Database Info

Building from source question.

This is a noon question and I appolagize but I figured I would ask anyways. If I were to build the ics myself and flash it would I have any issues getting back to 3.2.2 if I so wished to? I ask because I know the bootloader it picky for the images released for 3.2.2 and have never actually built it myself before. If its not obvious already I own a xoom 4g.
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium

Where do you plan to get all the code for all of the hardware drivers? Those are NOT included in the source code.

While we appreciate your enthusiasm for ICS and the developer community. We ask that you do many hours of research before diving into anything near the task you seek to accomplish. To start, you might want to try by flashing between roms, looking at different rom sourcecode, and different driver codes for hardware.

Thanks for the info, like I said I have never done anything like it before. I am kinda embarassed that I didnt even think about the hardware drivers that would be required as well. After doing a little reading on the aosp source site I come to find out an additional bit of information. As of ICS there is more needed than just the source code, there will also be some additional information for the graphics hardware acceleration to work , and the Xoom wasnt mentioned (only the Official Google Devices). Guess I will just sit tight and be happy with flashing ROMs for now. Thanks again.

Kernel updates

Apologies if this has been covered, but I've done multiple searches and have yet to find an answer. I'm in the process of picking a new phone, and I'm down to the galaxy nexus and gs3. (Damn you google for not releasing the n4 on vzw). In any case, my concern is around updates. I realize the CM team will continue to support the gs3 well into the future, but my question revolves around kernels. It's my understanding that the CM team will simply update the userspace - in order for there to be an updated kernel, there would need to be a release from Samsung for the appropriate kernel. In other words, if google updates android 5.x to a linux 3.6 kernel, and the last Samsung release was 4.2 running the 3.4 kernel, while I will get the 5.x android userland, I will be stuck with the old kernel, and potentially sub-par battery life/performance enhancements/etc. To the point I may not even be able to upgrade if they make significant enough changes to the kernel/userland interaction.
Are my assumptions correct, or am I off-base? I just don't want to get stuck like I am today with my droid-x that stopped being supported ages ago by motorola, and just barely supported by the community a year later.

There are custom kernels that have their own linux merges in so it would be very feasible that we have linux kernel updates beyond what Samsung gives us. The NA variant is on basically every carrier in NA so I am sure there are atleast a few excellent kernel devs who own the device that would be able to do this.
That isn't to say it isn't possible for us to get abandoned. But I think the dev community for this phone will last longer than previous phones.

con247 said:
There are custom kernels that have their own linux merges in so it would be very feasible that we have linux kernel updates beyond what Samsung gives us. The NA variant is on basically every carrier in NA so I am sure there are atleast a few excellent kernel devs who own the device that would be able to do this.
That isn't to say it isn't possible for us to get abandoned. But I think the dev community for this phone will last longer than previous phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand that as a whole it won't get abandoned. Unless Samsung is open sourcing drivers though, I don't see how it's possible to release updated kernels if Linus decides the kernel/driver interaction is going to change - which has happened in the past and likely will again in the next 2 years. Without the source to the drivers, I don't really see how the devs could hack something together short of trying to re-write them entirely.

[Q] VilleC2 and Android Lollipop

Hi to everyone reading this
I am a fairly long time user of xda, usually just lurking and watching threads as they go along, but have now decided to try my hand at developing a rom or two for our (unfortunately) long forgotten villec2, since everyone seems to develop for the S4 variant. I have seen android 5 ported to the S4 variant, and I would like to know if what I am trying to do is at all possible, and if it is, if anyone can point me in a starting direction.
What I am trying to accomplish, is to get a working (bootable, not much else) rom that can boot up on my phone, and then from there add drivers/modules (unsure about naming conventions used in android, coming from a java/C++ background) for the different phone functions as I learn more about the system. So far, I have not found much on upgrading device trees / vendor files (not even exactly sure what these are for since most I see are completely different, even for the same version of android) from 4.4 to 5.0.1, and if I should simply write many of these files from scratch. I know this is a huge en devour, and I am in for much frustration, but I am doing it for two main reasons. One, everyone seems to have forgotten the villec2 device, and I feel like I will still be using it for quite a long time, and being able to use the latest and greatest in android technology will be quite nice to say the least. And two, I am doing it for learning, broadening my own experience with android, since I have yet to really write my own rom, I have only done a few rough builds from other people's repositories like cm.
At this point, I have a AOSP build environment from the master branch, have not yet done a build from it, and would just like any nudge someone can give me in a starting direction. Would it be possible to obtain some of the files I need for android L from my current device,, which is running a android 4 variant? Should I look elsewhere for these files?

