At the android-platform group, we've been hashing out a scheme for adding in official apps-to-sd support to AOSP. We have a couple of google engineers following along/helping out and are now at a state where the initial testing implementation (we're using an incremental development approach) steps are defined in a fairly simple manner and we are ready to start at it from an actual implementation details/start coding perspective.
The actual thread is located here: http://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/browse_thread/thread/bf0709c157451cd9
Basically, if implemented, it will do the following;
1) totally obsolete current hacker apps2sd approaches by allowing actual sdcard removal from device.
2) ultimately ship with devices stock (when in a state where it is easy to use, stable, and at least as secure for non-root users as internal storage currently is).
3) keep application data on the same device as the actual application with no side-effects (like internal apps being broken while waiting for second partition to mount).
4) allow MULTIPLE sdcards containing apps to be swapped on the same device.
5) allow sdcard containing apps to be swapped between DIFFERENT devices.
Note: 4 and 5 are not in the initial implementation, first proof of concept and working system, then enhancement with additional features. 4 and 5 are not requirements for inclusion in AOSP, but they are cool features that ultimately should be implemented.
What we need:
Several good developers, web storage w/source/patch management, etc.
Anyone interested, please read the thread to get an idea of the current state of thought, and please don't pollute that thread with nonsense. There is a current state of organization, and though not set in stone, it should be considered as NOT open for major architectural changes (i.e., the google engineers don't have any major problems with the proposal that we can't work through). Minor glitches and implementation details will be handled along the way. If you must pollute a thread with nonsense, use this one.
Really? Nobody AT ALL is interested?
This is the *ONE* major feature missing from AOSP!
Id PM twistedumbrella and cyanogen and shafty
JAC would prolly be interested but hes been busy with personal stuff i guess?
Just keep bumping this thread to keep it at the top. this needs to be done, and is long overdue on android...
It's a must
I'm sorry that I'm not a developer. Good speed!
I really don't think a2sd is a good solution at all (I've been following the discussion at android groups), rather, I believe the lack of an a2sd solution will eventually lead to device manufacturers to increase the amount of internal storage available on the device for applications (this is what this project is all about, isn't it, not enough storage for apps?) like Samsung did with it's Galaxy.
We shouldn't assume that a device is going to be used a particular way because then we'll run into problems. We shouldn't assume that an user will want to have their device used that particular way, be it partitioned or with a custom, secure filesystem stored in the SD. How do we explain that they'll lose some of their sdcard to app storage? If we make it automatic, how do we allow the user to disable it if they do not want it? How do we make it if an user wants to have one SD card with apps on it and another one without them?
Again I believe we should let the demand for more storage drive the evolution for the next android devices instead of just making it work and have manufacturers ignore the real need for increased internal storage.
I disagree with it not being a good solution. Technology is always advancing, but people can't always follow suit with what is the latest. Be it financials or whatever, Having this as an option will allow older hardware to run more efficiently, Bring costs down for manufacturers and give everyone more options.
@Jubeh, All the questions you raised I believe could be addressed, Have a new settings menu and let them choose. If they select it, it will give it pop up saying "x amount of space will be reserved on your SD card for app storage".
And with AOSP, Android is not just a mobile phone os anymore, It is a mobile platform. Imagine if you buy and download apps on your phone, You save them to your SD card because of this suggested add-in. Now you also own a media tablet that runs android, For example something with a bigger screen usually used for movies and gaming, Now if we had this you could put your sd card in that device and have all your apps like that. I think that would be an amazing feature for android.
I can think of big issues being encryption, piracy seems like it would be easy to accomplish with something like this, but again this should still be addressed and at least attempted to make available. It would be a huge step for the android platform. My 2 and a 1/2 cents worth
I dont think its a bad idea at all...
Jubeh while i agree with your ideas, we definitely need to get more on board memory. But things like apps, and even most cache's shouldnt hinder or take up precious phone storage. I mean seriously, are we hoping for gigs in the near future? Probably not, lol. But the apps2sd is something we can and should change now, to help bring on future ideas.
And what about those already locked into their devices, or where purchasing a newer improved version isnt feasable? Its hard to rationalize a new smart phone every year, even though we all do it, lol. But some bought the g1 hoping to not have to purchase a new device for multiple years, dont they deserve some kind of back compatablity as well?
