Samsung Rom Date Code Naming Scheme - Verizon Droid Charge

I remember seeing explained on the Fascinate section about how to read the ROM date codes. I have done some searches and I can’t find it. So; does anyone know how to decode when the ROM was made?
Latest leak is EP1W, how can I read this and know the date of the build?

Get the build.prop for the rom and look at the build date in the build.prop

imnuts said:
Get the build.prop for the rom and look at the build date in the build.prop
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So there's no way to tell what the date of the build is from the name?
I know the epic used to have easy stuff... like EI07 - E=2011, I=09 (September) 07 = 7th (09/07/2011)
Are these builds not coded with some similar, but elusive, method?
The E is probably 2011 still ... but EP1W?! 16 - 1 - 23? No idea.

Related

Samsung Source code KB5 version

As per my request Samsung updated the source code to the version we have currently on our phones.
h ttp://opensource.samsung.com/reception/reception_main.do?method=downLoad&attach_id=1036
What else do we need now to get cyanogen on here? lol
Get CWM working!
Sorry for being the outdated, uneducated, tool but what exactly does this mean?
I'll be honest I'm not sure... I'm not a programmer for android but I do know someone mentioned that we don't have it. So I went ahead and emailed Samsung and they actually responded. So thought I would throw it out there.
it's for devs and builders. the kernel tar is labeled kb7, actually. krylon probably had this already but still.... good lookin' out man.
So does the source code include the kernel? I want to help get the ball rolling but I need to know whats missing...
Galaxy S 4G
soundwave123 said:
So does the source code include the kernel? I want to help get the ball rolling but I need to know whats missing...
Galaxy S 4G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kernal is included yes
So are we trying to figure out how to "unfreeze" it?
Galaxy S 4G
Warning -- as Krylon points out, this appears to contain KB7 source and the device appears to be running KB5
Thanks!
http://opensource.samsung.com/reception/reception_main.do?method=downLoad&attach_id=1036
$ cat readme.txt
HOW TO BUILD KERNEL
1. Visit http://www.codesourcery.com/, download and install Sourcery G++ Lite 2009q3-68 toolchain for ARM EABI.
2. Extract kernel source and move into the top directory.
3. Execute 'make vibrantplus_rev00_defconfig'.
4. Execute 'make' or 'make -j<n>' where '<n>' is the number of multiple jobs to be invoked simultaneously.
http://www.codesourcery.com/sgpp/lite_edition.html
http://www.codesourcery.com/sgpp/lite/arm/portal/release1600
Thanks again -- just what I was looking for -- Kernel_T959V_KB7/drivers/net/tun.c

[Q] Compile from source Release ROM using my own keys

I'm sorry if this has been answered somewhere else, but I have not been able to find this solution after a few days of searching.
I am building CM10 from source for Galaxy S II (I9100) with my own changes on a Linux system. It builds and runs fine using UserDebug signatures.
I wish to build the release version not the userdebug one, and I wish to use my own keys/certificates/Signatures (e.g. release.x509.pem)
After setting everything up, I build the ROM using the commands
. build/envsetup.sh
lunch 27
./build.sh i9100
Is there options or settings to trigger the Release build?
How do I get the build to use my own Signatures?
I understand how to re-sign an existing ROM, but wish to have my signatures be used for internal parts (media, platform, shared, etc.) plus use the builder to do everything automatically without any post processing.
I have not found or understood the Android nor Cyanogenmod documentation. I might be missing the key document.
Thank you for your time.
.
looking at make files and buildspec.mk.default
I'm still looking into solving this myself, but I'm not making much headway.
The search for android build_new_device gave me a links to look at and it is helping me understand the build a bit.
I am trying to understand how buildspec.mk.default is used. I've tried to find where TARGET_BUILD_VARIANT is set for the cm build of i9100 but apparently I am exceeding the limits of grep
Anyone have a suggestion or pointers for this?
Build a release version of cm10 for i9100 and use my own certificates/keys
(not userdebug or eng, but just user)
Thank you.
randombitsca said:
I'm sorry if this has been answered somewhere else, but I have not been able to find this solution after a few days of searching.
I am building CM10 from source for Galaxy S II (I9100) with my own changes on a Linux system. It builds and runs fine using UserDebug signatures.
I wish to build the release version not the userdebug one, and I wish to use my own keys/certificates/Signatures (e.g. release.x509.pem)
After setting everything up, I build the ROM using the commands
. build/envsetup.sh
lunch 27
./build.sh i9100
Is there options or settings to trigger the Release build?
How do I get the build to use my own Signatures?
I understand how to re-sign an existing ROM, but wish to have my signatures be used for internal parts (media, platform, shared, etc.) plus use the builder to do everything automatically without any post processing.
I have not found or understood the Android nor Cyanogenmod documentation. I might be missing the key document.
Thank you for your time.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try posting this in your device forum
In the General section
That would give you more help I believe !
Sent from my MT11i using xda premium