niekz said:
Hi to everyone reading this
I am a fairly long time user of xda, usually just lurking and watching threads as they go along, but have now decided to try my hand at developing a rom or two for our (unfortunately) long forgotten villec2, since everyone seems to develop for the S4 variant. I have seen android 5 ported to the S4 variant, and I would like to know if what I am trying to do is at all possible, and if it is, if anyone can point me in a starting direction.
What I am trying to accomplish, is to get a working (bootable, not much else) rom that can boot up on my phone, and then from there add drivers/modules (unsure about naming conventions used in android, coming from a java/C++ background) for the different phone functions as I learn more about the system. So far, I have not found much on upgrading device trees / vendor files (not even exactly sure what these are for since most I see are completely different, even for the same version of android) from 4.4 to 5.0.1, and if I should simply write many of these files from scratch. I know this is a huge en devour, and I am in for much frustration, but I am doing it for two main reasons. One, everyone seems to have forgotten the villec2 device, and I feel like I will still be using it for quite a long time, and being able to use the latest and greatest in android technology will be quite nice to say the least. And two, I am doing it for learning, broadening my own experience with android, since I have yet to really write my own rom, I have only done a few rough builds from other people's repositories like cm.
At this point, I have a AOSP build environment from the master branch, have not yet done a build from it, and would just like any nudge someone can give me in a starting direction. Would it be possible to obtain some of the files I need for android L from my current device,, which is running a android 4 variant? Should I look elsewhere for these files?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you seen this thread?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2581659
I know it's not for C2 but maybe you can find some info there or someone can give you some advice
Sent from nowhere over the air...

I have checked out the thread, but unfortunately most of these guides refer to an already made vendor/device tree, which does not yet exist for the c2 (for android 5 anyways). Ill likely need to write my own it seems. Sadness..

Hi!
i really excited for this thread. i have a villeC2 and its very sad that phone just update at 4.1. its a really great phone whit much potential... if i can i help you but i don't know everything about compile roms. but i can try the rom like a beta tester. i really glad to do that. so.. if you continue whit this, i help you like a beta tester contacte me.

You can examine recent posts c2 development cm11 kitkat and offical pacman pages.

https://forum.xda-developers.com/chef-central/android/guide-android-rom-development-t2814763
https://forum.xda-developers.com/ch...ide-how-to-port-lollipop-marshmallow-t3283452
https://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2707438

i think we should port HTC Sensation roms
i dont know what's the difference between C2 and Sensation kernels . but i saw viperC2 and SAM rom files is the same
---------- Post added at 17:39 ---------- Previous post was at 17:06 ----------
https://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2178042

X86 Atom Android tablet BLISS ROM. Kernel source & HALS, is tha enough to get going?

X86 Atom Android tablet BLISS ROM. Kernel source & HALS, is tha enough to get going?
I have a TX201LA tablet runs Android 4.2. Its a dual device 2 systems in 1. The tablet half is what i am focusing on. NOT the dock as I have windows 10 running fine on that half. The tablet is nearly useless as it is on android 4.2. I've been exploring a few options for getting an android update. My tablet runs an atom x86 cpu with 2GB of ram and is quad core cloevertrail CPU x2560. Plenty of power to run a newer android or even chromeOS, cloudready, or remixOS. I've explored those options but Bliss is the most straight forward as there are already x86 builds of Bliss. I think support should be relatively easy to add for my device.
There are a few caveats however I know ways to overcome them if I can get a rom to load.
1. I dont have a unlocked bootloader but I maybe able to unlock using zenfone 5 unlock method. Still no custom rom has ever been made for my tablet, only for similar devices like zenfone 5, galaxy tab 3 10.1, & dell venue 7.
2. Once I get it unlocked, I can load CWM or use flashfire. My tablet boots with Droidboot, which I can replace with CWN via again a zenfone 5 exploit that I have confirmed works with my tablet.
3. Would bliss load things like my LCD driver, touch screen etc? That is possibly the biggest issue. I have the kernel code here, UPDATED: http://support.asus.com.cn/Download....1LAF&p=3&s=587 OR here original: http://support.asus.com.cn/Download....01LA&p=3&s=587
3A. If the kernel code has all the HALS isnt it possible to build a Bliss rom that would be loaded via CWM/Flashfire and then boot-able?
3B. Could the Bliss team build a rom with the kernel code listed above, that I could then test? Or would the bliss team need to the device (I would think not, i hope). If a rom could be created I would GLADLY donate to BLISS.
Love to find out if this is possible. THANKS