Whether it should or should not be implemented is not open to debate. The objective is to actually IMPLEMENT it -- in a manner that meets the stability and security requirements of AOSP. One way or another, community needs WILL implement this system, problem is that the current implementations are just crazy HACKS --- unstable, unreliable, etc. As someone who WILL be installing applications to sdcard, *I* want the system to actually WORK PROPERLY, and I'm sure that not only most everyone else (with VERY VERY few exceptions...) does.
Also, the fact that anyone (jubeh) would bring up those completely retarded points about "assumptions regarding use cases" proves in no uncertain terms that they didn't read the thread linked to (even if they did make themselves look completely retarded by replying in it).
In other words jubeh: If you don't read before you reply, you will make yourself look like an a$$. Now run along.
Oh, and what did I say about keeping the NONSENSE out of that thread? Really... you need to learn to READ.
lbcoder, I have to hand it to you. You killed your project quicker than anybody else possibly could have. While many users wouldn't necessarily agree with what jubeh said, he was raising what he considered were valid points in a fairly reasonable manner. Instead of pointing out that you had already worked on those points and that you didn't want to rehash them, you trashed him (three times) and made it pretty clear that you would be an a$$ to work with. I wish you luck in finding devs who want to put up with that.
I think either member have the right to say what they please.
While lbcoder was a bit harsh, I can understand his frustration.
They're both senior members however, and have both have contributed MASS amounts to the comunity. If they want to hash out a problem so be it.
All its doing is keeping this thread at the top
sykokenndogg said:
I think either member have the right to say what they please.
While lbcoder was a bit harsh, I can understand his frustration.
They're both senior members however, and have both have contributed MASS amounts to the comunity. If they want to hash out a problem so be it.
All its doing is keeping this thread at the top
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i agree. this should DEFINITELY stay at the top non-rooted g1 users at the very least should have these a2sd AOSP updates... and everyone else can just get the regular updates because they have enough internal memory
lbcoder said:
the current implementations are just crazy HACKS --- unstable, unreliable, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not to fill this thread with more nonsense but I have to disagree with you on saying the current apps2sds are just crazy hacks. Hacks? yes. Crazy, unstable, and unreliable? No. The new roms that are out currently automatically move your apps to your ext partition on startup if the ext partition is there. If not then the apps will not move there. The fact that you can dual mount your sd now also illiminates any FCs while you have the phone mounted to a pc. I am not saying that the method can not improve but anyone that is currently running an Enom or Cyan rom can tell you if you didnt personally create the partition then you would have no idea that the apps were on the sd.
Agreed, A2SD is stable
If you follow the directions, Apps2SD is more stable than most of the apps on it, imho.
I think the problem that people are having with stability involve the several ways to get there, the fact that each is a multi-step process, and Android users seem to run the gamut from someone who could hack into Sun Microsystem's payroll to someone who just got their first ,uh, smartphone. Most of us tend toward the latter. If you wrest the control from the user and automate it, then I think we'd see the last of A2SD instability.
Internal memory isn't just for apps, and I think it'll grow regardless. People like high numbers on boxes. WM (WP?) has had this since pre-turn of the century, and the demand for more phone memory hasn't decreased. As a matter of fact, the ROMs just grew, and grew, and grew.
Hey, it's cheaper, it's pretty much just as fast, and if it's easy, people will be able to figure out what the different partitions are once they get them and have to manage them, so it'll teach the masses. I'm all for it. Can't code for diddly, but I like the idea.
Yeah. Bump.
Edit: Yes, you will catch more flies with honey. In the friendliest way I can say it, lose the 'tude, or you'll lose out on a lot, lot, lot of other stuff, and you likely won't be able to figure out why things aren't working out for you. You can't really look back and say what might've been, either. You can, and please do, still say what you need to say, maybe even more, but *how* you say it really matters.
a2sd is FAR from being a stable, reliable, sane solution to the device's storage problem, I've said it time and time again.