[Q][need help]building jellybean for motorola photon q ver 77.8.14.XT897.Sprint.en.US

hi i wanna build jellybean for my phone and i need help
please consider me a complete NOOB cause i barely got the kitchen running but it doesnt work with this phone so...
got it rooted with No Problem though
thanx to everyones work that got me this far
ps im running rooted stock rom willing to help as much as i can to get help just tell me what to do maybe we can help each other
...you can build your own rom, but maybe is better leave it on Skrilax_CZ
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2159708
then how will i learn?
CornholioGSM said:
...you can build your own rom, but maybe is better leave it on Skrilax_CZ
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2159708
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok so i went as far as downloading the JB source from AOSP
i have everything installed needed for the build
whats next? cause when i try to issue:
lunch full_asanti_c-userdebug
i get the following error:
build/core/product_config.mk:205: *** No matches for product "full_asanti_c". Stop.
** Don't have a product spec for: 'full_asanti_c'
** Do you have the right repo manifest?
It has to be properly ported to Photon Q first.
how?
Skrilax_CZ said:
It has to be properly ported to Photon Q first.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what are the steps to do that?
That's very specific for each platform - by simply making each feature working. You can use my CM10 device / vendor repos as a base.
I believe Cyanogenmod has an article in their wiki explaining how to build for a "new" device.. Even for a device that is already in the "lunch combo" you will still run into make errors without the right GCC compiler, kernel source, and proprietary files....
EDIT: Then once you get it to compile you also gotta create a "signed zip" with some more vodo... :/
Sent from my XT897 using Tapatalk 2

building kernel from aosp source

im trying to build the kernel from androids googlesource website, and want to know which defconfig i need to use to start the build
tegra3_android_defconfig
tegra_android_defconfig
tegra3_defconfig
tegra_defconfig
i couldnt find a grouper specific one
azoller1 said:
im trying to build the kernel from androids googlesource website, and want to know which defconfig i need to use to start the build
tegra3_android_defconfig
tegra_android_defconfig
tegra3_defconfig
tegra_defconfig
i couldnt find a grouper specific one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
tegra3_android_defconfig seems to be the one.
Yes, I am trying to rebuild their from source. But, when I have testing on running. There are found red splash when I click them on screen. May I know what the caused of this ?
Thanks.
Ok, The problem has resolved now .
AOSP's guide to building kernels is quite useful. I actually used it earlier today.
http://source.android.com/source/building-kernels.html
It contains building instructions (obviously) as well as the proper defconfig for all AOSP devices.