madhits45 said:
I have a TX201LA tablet runs Android 4.2. Its a dual device 2 systems in 1. The tablet half is what i am focusing on. NOT the dock as I have windows 10 running fine on that half. The tablet is nearly useless as it is on android 4.2. I've been exploring a few options for getting an android update. My tablet runs an atom x86 cpu with 2GB of ram and is quad core cloevertrail CPU x2560. Plenty of power to run a newer android or even chromeOS, cloudready, or remixOS. I've explored those options but Bliss is the most straight forward as there are already x86 builds of Bliss. I think support should be relatively easy to add for my device.
There are a few caveats however I know ways to overcome them if I can get a rom to load.
1. I dont have a unlocked bootloader but I maybe able to unlock using zenfone 5 unlock method. Still no custom rom has ever been made for my tablet, only for similar devices like zenfone 5, galaxy tab 3 10.1, & dell venue 7.
2. Once I get it unlocked, I can load CWM or use flashfire. My tablet boots with Droidboot, which I can replace with CWN via again a zenfone 5 exploit that I have confirmed works with my tablet.
3. Would bliss load things like my LCD driver, touch screen etc? That is possibly the biggest issue. I have the kernel code here, UPDATED: http://support.asus.com.cn/Download....1LAF&p=3&s=587 OR here original: http://support.asus.com.cn/Download....01LA&p=3&s=587
3A. If the kernel code has all the HALS isnt it possible to build a Bliss rom that would be loaded via CWM/Flashfire and then boot-able?
3B. Could the Bliss team build a rom with the kernel code listed above, that I could then test? Or would the bliss team need to the device (I would think not, i hope). If a rom could be created I would GLADLY donate to BLISS.
Love to find out if this is possible. THANKS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For one, you should ask Bliss OS (x86) related questions in the Bliss OS thread: https://forum.xda-developers.com/bliss-roms/bliss-roms-development/x86-bliss-x86-pc-s-t3534657
Second, I tend to only use source dumps that maintain proper commit attribution. This is our way of giving credit where it is due (the original developers) Most of the source dumps I come across are a bunch of source code, with one commit at best titled, "initial commit" or "dump", and this to me says that there is something not trustworthy about it. I would like to see all the individual commits and changes made throughout the commit history, as this allows us to easily target changes that were made for that specific device.
If others want to go through the trouble of picking out those differences and creating a pull request with the proper attribution attached, we have no issues merging into our releases after testing.

electrikjesus said:
For one, you should ask Bliss OS (x86) related questions in the Bliss OS thread: https://forum.xda-developers.com/bliss-roms/bliss-roms-development/x86-bliss-x86-pc-s-t3534657
Second, I tend to only use source dumps that maintain proper commit attribution. This is our way of giving credit where it is due (the original developers) Most of the source dumps I come across are a bunch of source code, with one commit at best titled, "initial commit" or "dump", and this to me says that there is something not trustworthy about it. I would like to see all the individual commits and changes made throughout the commit history, as this allows us to easily target changes that were made for that specific device.
If others want to go through the trouble of picking out those differences and creating a pull request with the proper attribution attached, we have no issues merging into our releases after testing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you look at my source to see if this is a problem? I'm not exactly sure how it needs to look but is this something you have found to be the case with other asus sources in the past? I'd be surprised if it was. I'd love to get a bliss rom for my tablet but I figured this would not be so easy even with x86 support being its base.