Being "Senior Member" is in no way a measure of reliability, experience, or knowledge. I could fill 10,000 posts with 4/5ths of them being "Reported 10 chars" and be a senior member. Also, although I've tried to help where I can, I don't think I've yet contributed anything significant, mainly to avoid the barrage of posts afterwards asking how to make it work... and that brings me back to topic; the storage of apps on SD-card would be hell for carrier's support lines. The implementation is mostly non-existent in MASS MARKET headsets, and although you're right to point out that Android is making strides beyond the phone market, I believe the implementation would be shunned by google for several reasons; the formerly mentioned carrier support hell, both carriers and manufacturer's desire for handsets to become obsolete, google's desire to keep android appealing to both carriers and manufacturers, and possible competition in the thin-portable client and netbook spaces against it's own upcoming Chrome OS.
At this point already, the hope that the feature will "2) ultimately ship with devices stock" is pretty, pretty slim.
As opposed to what most members here might think, we're in the minority (rooted Dream users), and although a2sd does cater to some rooted users, we're still talking about the minority of Dream devices out there (since really, it seems the only reason behind implementing a2sd is the Dream's stock 70 MB app storage space, most other devices at least double that amount). Normal people (read: not us geeks) change devices often almost as a fashion statement, so any solution, if it did make it as an update, would be to support the desire of a small fraction of an almost obsolete device.
Besides, even starting with the way apps are currently handled by the device, it would require a major re-working of the platform to get this monstrosity working. Currently, apps are handled in two spaces, system apps, which can't be un-installed, and user apps, which can be un-installed, updated, etc, but not by the user, but by the package-manager. A better solution would be a third app space for sd-card installed apps. The system/package manager would not install these apks downloaded directly to the sd-card's fat32, rather, they would just show up on the app launcher (we could have scans for new apps every time an sd-card was inserted/removed). With donut's on-demand dexopting, we could create another directory in /data, say, /sd-dalvik-cache, or even leave the .dex in the sdcard while the app was in use and remove it when the app stops (and clear any .dex on sd-card mount), and create a third category of apps that could be installed to sd (in lieu of it, apps would get thrown into /data/app and moved back to sd as soon as one was available, of course, after prompting the user). This way, developers would be able to choose for their apps to be installed to SD and they could take the appropriate security measures to ensure the safety of their code, if that's what they want.
A2SD should have been an option for android in first place. Windows mobile has it, why not android? Is it stable and usable the way it is - sure. But what happens if I want to take out my sdcard and put it in a card reader?
It's one of the major failures of android along with it not supporting adhoc
networks, bluetooth obex as default and some other significant issues.
Don't get me wrong here - there are many things I love abut the platform but
flaws are there too. I've had winmo standart, winmo pro and now an android phone and in terms of "getting the job done" all three have their + and -.
The *current* mechanism to install applications on SD is an EXTREMELY hacky piece of junk.
Though it will work, it will only do so under the following conditions;
1) the user is fully aware of the limitations of the system and doesn't do anything that will stress it out,
2) the sdcard is *always* in the device, never removed.
3) it is impossible to use multiple sdcards in the same device.
Let me pose this question to everyone;
WHAT HAPPENS if you are using hack-apps2sd and you remove the sdcard? You know, just PULL IT OUT... This is something that "regular" users do *all the time*.
This is only one of many conditions that need to be managed by an apps2sd system before it can be considered for inclusion in a consumer device.
Needs to be done;
1) The user needs to be able to chose whether or not to enable apps-to-sd and must set itself up on the phone itself by just the click of a button.
2) The user must be able to SWAP SDCARDS at will. This includes the case where they just rip the card out without unmounting it.
3) When an sdcard is inserted containing apps, the system must automatically set it up and add those applications to the package manager.
4) UID collisions must NEVER happen.
5) External apps must be able to be sanely removed from the package manager upon unmount (planned or unplanned).
6) Processes with open file handles must be politely shut down upon a planned unmount.
7) Processes with open file handled must be CLEANLY killed off upon an UNPLANNED unmount.
8) PROTECTED-APPS must be copy protected when stored on the sdcard to at least equal security to that used internally, i.e. they should be encrypted using a randomly generated key stored in a root-only location within /data.
9) The user must be able to chose where to install a new application.
10) Application home directory and dalvik-cache must be stored on the same media as the application is installed to, i.e. internally installed apps should have their home directory and dalvik-cache stored internally, externally installed apps should have their home directory and dalvik-cache stored externally.
