMs do not release blankflashes or other such repair files.
If the blankflash is too old or older than the corrupted bootloader, the programmer appears to fail to rescue the device. Short of having the actual, signed files in a blankflash or similar, that are as new or newer than your current corrupted bootloader, it becomes very hard to rescue a device. That's likely why we've seen quite a few Z Play devices on 7.1.1 or 8.0 that downgraded and got corrupted by an OTA that are not rescuable at the moment - we simply do not have updated tools. Motorola (and likely other OEMs) seems to regard these blankflashes as internal development tools and as such won't give them out - all we have are leaks. I imagine Motorola's point of view also includes that since your bootloader was unlocked, you assume responsiblity for anything that happens.
If you do hard brick then I recall there are a few options:
a)Hope that a blankflash or updated MSM8953 programmer/signed images for Motorola devices is leaked. Must be as new or newer than your corrupted bootloader (recall you cannot downgrade bootloaders). No guarantee of being released if at all.
b)Hope that someone finds a JTAG or other board level repair.
c)Pay for a motherboard replacement (expensive, 60-80% of the device cost sometimes) - perhaps you may be covered by local consumer laws.
d)Buy a new device, forget about repairing this one.
As I mentioned above, hard bricks are very difficult to recover from without the correct tools. However, they are avoidable if users do not flash older stock firmware, only flashing the same stock firmware as they had on their device (matching their bootloader) or newer stock firmware. If they do downgrade, then not using OTA updates whatsoever may also save them from a hard brick (though in that case you must use the latest stock firmware to update with). Alternatively, if you unlocked your device bootloader, you could just use TWRP flashable stock ROMs and forget about using stock firmware at all - TWRP flashables in general should not affect the bootloader.
Any further comments or corrections welcome.
echo92 said:
I'm not sure how your old device's bootloader is different, maybe it's a lot less stringent. Was it running a Qualcomm bootloader or a Mediatek bootloader?
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes indeed it was a mediatek device and thank you so much for your answer, I really appreciate it.
So a patched bootloader will able to bypass the verification step and the update will be flashed easily but the problem is with the security. BTW, what kind of security concerns? Will my device become vulnerable to hackers and viruses?
And if the patching bootloader is a pain then is there any way to patch the OTA itself? A patched OTA which doesn't requires verification and won't cause hard bricking. So if a person who has downgraded to predecessor version and have a bootloader of successor version can get the successor version of Android through side loading the patched OTA.
I was thinking about the JTAG stuff but it's overall not economically feasible.
I think patched Ota update is a good way to get around but is it possible?
Manish355 said:
Yes indeed it was a mediatek device and thank you so much for your answer, I really appreciate it.
So a patched bootloader will able to bypass the verification step and the update will be flashed easily but the problem is with the security. BTW, what kind of security concerns? Will my device become vulnerable to hackers and viruses?
And if the patching bootloader is a pain then is there any way to patch the OTA itself? A patched OTA which doesn't requires verification and won't cause hard bricking. So if a person who has downgraded to predecessor version and have a bootloader of successor version can get the successor version of Android through side loading the patched OTA.
I was thinking about the JTAG stuff but it's overall not economically feasible.
I think patched Ota update is a good way to get around but is it possible?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good questions.
1)In theory, a patched bootloader may let you bypass the verification step, though the upstream bootloaders (including those burned into your device's memory) may still stop that bootloader from running, as it fails the 'chain of trust' as Google puts it. https://source.android.com/security/verifiedboot/verified-boot
As for security concerns, well, who knows? If you could put a compromised bootloader onto your device with the correct authorisations, it could do anything. That's likely why blankflashes are not around, plus the fact they have to be signed by the issuing OEM to be valid. Else, that could be a potential vector to breaking security. If you can't trust the guardian of your device (which the bootloader can act as), what can you then trust about that device?
2)In theory, again, you could patch the OTA, but the OTA is signed, and thus any modification may break the signing. This would then cause rejection by the stock recovery https://source.android.com/devices/tech/ota/sign_builds
I have seen OTA updates modified to work with TWRP, though I think they may not update your bootloader (e.g. have a look here: https://forum.xda-developers.com/g5-plus/how-to/npn25-137-33-stock-firmware-t3577081/page12 ) However, in that case, you may be better off staying with TWRP flashables of the stock ROM and forget about using stock ROM firmware if you are worried about the bootloader.
So in summary, if you want to avoid a hard brick, some ways are:
1)Ensure you only flash the latest firmware onto your device that is as new or newer than your bootloader. If your bootloader is locked, that should apply automatically (as the bootloader will block downgrades).
2)If you do choose to flash older stock firmware that is older than your bootloader version, please do not use OTA updates. Only use newer stock firmware to update (and ensure it's the correct build for your region/software channel).
3)If you so wish and you have an unlocked bootloader, forget about using stock firmware, use the TWRP flashables of the stock firmware (e.g. https://forum.xda-developers.com/moto-z-play/development/rom-nov-patch-npns26-118-22-2-8-t3717037) Of course, OTA updates are not usable.