madhits45 said:
Did you look at my source to see if this is a problem? I'm not exactly sure how it needs to look but is this something you have found to be the case with other asus sources in the past? I'd be surprised if it was. I'd love to get a bliss rom for my tablet but I figured this would not be so easy even with x86 support being its base.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By the time I read your post, the links didn't work. And of the Asus source dumps I've seen in the past, they haven't included any git history

electrikjesus said:
By the time I read your post, the links didn't work. And of the Asus source dumps I've seen in the past, they haven't included any git history
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey Electrik jesus, Here is the new link: https://www.asus.com/2-in-1-PCs/ASUS_Transformer_Book_Trio_TX201LA/HelpDesk_Download/
I'm from Michigan to.. So hopefully you can help another Michigander lol with a bliss build. Asus recently changed up there whole support site and the source code used to only be available on the international site now it seems its also on there US site. The Tx201LA was sold more overseas then in the US. It so similar to about 50 other devices (same Soc) asus made but mostly a lot of them are phones.

madhits45 said:
Hey Electrik jesus, Here is the new link: https://www.asus.com/2-in-1-PCs/ASUS_Transformer_Book_Trio_TX201LA/HelpDesk_Download/
I'm from Michigan to.. So hopefully you can help another Michigander lol with a bliss build. Asus recently changed up there whole support site and the source code used to only be available on the international site now it seems its also on there US site. The Tx201LA was sold more overseas then in the US. It so similar to about 50 other devices (same Soc) asus made but mostly a lot of them are phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I checked it out, and it is just as I was expecting. no .git folder or anything to show what commits were made on top of the standard kernel source. I guess the only thing we can do about it though is set an example of how to do it...
Example of how a kernel commit history could look: https://github.com/BlissRoms-x86/platform_kernel_common/commits/k4.15.10-ipts

electrikjesus said:
I checked it out, and it is just as I was expecting. no .git folder or anything to show what commits were made on top of the standard kernel source. I guess the only thing we can do about it though is set an example of how to do it...
Example of how a kernel commit history could look: https://github.com/BlissRoms-x86/platform_kernel_common/commits/k4.15.10-ipts
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So if I understand you correctly the source code needs to be gone through to be pick out the comments etc and then it can be pulled into the bliss x86 source for merging? I think this is above my skill set, what can I do if I dont have the skills to do this?

madhits45 said:
So if I understand you correctly the source code needs to be gone through to be pick out the comments etc and then it can be pulled into the bliss x86 source for merging? I think this is above my skill set, what can I do if I dont have the skills to do this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's more of a prevention on our end from not giving attribution to the original author. Let's say that someone who worked on a linux project, got the GPU to finally work right with the chipsets in your ASUS. I would like to see that one guy's additions, but even moreso, I would like to see ASUS show that they used his work. Because for all we know, there are hundreds of commits in there that were added, and some of that could be work that someone else deserves to be reimbursed for. The fact that they removed the .git folder shows that they have something to hide. Calling it "trade secrets" shouldn't be allowed when it comes to kernel code.

electrikjesus said:
It's more of a prevention on our end from not giving attribution to the original author. Let's say that someone who worked on a linux project, got the GPU to finally work right with the chipsets in your ASUS. I would like to see that one guy's additions, but even moreso, I would like to see ASUS show that they used his work. Because for all we know, there are hundreds of commits in there that were added, and some of that could be work that someone else deserves to be reimbursed for. The fact that they removed the .git folder shows that they have something to hide. Calling it "trade secrets" shouldn't be allowed when it comes to kernel code.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So its about credit and royalties? I understand being upset at asus because they did not or have not credited someone but what can i do about that? Am I stuck at not being able to have my device supported because asus is a bad actor? Is there any way I can get support?

madhits45 said:
So its about credit and royalties? I understand being upset at asus because they did not or have not credited someone but what can i do about that? Am I stuck at not being able to have my device supported because asus is a bad actor? Is there any way I can get support?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is, you could take the route Jakeday has for the Surface line. Since we don't know the author, he created patches to add the support needed to the kernel. It's far from the easy road, but this is what helps developers far more than any source dump
https://github.com/jakeday/linux-surface

electrikjesus said:
There is, you could take the route Jakeday has for the Surface line. Since we don't know the author, he created patches to add the support needed to the kernel. It's far from the easy road, but this is what helps developers far more than any source dump
https://github.com/jakeday/linux-surface
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I am confused about is this.
1. Is it a protocol thing? IE asus did not give credit and thus bliss refuses to add support unless they do.
OR
2. Is it an actual road block? IE we cant use the source code as is because it needs more information or reformatting?
Or is it both with more weight on #2?
If its #1 then can we make an exception? and if it is #2 why isnt there some sort of code AI that can redo the code to make it conform to the needed edits, seems like that should be possible. I would hope that if it is #1 only that you would admit that is all it is and help more people instead of forcing people to work around the bureaucracy brought onto them by bad actors like asus.