11) Optional: Ability to grow/shrink the amount of storage on the sdcard devoted to applications.
In other words, the user experience should be like this;
1) With a regular sdcard inserted (or no sdcard inserted), the user experience must not be any different than it is currently.
2) User can go to Settings-->SD card & phone storage-->(SD card) Enable application install to SD card. This prompts the user for how much space to devote to applications (default, say equal to internal), and then sets it up.
2B) optional -- user can go to Settings-->SD card & phone storage-->(SD card) "Change SD card space reserved for applications". Prompts for new size (min size = current space used, max size = current available + total sdcard available).
3) User goes to install a new app, if the card has application storage enabled, the installer asks where to install the application to (internal or sdcard).
4) User safely unmounts sdcard -- if applications are running, prompt "There are applications running on the sdcard (list them), these will be terminated. Continue?", terminates applications, removes them from package manager, unmounts.
5) User unsafely pulls sdcard -- if applications were running, message "These applications were running on the sdcard. They have been terminated and any unsaved data has been lost."
6) User inserts or mounts sdcard, system scans if application install is enabled on the card, if it is, the applications are added to package manager.
discussion management
lbcoder,
The thread at groups.google is definitely the technical thread, so I am using this one to comment on your reply dated Oct 30 2:39 pm.
Hands down I believe that for the sake of keeping the discussion open (one of the pillars of the scientific method) is to allow comments that may or may not agree with your or anyone else's point of view.
I agree on that Armando's idea is wrong, just like you do. Although he does have some valid points, which anyone who reads carefully can see. He is probably out of line writing what he did on the technical thread instead of here; and should be scolded for that. But not for sharing his thoughts. I won't elaborate on my own ideas on the matter this because it is not my purpose with this post.
My purpose is to ask everyone working on both this and the technical thread to tone it down, please. XDA sometimes becomes a battleground, sometimes funny and sometimes wasteful and even annoying and both this and the technical thread at groups.google could be very valuable for the platform.
BTW: I'm a well seasoned developer, with well over 15 yrs of experience and who leads reasonably big projects.
Thanks for the thread. It is well worth it, whatever the outcome is.
fosormic said:
lbcoder,
The thread at groups.google is definitely the technical thread, so I am using this one to comment on your reply dated Oct 30 2:39 pm.
Hands down I believe that for the sake of keeping the discussion open (one of the pillars of the scientific method) is to allow comments that may or may not agree with your or anyone else's point of view.
I agree on that Armando's idea is wrong, just like you do. Although he does have some valid points, which anyone who reads carefully can see. He is probably out of line writing what he did on the technical thread instead of here; and should be scolded for that. But not for sharing his thoughts. I won't elaborate on my own ideas on the matter this because it is not my purpose with this post.
My purpose is to ask everyone working on both this and the technical thread to tone it down, please. XDA sometimes becomes a battleground, sometimes funny and sometimes wasteful and even annoying and both this and the technical thread at groups.google could be very valuable for the platform.
BTW: I'm a well seasoned developer, with well over 15 yrs of experience and who leads reasonably big projects.
Thanks for the thread. It is well worth it, whatever the outcome is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no place in this discussion for opinions. Its not about battling, its not about opinions, its not about any of that BS. What I am asking is for anyone INTERESTED in CONTRIBUTING (either in code, or in rational discussion regarding implementation details) to come forward and do so. Everything else is irrelevant and out of place.
As for his having valid points... not relevant since ALL of his valid points have been addressed. His purpose (if he has any at all) is therefore simply to disrupt progress.
And since he has effectively destroyed this thread with his nonsense, I may cease monitoring this thread. Anyone interested in contributing, please contact me by PM. Anyone interested in being disruptive, don't waste your time -- really, just go away.
lbcoder said:
The *current* mechanism to install applications on SD is an EXTREMELY hacky piece of junk.
Though it will work, it will only do so under the following conditions;
1) the user is fully aware of the limitations of the system and doesn't do anything that will stress it out,
2) the sdcard is *always* in the device, never removed.
3) it is impossible to use multiple sdcards in the same device.