[DEV] Porting kernel 3.10.x to d2 for Lollipop

As we know, Android Lollipop is being released soon, and it requires a kernel that is 3.10.y, which is not available for our device. I'm not great with kernels and would in no way consider myself a kernel developer, but I have applied the neccessary patches to get the kernel version up to 3.10.0, which can be found here https://github.com/frap129/android_kernel_samsung_d2. Because I'm not a kernel developer, I am looking for some help in at least getting this kernel somewhat ready before the release of 5.0, so we can all get the latest update ASAP. Any and all help is apreciated!
Does your kernel compile and boot on cm11? If it does, there shouldn't be much problems in getting it working on L.
Any news? Does it compile?
frap129 said:
As we know, Android Lollipop is being released soon, and it requires a kernel that is 3.10.y, which is not available for our device. I'm not great with kernels and would in no way consider myself a kernel developer, but I have applied the neccessary patches to get the kernel version up to 3.10.0, which can be found here https://github.com/frap129/android_kernel_samsung_d2. Because I'm not a kernel developer, I am looking for some help in at least getting this kernel somewhat ready before the release of 5.0, so we can all get the latest update ASAP. Any and all help is apreciated!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nope android 5.0 doesnt require new kernel, you could build it on 3.0.y like i am doing on my Note 2 oh and as far as i know new nexus devices are still on 3.4.y
Ivan_Meler said:
nope android 5.0 doesnt require new kernel, you could build it on 3.0.y like i am doing on my Note 2 oh and as far as i know new nexus devices are still on 3.4.y
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes, but the new Samsung tablets (at least) are being shipped with the 3.10.x kernels.. 'course they're still running kitkat at the moment, but definitely cannot wait to see if/when they get kit kat.
I'll have to report back later after I take pictures of the 'about phone' page lol [if you want proof anyway]
frap129 said:
As we know, Android Lollipop is being released soon, and it requires a kernel that is 3.10.y, which is not available for our device. I'm not great with kernels and would in no way consider myself a kernel developer, but I have applied the neccessary patches to get the kernel version up to 3.10.0, which can be found here https://github.com/frap129/android_kernel_samsung_d2. Because I'm not a kernel developer, I am looking for some help in at least getting this kernel somewhat ready before the release of 5.0, so we can all get the latest update ASAP. Any and all help is apreciated!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ztotherad said:
yes, but the new Samsung tablets (at least) are being shipped with the 3.10.x kernels.. 'course they're still running kitkat at the moment, but definitely cannot wait to see if/when they get kit kat.
I'll have to report back later after I take pictures of the 'about phone' page lol [if you want proof anyway]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know samsung does things like that (i have few other devices from them) but hey thats samsung and they are lazy so they dont want to update kernel version after device is relesed so they do this not to feel outdated on softwere side
Whoops! I read somewhere that the newly expanded SELinux permissions had some dependency on the 3.10.y kernel. Oh well, I guess Ill just test it anyways so I can brag that I have a newer kernel than anyone else if it works
frap129 said:
Whoops! I read somewhere that the newly expanded SELinux permissions had some dependency on the 3.10.y kernel. Oh well, I guess Ill just test it anyways so I can brag that I have a newer kernel than anyone else if it works
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would definitely be awesome! Be sure to report back your results. I'm not an experienced ROM or kernel developer, but I'll be attempting on bringing a pure AOSP 5.0.0_r2 to my GS3. I'm not sure how successful I'll be, but my first step involved me planning on copying over our vendor repo from CM's M11 or M12 release (whenever that gets out) and trying to build Lollipop against it.
polarEskimo said:
That would definitely be awesome! Be sure to report back your results. I'm not an experienced ROM or kernel developer, but I'll be attempting on bringing a pure AOSP 5.0.0_r2 to my GS3. I'm not sure how successful I'll be, but my first step involved me planning on copying over our vendor repo from CM's M11 or M12 release (whenever that gets out) and trying to build Lollipop against it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was planning on working on that as well over the weekend.