echo92 said:
Good questions.
1)In theory, a patched bootloader may let you bypass the verification step, though the upstream bootloaders (including those burned into your device's memory) may still stop that bootloader from running, as it fails the 'chain of trust' as Google puts it. https://source.android.com/security/verifiedboot/verified-boot
As for security concerns, well, who knows? If you could put a compromised bootloader onto your device with the correct authorisations, it could do anything. That's likely why blankflashes are not around, plus the fact they have to be signed by the issuing OEM to be valid. Else, that could be a potential vector to breaking security. If you can't trust the guardian of your device (which the bootloader can act as), what can you then trust about that device?
2)In theory, again, you could patch the OTA, but the OTA is signed, and thus any modification may break the signing. This would then cause rejection by the stock recovery https://source.android.com/devices/tech/ota/sign_builds
I have seen OTA updates modified to work with TWRP, though I think they may not update your bootloader (e.g. have a look here: https://forum.xda-developers.com/g5-plus/how-to/npn25-137-33-stock-firmware-t3577081/page12 ) However, in that case, you may be better off staying with TWRP flashables of the stock ROM and forget about using stock ROM firmware if you are worried about the bootloader.
So in summary, if you want to avoid a hard brick, some ways are:
1)Ensure you only flash the latest firmware onto your device that is as new or newer than your bootloader. If your bootloader is locked, that should apply automatically (as the bootloader will block downgrades).
2)If you do choose to flash older stock firmware that is older than your bootloader version, please do not use OTA updates. Only use newer stock firmware to update (and ensure it's the correct build for your region/software channel).
3)If you so wish and you have an unlocked bootloader, forget about using stock firmware, use the TWRP flashables of the stock firmware (e.g. https://forum.xda-developers.com/moto-z-play/development/rom-nov-patch-npns26-118-22-2-8-t3717037) Of course, OTA updates are not usable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, you're the man. I was expecting that because when I looked into the OTAs, I found it's hard to modify the OTA to work on signed bootloader. It's like a lock and key system that makes the OTA possible. Thanks for your help, it has saved me not of time.
BTW, the stock ROM (Oreo) replaces the build prop everytime I reboot? I am trying to modify the build prop but no results till now. Is it because of magisk? Because magisk is a systemless root so it prevents system modifications?
Manish355 said:
Wow, you're the man. I was expecting that because when I looked into the OTAs, I found it's hard to modify the OTA to work on signed bootloader. It's like a lock and key system that makes the OTA possible. Thanks for your help, it has saved me not of time.
BTW, the stock ROM (Oreo) replaces the build prop everytime I reboot? I am trying to modify the build prop but no results till now. Is it because of magisk? Because magisk is a systemless root so it prevents system modifications?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, if you're following this rooting guide, https://forum.xda-developers.com/moto-z-play/how-to/guide-how-to-magisk-root-xposed-oreo-8-t3743273 it could well be dm-verity which is still enabled on your device. As I understand it, dm-verity is there to prevent modifications to your system partition (which build.prop is part of) and other key partitions, or if it detects modifications, to stop your device from booting. Others have reported the same issue on other devices https://forum.xda-developers.com/mate-9/help/mount-writable-twrp-t3685867 https://source.android.com/security/verifiedboot/ I think dm-verity is strictly enforced on Nougat and I imagine the same applies to Oreo, if not more so.
However, looking at the magisk help documentation, attempting to disable dm-verity with the stock kernel (stock = the Motorola hudsoncm kernel in this case) can cause odd instabilities on devices https://www.didgeridoohan.com/magisk/MagiskIssues so you may have to look into flashing an Oreo based custom kernel, if one is available (which hopefully has the F2FS fix integrated, and has dm-verity disabled or not present) if you wish to modify your system. However, that custom kernel probably will have to wait for the Oreo stock kernel source to be released by Motorola, as you'll need the Motorola Oreo kernel source to build a compatible kernel for stock Oreo ROMs from what I understand.
echo92 said:
Hmm, if you're following this rooting guide, https://forum.xda-developers.com/moto-z-play/how-to/guide-how-to-magisk-root-xposed-oreo-8-t3743273 it could well be dm-verity which is still enabled on your device. As I understand it, dm-verity is there to prevent modifications to your system partition (which build.prop is part of) and other key partitions, or if it detects modifications, to stop your device from booting. Others have reported the same issue on other devices https://forum.xda-developers.com/mate-9/help/mount-writable-twrp-t3685867 https://source.android.com/security/verifiedboot/ I think dm-verity is strictly enforced on Nougat and I imagine the same applies to Oreo, if not more so.
However, looking at the magisk help documentation, attempting to disable dm-verity can cause odd instabilities on devices https://www.didgeridoohan.com/magisk/MagiskIssues so you may have to look into flashing an Oreo based custom kernel, if one is available (which hopefully has the F2FS fix integrated, and has dm-verity disabled or not present) if you wish to modify your system. However, that custom kernel probably will have to wait for the Oreo stock kernel source to be released by Motorola, as you'll need the Motorola Oreo kernel source to build a compatible kernel for stock Oreo ROMs from what I understand.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's an option in magisk that says "Preserve AVB 2.0/dm-verity", should unchecking it will work?