Let me pose this question to everyone;
WHAT HAPPENS if you are using hack-apps2sd and you remove the sdcard? You know, just PULL IT OUT... This is something that "regular" users do *all the time*.
This is only one of many conditions that need to be managed by an apps2sd system before it can be considered for inclusion in a consumer device.
Needs to be done;
1) The user needs to be able to chose whether or not to enable apps-to-sd and must set itself up on the phone itself by just the click of a button.
2) The user must be able to SWAP SDCARDS at will. This includes the case where they just rip the card out without unmounting it.
3) When an sdcard is inserted containing apps, the system must automatically set it up and add those applications to the package manager.
4) UID collisions must NEVER happen.
5) External apps must be able to be sanely removed from the package manager upon unmount (planned or unplanned).
6) Processes with open file handles must be politely shut down upon a planned unmount.
7) Processes with open file handled must be CLEANLY killed off upon an UNPLANNED unmount.
8) PROTECTED-APPS must be copy protected when stored on the sdcard to at least equal security to that used internally, i.e. they should be encrypted using a randomly generated key stored in a root-only location within /data.
9) The user must be able to chose where to install a new application.
10) Application home directory and dalvik-cache must be stored on the same media as the application is installed to, i.e. internally installed apps should have their home directory and dalvik-cache stored internally, externally installed apps should have their home directory and dalvik-cache stored externally.
11) Optional: Ability to grow/shrink the amount of storage on the sdcard devoted to applications.
In other words, the user experience should be like this;
1) With a regular sdcard inserted (or no sdcard inserted), the user experience must not be any different than it is currently.
2) User can go to Settings-->SD card & phone storage-->(SD card) Enable application install to SD card. This prompts the user for how much space to devote to applications (default, say equal to internal), and then sets it up.
2B) optional -- user can go to Settings-->SD card & phone storage-->(SD card) "Change SD card space reserved for applications". Prompts for new size (min size = current space used, max size = current available + total sdcard available).
3) User goes to install a new app, if the card has application storage enabled, the installer asks where to install the application to (internal or sdcard).
4) User safely unmounts sdcard -- if applications are running, prompt "There are applications running on the sdcard (list them), these will be terminated. Continue?", terminates applications, removes them from package manager, unmounts.
5) User unsafely pulls sdcard -- if applications were running, message "These applications were running on the sdcard. They have been terminated and any unsaved data has been lost."
6) User inserts or mounts sdcard, system scans if application install is enabled on the card, if it is, the applications are added to package manager.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well the extremely hacky piece of junk took a lot of hard work from the developers here......show some respect
I'm aware, that only a few of my comrades in
XDA'a
R
M
Y may be aware of this issue, and change since the migration to android 11. To help illustrate to you I recently, thru google takeout, downloaded my 45+gb gp music library, all to which it's destiny was sd card storage (as chosen thru my Chrome Browser settings). After all files were unzipped and transferred , the available storage space on my sd card hadn't charged! So yes, my sd card is OK too, as affirmation to one of the replies I received earlier stating since gaining Android 11 rhey hadn't seen any changes. And by ok, you nust mean the sd card doesn't unmount itself at will, or randomly throw-up an error msg like, "sd file corruption detected," just for giggles!
As stated earlier, only a handful of folks I know over on discord's SamCentral are aware of this change, so there's been little discussion of file allocation tables & tweaks, i.e., formatting FAT 32(or that's the current default)idk...this isn't my field but imo, I think they're saying currently everything is being shifted to external stg. '0' which is the common ground for all or most of Android O/S's, thus "arming" their decision with the "no purchase necessary" routine. Fact is, most folks don't require more than half-a-gig or more of on-board mobile device storage. "The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."(RIP Mr. Spock, Leonard Nimoy). So,, if this smells like a patch of sorts to you, why haven't we heard anything, and when can some of us expect to get our money's worth for our sd card purchase(mine, 256gb = $100, in Spring of '19). Some of the "fake-news" spreaders over there(lol) are saying the most recent samsung shifts to Microsoft based apps/services & cross-syncing is the root of the cause, and they're probably getting closer to plotting a solution now that the big hill has been championed(ref. to And. 11 + One UI 3.0-no project completion)! I miss the functionality of not being able to use an interface I paid for!