polarEskimo said:
That would definitely be awesome! Be sure to report back your results. I'm not an experienced ROM or kernel developer, but I'll be attempting on bringing a pure AOSP 5.0.0_r2 to my GS3. I'm not sure how successful I'll be, but my first step involved me planning on copying over our vendor repo from CM's M11 or M12 release (whenever that gets out) and trying to build Lollipop against it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You will need to change many things in device tree to get it compile oh and dont forget to disable cm overlays
Ivan_Meler said:
You will need to change many things in device tree to get it compile oh and dont forget to disable cm overlays
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm very new to the AOSP build process and didn't have much luck last night getting the CM device sources to play nicely with AOSP. I'm finding it difficult to find any relevant guides on porting over the CM device trees to pure AOSP. If you or anyone else can help by explaining the process or pointing to a guide that I may have missed, I'd be grateful. Plus the more people we have collaborating on his, the better our chances of getting Lollipop on our devices.
I'm working on porting 5.0 to our phone, tweaked the device tree and got the build running but (as expected) i'm running into SEpolicy hell. The new selinux implementation in lollipop is proving to be trouble. I've just made a few more edits and the build is moving along, I'll post results shortly.
If anyone cares to help I'll walk you through what I've done so far. One thing to note is you need to adjust vendorsetup.sh to say full_d2lte-eng instead of cm_d2lte-eng and create AndroidProducts.mk that points at full_d2lte.mk (you can use the hammerhead device tree as a reference to do this)
That will get your device tree to regester properly. If you don't do the above you'll get a "no config makefile found" error when you try to select d2lte with lunch.
As far as the actual tree, you're gonna wanna grab device/samsung/d2lte, device/samsung/msm8960-common, vendor/samsung/d2lte, vendor/samsung/msm8960-common, vendor/cm, vendor/cyngn, and kernel/d2.
You'll also need a couple things from /hardware, namely hardware/samsung. There's a couple things you'll need to remove from msm8960-common in /device, I can't remember the specific file name but the error message will tell you.
Follow those instructions and you'll get where I'm at, with the build crapping out on SEpolicy
Restl3ss said:
I'm working on porting 5.0 to our phone, tweaked the device tree and got the build running but (as expected) i'm running into SEpolicy hell. The new selinux implementation in lollipop is proving to be trouble. I've just made a few more edits and the build is moving along, I'll post results shortly.
If anyone cares to help I'll walk you through what I've done so far. One thing to note is you need to adjust vendorsetup.sh to say full_d2lte-eng instead of cm_d2lte-eng and create AndroidProducts.mk that points at full_d2lte.mk (you can use the hammerhead device tree as a reference to do this)
That will get your device tree to regester properly. If you don't do the above you'll get a "no config makefile found" error when you try to select d2lte with lunch.
As far as the actual tree, you're gonna wanna grab device/samsung/d2lte, device/samsung/msm8960-common, vendor/samsung/d2lte, vendor/samsung/msm8960-common, vendor/cm, vendor/cyngn, and kernel/d2.
You'll also need a couple things from /hardware, namely hardware/samsung. There's a couple things you'll need to remove from msm8960-common in /device, I can't remember the specific file name but the error message will tell you.
Follow those instructions and you'll get where I'm at, with the build crapping out on SEpolicy
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, this is awesome. It sounds like you've gotten the furthest than any of us. I appreciate the instructions, but is there any chance you could push your repos to GitHub? And do you think the SELinux stuff you're running into has anything to do with our device being on the 3.4 kernel instead of 3.10?
polarEskimo said:
Wow, this is awesome. It sounds like you've gotten the furthest than any of us. I appreciate the instructions, but is there any chance you could push your repos to GitHub? And do you think the SELinux stuff you're running into has anything to do with our device being on the 3.4 kernel instead of 3.10?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not a kernel thing so much as a device tree thing. (Kitkat vs lollipop) the policy.conf (along with a few other things) in the device tree is designed for kitkat and isn't playing very nice with the 5.0 source. I'm trying to bang it out a bit by swapping a few C and header files in the build core.