Or rooting with SuperSU would work? I tried SuperSU 2.82, it all flashed but stuck on boot at the last. Do you know how can I root my device using SuperSU, safety net is not an issue.
Manish355 said:
There's an option in magisk that says "Preserve AVB 2.0/dm-verity", should unchecking it will work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I honestly do not know, though it's possible unchecking that may cause a bootloop if magisk tries to disable dm-verity on the stock kernel. I'm hoping you could boot into recovery and enable dm-verity then re-flash magisk to get your device running if you do bootloop.
echo92 said:
I honestly do not know, though it's possible unchecking that may cause a bootloop if magisk tries to disable dm-verity on the stock kernel. I'm hoping you could boot into recovery and enable dm-verity then re-flash magisk to get your device running if you do bootloop.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rooting with SuperSU would work? I tried SU 2.82 but my device got stuck at boot after long time and several bootloops. Do you know how to root using superSU? I don't mind safety net fail or pass, I don't use apps that requires safety net either.
Manish355 said:
Rooting with SuperSU would work? I tried SU 2.82 but my device got stuck at boot after long time and several bootloops. Do you know how to root using superSU? I don't mind safety net fail or pass, I don't use apps that requires safety net either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not familiar with rooting with SuperSU on the Z Play - for my G4 Plus, the easiest way was to flash a custom kernel (ElementalX courtesy of flar2 or vegito) which had dm-verity removed from the kernel. That way, when you flashed magisk or SuperSU, there was less risk of boot issues. There were dm-verity disablers but I recall they had to be modified for each new stock firmware and sometimes had boot issues if the patch didn't work properly.
I have absolutely no idea if this will work on the Oreo stock kernel, in theory you could unpack the kernel, disable dm-verity and re-pack the kernel: https://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=69558535&postcount=7912
However, I think the most compatible and reliable path would be to compile a custom kernel, without dm-verity, from the Z Play Oreo kernel source, then flash that to your device then flash magisk/SuperSU.
echo92 said:
I'm not familiar with rooting with SuperSU on the Z Play - for my G4 Plus, the easiest way was to flash a custom kernel (ElementalX courtesy of flar2 or vegito) which had dm-verity removed from the kernel. That way, when you flashed magisk or SuperSU, there was less risk of boot issues. There were dm-verity disablers but I recall they had to be modified for each new stock firmware and sometimes had boot issues if the patch didn't work properly.
I have absolutely no idea if this will work on the Oreo stock kernel, in theory you could unpack the kernel, disable dm-verity and re-pack the kernel: https://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=69558535&postcount=7912
However, I think the most compatible and reliable path would be to compile a custom kernel, without dm-verity, from the Z Play Oreo kernel source, then flash that to your device then flash magisk/SuperSU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't tried compiling a kernel, I am not a developer (I had ported ROMs for my old MTK device but none for this device, I am not very much familiar with snapdragon devices) so i think I should just flash a custom ROM, that would work, right?
Manish355 said:
I haven't tried compiling a kernel, I am not a developer (I had ported ROMs for my old MTK device but none for this device, I am not very much familiar with snapdragon devices) so i think I should just flash a custom ROM, that would work, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you really want access to your /system partition and build.prop, custom ROMs are an option, yes, as their kernels shouldn't have dm-verity on and so are easier to root. Ensure you have the stock firmware to revert back to if you so wish and back up your data, as a custom ROM flash will usually mandate a data wipe/factory reset.
Alternatively, wait for the Z Play Oreo kernel source and for a developer to release a custom kernel built on that source.
echo92 said:
Alternatively, wait for the Z Play Oreo kernel source and for a developer to release a custom kernel built on that source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ya, this seems like a good option. BTW, unchecking the dm-verity in magisk won't do anything, after reboot it checks again. Thanks for the help.
Driver Installation
Does anyone know how to update the drivers to reflect that the device is a Moto phone? I bricked my device (exactly as described here; downgraded then OTA bricked). When I plug in to my computer it recognizes it as a USB driver Qualcomm HS-USB QDLoader 9008. Would it help any to download a driver to have it identify as a phone?
Tweedledope said:
Does anyone know how to update the drivers to reflect that the device is a Moto phone? I bricked my device (exactly as described here; downgraded then OTA bricked). When I plug in to my computer it recognizes it as a USB driver Qualcomm HS-USB QDLoader 9008. Would it help any to download a driver to have it identify as a phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately, the only way is to somehow repair your bootloader as the bootloader is (part of ) what identifies your device to your computer as a phone. That Qualcomm HS-USB 9008 is your device in emergency mode - usually when your bootloader is corrupted (by a bad OTA update) or non-existent and now it's in a fail-safe boot state.
The only ways to get your device recognised again are to find a working blankflash to repair your device bootloader, try to boot from a cloned image of a working device (and then perform a firmware flash to repair the damage) or pay for a motherboard replacement.