(If any of this I've shared here fact-cks.out to be valid, and I become a hero of sorts, does this mean I may gain some of that XDA "street-cred" and snag a couple of likes)?!
tarHeel71 said:
This actually was a thought of mine shortly after being sworn-in as a beta-tester for Samsung's One UI 3.0h-no, last fall.
Is there a different format process for my sd card now with Android 11(and if so, why was I not consulted)?
Any guidance or insight on my query would be great. Carry on!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I updated to 11 and UI 3.0 about a week ago and not having any issues with my sdcard. Only problem I have is that my battery usage as more than doubled even after a FDR.
tarHeel71 said:
This actually was a thought of mine shortly after being sworn-in as a beta-tester for Samsung's One UI 3.0h-no, last fall.
Is there a different format process for my sd card now with Android 11(and if so, why was I not consulted)?
Any guidance or insight on my query would be great. Carry on!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What exactly is the issue here? Not formatted? Can't see specific data? I went through the whole beta and now on release and my SD card is "exactly" the same as before with the exception that some apps can't see other apps' directories which is a "feature" from Google.
Compusmurf said:
What exactly is the issue here? Not formatted? Can't see specific data? I went through the whole beta and now on release and my SD card is "exactly" the same as before with the exception that some apps can't see other apps' directories which is a "feature" from Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The real obvious missing link to me was, for instance, when I'm signed in and surfin on my browser(Chrome, Samsung Internet, etc) and I save/download a file, it doesn't actually get saved on the physical sd card like it did before, rather, the o/s leaves the file in a limbo state of sorts, with whatever browser app!? I got my n20u1_5G back in 9/20, so while on Q if I saved, d/led a file i.e., using Chrome, I would go thru my Files then sd, then Android, then data, then find chrome(com.google.shrome), and there she is!
But, since beta school, whilst on 11, I do my Lil routine(as b-4), and when I goto Android then data, there's nothing, no app files(google or Samsung, as there were b-4)!? I hope I'm explaining the deal well enough here, as I couldn't be alone with this issue! Anyone using a stg card knows what I'm saying that isn't to be seen anymore! I'm using the same 250gb (high-end) Samsung card as b4, when I purchased my handset thru b-buy.com last fall(see jpg).
(Sorry 4 delay in my reply)☠
"Android, then data, then find chrome(com.google.shrome), and there she is!"
BINGO. Yeah, that's NOT happening any more. Those folders are now SECURED from any other apps viewing them. Only the owning app can view. The files are probably there, nice and safe.
Right now I know of 3 ways to view them. Total commander file manager in the app store filed the appropriate request to google for "total access" and you can view them if you hook your phone up to a computer. The 3rd way is quite a bit uglier requiring you to make an activity to a legacy file manager that google accidentally left in android 11 but hid. I'd have to dig around a lot to find those instructions again.
It's called "SCOPED STORAGE"... Go read about it and cry.... I know I did.
So, NO, you aren't going nutz based on this. However, that doesn't preclude other ways to go nutz!!!!
Compusmurf said:
"Android, then data, then find chrome(com.google.shrome), and there she is!"
BINGO. Yeah, that's NOT happening any more. Those folders are now SECURED from any other apps viewing them. Only the owning app can view. The files are probably there, nice and safe.
Right now I know of 3 ways to view them. Total commander file manager in the app store filed the appropriate request to google for "total access" and you can view them if you hook your phone up to a computer. The 3rd way is quite a bit uglier requiring you to make an activity to a legacy file manager that google accidentally left in android 11 but hid. I'd have to dig around a lot to find those instructions again.
It's called "SCOPED STORAGE"... Go read about it and cry.... I know I did.
So, NO, you aren't going nutz based on this. However, that doesn't preclude other ways to go nutz!!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the reply...I've heard bits/pieces in talks with geek friends, and I appreciate your expertise here on this topic! But, why aren't the bytes getting gobbled -up(like when viewing sd card stg. available from the pull--down menu or from device care app)? I downloaded nearly 45 gb of audio files to my sd card, with absolutely no change there, but you see the stg reduction to internal storage. For what benefit, to them , google? Or just more of the ongoing sparing the two of 'em are constantly a part of! lol/smh