madhits45 said:
What I am confused about is this.
1. Is it a protocol thing? IE asus did not give credit and thus bliss refuses to add support unless they do.
OR
2. Is it an actual road block? IE we cant use the source code as is because it needs more information or reformatting?
Or is it both with more weight on #2?
If its #1 then can we make an exception? and if it is #2 why isnt there some sort of code AI that can redo the code to make it conform to the needed edits, seems like that should be possible. I would hope that if it is #1 only that you would admit that is all it is and help more people instead of forcing people to work around the bureaucracy brought onto them by bad actors like asus.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's the third option, I'm too busy to do the work for something that is more important to you than it is to me.

electrikjesus said:
It's the third option, I'm too busy to do the work for something that is more important to you than it is to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL.. Pretty PLEASE, with big traverse city cherrys on top.
I have also emailed asus to see if they will look at the source code again to properly format it, not likely but worth a shot.

Does this help: https://proandroiddev.com/ooga-chaka-git-hooks-to-enforce-code-quality-11ce8d0d23cb
Is the process of going through the code very time consuming? So even if using git hooks it will take time? Im still trying to understand why there is no AI that can go through it.

electrikjesus said:
It's the third option, I'm too busy to do the work for something that is more important to you than it is to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is important for several people. I hope at some point you have enough time to be able to help us. please help.

I am revisiting this conversation after a few months, and for starters, I would like to say I'm sorry for being rude. Secondly, I would like to use this conversation to start change where we need it. Innovation is the key point here. and if any of us are to build off of one another, we must work together to make it all possible. The lack of commit attribution by OEMs is a blatant disregard for GPL and Open Source licensing. As a ROM team, I would love to work with any OEM to help them through the process of adding a proper commit history. As Bliss, we are open to taking on any new device work, and we have in the past with Udoo-x86 & PINE64, but one of our requirements is that we can release full source, commit history, etc. Everything anyone could need to build off our work.
Too many OEM's are using patents as a way to stab eachother in the back, or use it as a "competitive" road block to stop the sale other devices that may have a similar method or feature. We don't agree with this practice and believe it is driven by greed and the wants of a few, not the needs of the majority. We as Bliss will continue to do what we can to act as an example of what should be done to best facilitate the rapid development of mobile technology and software for all parties involved.

New official source code releases for Nokia 8

Hi everyone,
I bugged HMD about not releasing more recent source code for the Nokia 8 and a few days ago they updated their site with links to code for the Android 9 builds. Note they still haven't published the latest build (5.150) nor and 4.88 builds nor any Android 7.1x builds.
I checked the archives and they are different from the previous 4.84 release, but I've no idea if they are buildable. They still look like they might be missing some useful bits, from my limited knowledge. Those of you who know what to do with this can test it and see if it's useful to you.
Let me know if you would like me to keep bugging them about the 4.88 build's code, or even any earlier 3.x builds.
Have fun!
Cheers

Thanks for bugging them!
Sadly it still contains the same device tree typos that the previous NB1 and even A1N sources contained, so without fixing them those trees do build but won't work correctly as the display won't be accessed correctly (half the screen will be white IIRC).
To be clear, this is what I mean: https://github.com/resident-nokia/u...f68ad2f#diff-6ea71fa79b281dd80cbab0bea96d9472
Also, as a funfact: A quick diff I did showed that the 5140 source is identical to the 4120 kernel source from Nokia 8 Sirocco that was released around December if I am not mistaken (minus the device tree files and some places where device names were hardcoded). That would mean that our kernel hasn't seen an update since December (actually even September, since thats the first CAF tag (Qualcomm upstream) that has changes you can find in those sources). Customer service I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Hi @THMSP!
Thanks for checking it out, shame it's still got errors in it. That's very interesting about the comparison with the Sirocco and the last change being in September. I suppose a new build doesn't automatically mean a new kernel though.
Since both the Android 8 and 9 source contain errors my only wonder is if the Android 7 source would also have errors, or if it might actually work?! I will ask them for it.
Cheers
EDIT: So the device tree is there after all? I had obviously misunderstood some of the other conversations I'd read, I had always thought it was missing. So it seems the device tree is there, but broken? Or only partially there, and what is there is broken?