OTA - You may BRICK your phone if you have a TWRP,etc | OTA will fail if magisk.

OTA - You may BRICK your phone if you have a modified recovery(TWRP,etc) and you try to take an OTA.
OTA will fail if magisk is present.
see
https://forum.xda-developers.com/mo...p-flashing-t3813498/post77011495#post77011495
bump
hello
bumpsi
It is well known since ages, at least since Android 4 where this block oriented OTA was first implemented, that OTA will fail if recovery, boot or system partition is modified. Any root solution modifies at least boot or system and will prevent OTA to run through. Modified recovery should also stop the OTA (do not flash TWRP since long time, so I am not that sure about this on newer Android, at least until Android 6 Lollipop it did).
So: No one could ever successfully take OTA without uninstalling root and twrp if installed. This is valid and well known for nearly all Android devices, not only Motorola. It is known.
Brick on Moto devices is dangerous. It happens if you downgrade your system, but bootloader never is able to get downgraded. So the OTA tries to update the bootloader assuming it is old, but it already is current. This may result in a hard brick where flashing is not possible anymore. You are on the safe side if you do not restore a backup of a system with a previous bootloader, and do not flash older firmware.
So: No one is supposed to brick the Motorola smartphone via OTA if no firmware downgrade ever is done.
Just doing OTA with root will NOT do a greater harm than a failed OTA. There will be some installation log mentioning "there is partition xyz modified, I will not install the OTA". The system will run as before without update. If it doesn't because of some error in the update mechanism, it will suffice to flash the currently installed or some newer firmware to recover the device, there should occur no brick. Root is not the reason for brick in combination with OTA. Older firmware is.
So: What is your reason to bump this wrong worded warning?
KrisM22 said:
bumpsi
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kris, please stop spamming the forum. You bumped two threads, repeatedly
many thanks for bumping this important post!
interesting sig.