As for my last build, my tweaks got me past where I was but now I'm hanging on a new set of SElinux errors.
I've been at this for less than 12 hours so given that timeframe this looks promising.
I'm trying to think of what the best way to go about this is. I could either try to adapt the tree for the new source or I could try to adapt the source for the old tree (use KitKat SElinux implementation on lollipop). The latter would have more success with root but the former is the correct way to do it (and would get us cyanogenmod 12 faster once they start nightlies, as I can push the changes to gerrit)
Restl3ss said:
It's not a kernel thing so much as a device tree thing. (Kitkat vs lollipop) the policy.conf (along with a few other things) in the device tree is designed for kitkat and isn't playing very nice with the 5.0 source. I'm trying to bang it out a bit by swapping a few C and header files in the build core.
As for my last build, my tweaks got me past where I was but now I'm hanging on a new set of SElinux errors.
I've been at this for less than 12 hours so given that timeframe this looks promising.
I'm trying to think of what the best way to go about this is. I could either try to adapt the tree for the new source or I could try to adapt the source for the old tree (use KitKat SElinux implementation on lollipop). The latter would have more success with root but the former is the correct way to do it (and would get us cyanogenmod 12 faster once they start nightlies, as I can push the changes to gerrit)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, any chance you can post your source? You don't have to try and work on it on your own. The more people that look at the progressions you made, the better our chances are at success.
polarEskimo said:
Again, any chance you can post your source? You don't have to try and work on it on your own. The more people that look at the progressions you made, the better our chances are at success.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll push what I've got to github after this experiment
Cyanogen is updating sources to lolipop right now and omni has semi working source so it will be easier to port 5.0 since we wont need to edit device tree that much
Ivan_Meler said:
Cyanogen is updating sources to lolipop right now and omni has semi working source so it will be easier to port 5.0 since we wont need to edit device tree that much
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes but, they have a tentative deadline of dec. 1st to start pushing out the first nightlies. We likely won't be in the first wave either, since d2 is now 3 generations out of date.
I'd much rather just port aosp and have it in 2 weeks rather than wait 3 weeks to even begin work.
Side note. If/when I get this working I'm calling it PotatOS
Managed to work past my problem with SElinux for now, the build has now moved on to... another set of errors!
Build currently hangs at this:
Code:
host C++: libutils_32 <= system/core/libutils/StopWatch.cpp
host C++: libutils_32 <= system/core/libutils/String8.cpp
host C++: libutils_32 <= system/core/libutils/String16.cpp
host C++: libutils_32 <= system/core/libutils/SystemClock.cpp
host C++: libutils_32 <= system/core/libutils/Threads.cpp
host C++: libutils_32 <= system/core/libutils/Timers.cpp
system/core/libutils/Timers.cpp: In function 'nsecs_t systemTime(int)':
system/core/libutils/Timers.cpp:43:13: error: 'CLOCK_BOOTTIME' was not declared in this scope
build/core/binary.mk:618: recipe for target 'out/host/linux-x86/obj32/STATIC_LIBRARIES/libutils_intermediates/Timers.o' failed
make: *** [out/host/linux-x86/obj32/STATIC_LIBRARIES/libutils_intermediates/Timers.o] Error 1
#### make failed to build some targets (01:19 (mm:ss)) ####
Going to bed, will get back at it in the morning. Source should be up on github by tomorrow night
Restl3ss said:
Yes but, they have a tentative deadline of dec. 1st to start pushing out the first nightlies. We likely won't be in the first wave either, since d2 is now 3 generations out of date.
I'd much rather just port aosp and have it in 2 weeks rather than wait 3 weeks to even begin work.
Side note. If/when I get this working I'm calling it PotatOS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm with you on that, I'd rather have pure AOSP than buggy CM nightlies. Also interesting choice of ROM name lol. Thanks for your hard work and I'm looking forward to pulling down your repos so I can take a stab at these compile-time issues.

Categories

Resources