The device tree files are all there, but they contain four serious typos that cause them to not actually work when you boot your compiled kernel. The rest of the source code does work. Correcting those typos is not much of a deal, but it is annoying (and personally I wonder how on earth they even maintain these sources).
The other annyoing issue is that for any custom or mismatching kernel the wifi driver won't load (because of signature enforcement for kernel modules), so if you want to make a kernel that doesn't break wifi, you need to add the Qualcomm wifi driver yourself (which then requires additional patches to actually work as well).
When you do those two things, the kernel will work just like the one that Nokia is shipping. For example, my TWRP builds for NB1 actually use the kernel source code for Sirocco, but with the (corrected) device tree files from NB1, and a patched version of the qualcomm wifi driver compiled into the kernel directly.
I am not sure if the nougat sources would help that much to be honest. It's not like those sources are broken because HMD / FIH don't know how to fix them, I bet they break them on purpose (or they get broken by the tool they use to package them). So any further release by them will probably contain the same stupid errors.

Wow! That's a lot to do to make them usable. I agree that I have many questions about QC and QA in the software for these phones, not only because of the source code releases.
You did very well making the device tree for the NB1 then and getting TWRP running, well done! And thanks
Like many I'm interested in the possibility of running other OSes on the NB1, particularly /e/ and any that run on Halium. I presume it will still take a lot of work to get another OS running on the NB1, but is it doable? I think in all cases these projects start from a LOS base.
Cheers

madb1lly said:
Wow! That's a lot to do to make them usable. I agree that I have many questions about QC and QA in the software for these phones, not only because of the source code releases.
You did very well making the device tree for the NB1 then and getting TWRP running, well done! And thanks
Like many I'm interested in the possibility of running other OSes on the NB1, particularly /e/ and any that run on Halium. I presume it will still take a lot of work to get another OS running on the NB1, but is it doable? I think in all cases these projects start from a LOS base.
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most of the work regarding TWRP and the kernel was actually done by @dg28gadhavi - I just tried to update everything a bit and adapt it to all the new bootloader bugs features that were introduced over time. He deserves all the credit, otherwise I would've had nothing to learn all this stuff from.
Regarding custom ROMs: Sure it is possible. But it is a huge amount of work, that requires you to risk your device (Snapdragon chips are unbrickable, but you couldn't use it as a daily driver), with potentially very few people actually caring (or even donating etc.). When you reached the point where you are able to port a ROM, you have the knowledge to make the changes that you need yourself with Magisk as well. So the only real reason to port a ROM is to give something to the community. And the Nokia 8 community simply isn't big enough that anyone would do that, imo.

Well thanks for @dg28gadhavi as well then!
Yes, I have read that Magisk can do most of what a custom Android ROM might have done. I have some reservations about Magisk, since it's not open source I don't know if I fully trust it, but that could also be the case for most of the software I use! Personally I'm interested most in /e/, which is currently built of a LOS base, but I don't know if all the customisations they've done (mainly to remove any communication with Google services) can be done with Magisk.
As for Halium-relate OSes (Ubuntu Touch, Plasma Mobile, Sailfish OS, LuneOS... some others too), Magisk can't recreate those as they're basically completely different from Android, they just run off the Android kernel and use libhybris to interface with the Bionic library drivers; the rest of Android is not used.
Anyway, this is all beyond my available time at present, so I will just have to carry on with stock Android maybe with some Magisk customisations until my phone breaks!
Cheers

madb1lly said:
I have some reservations about Magisk, since it's not open source I don't know if I fully trust it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Magisk is completely opensource, it has always been: https://github.com/topjohnwu/Magisk
You might be thinking about SuperSU which was / is indeed closed source