Root (OTA)

My pixel 2xl is rooted , I rooted my device after getting november security patch
Now Whenever i check for OTA it says your system is uptodate
I thought it's because of the root so i unrooted it by opening magisk app
And choose (1- restore image 2- complete unroot)
My device restarts and i check for ota again but still its not showing any ota
shivangshukla said:
My pixel 2xl is rooted , I rooted my device after getting november security patch
Now Whenever i check for OTA it says your system is uptodate
I thought it's because of the root so i unrooted it by opening magisk app
And choose (1- restore image 2- complete unroot)
My device restarts and i check for ota again but still its not showing any ota
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably some leftovers hanging in there. You should try rolling an update with a factory image but take out the -w from the script first so you don't lose your data. That may not be enough though. Personally if your committed to taking ota updates I would do a completely fresh install and wipe the phone.
All that being said, I'm confused as to why you are routine about ota at all. Doing monthly updates with the factory updates is super easy and very fast.
I'm at work and don't have the time to get you all the details but if @Badger50 is around I'm sure he can copy paste the instructions from one of his many posts.

OTA File Location

Greetings.
Let's say I accidentally DL'd the OTA from the OEM update screen. Where in my file system might I find the file? I read that it may expire and vanish. It's that true? Kind of afraid to reboot right now. Thanks in advance.
Pixel 2xl, rooted, Magisk, OEM 10, Aug. rev.
Even if the OTA did expire and vanish, and I have never heard that happening, Google makes full OTA images available at https://developers.google.com/android/ota in the Taimen section. As to where they are located, likely in the /data partition, but I have absolutely no clue where exactly they are.
I would simply reboot, as the system has most likely already applied the OTA and simply needs to finish completing the update.
So I had to reboot, now I lost root. Is there an easy way to get it back or do I have to wipe?? Thanks.
Boot - NOT install - TWRP using fastboot on the bootloader screen and flash a copy of Magisk you should have stored on your unit.
If you need detailed instructions we have a rooting guide on the forum that should help. Just make sure not to install TWRP or the unit will end up bootlooping, requiring you to flash the full firmware to fix it.

Question Can't adb install May 2023 ota

So I can't use adb update in recovery for the May 2023 ota update. I think I know the culprit to my issue. When I saw that the May update was out, I just did the usual check to see if the update was pushed to the phone. When I checked for an update, an update started and I thought it was the May update. But after a restart, I saw that it was the still the April update. I figured out that my google version P6P that I used on Verizon, was updated with the Verizon April OTA update, which is dumb because I already had the global April Update installed (I've always had the global builds on my P6P, instead of the VZW ones). Now when I try to adb upgrade in recovery the May 2023 global ota, I get an error:
"Update package is older than the current bulid, expected a build newer than timestamp 1681504608 but package has timestamp 1679671817 and downgrade not allowed"
So is there a way to be able to hop back on the global ota's without having to reset everything and use a factory image?
Phone is completely stock, non-rooted, and I haven't unlocked the bootloader (but OEM unlocking is activated in dev options).
Unlock the bootloader, if you can, and flash a factory image. You can preserve your data doing this, simply by editing the flash-all batch file: info on how to do this is readily available. After, you can lock the bootloader if you wish.
Strephon Alkhalikoi said:
Unlock the bootloader, if you can, and flash a factory image. You can preserve your data doing this, simply by editing the flash-all batch file: info on how to do this is readily available. After, you can lock the bootloader if you wish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
unlocking the Bootloader will wipe the data anyway..
fernoct said:
unlocking the Bootloader will wipe the data anyway..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are of course correct. So he takes a backup of his internal storage at the very least. There are ways to take a full backup and restore it but it's somewhat tedious to do.
Gonna wait till the June OTA (when the timestamp will presumably be later) and update manually going forward.
I'm in the same boat, and have too many work apps to reconfigure for a reimage. Waiting it out seems like the best option.
somethingsomethingroot said:
Gonna wait till the June OTA (when the timestamp will presumably be later) and update manually going forward.
I'm in the same boat, and have too many work apps to reconfigure for a reimage. Waiting it out seems like the best option.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, that's probably what i will do. Fight the temptation to flash the vzw ota for may (shouldn't be too hard since May update was for security and bug fixes). If the June global OTA, which will also will be a feature drop, doesn't flash...then I'll resort to unlocking the bootloader and flashing factory image. Thanks to everyone else for chiming in.
For anyone reading this later, remember to turn off automatic system updates in dev options. I forgot to do this and my phone just took the VZW May update by itself. So most likely, I won't be able to adb install the June update, and will have to wait until July.

Categories

Resources