Database Info

If you have twitter....tweet to HTC so we can get our Kernel!!

I'm just putting this in a new thread so that everyone can see it without having to accidentally come across it in the Hero Source Attempts thread... Some other users have realized that if everyone who has a twitter account messages HTC through twitter, it becomes bad PR for them because everyone sees it, and they are more likely to meet our demands at a speedier pace.
If you really want lots of cool ROMs and lots of options, we gotta get that dang kernel, and this seems to be the best tactic so far. Supposedly it worked in getting the GSM kernel. SO GET TO WORK PEOPLE! START TWEETING/Messaging THROUGH TWITTER @HTC!!
Here is the original post by another user:
I personally believe that these two methods would work fastest. If they get 1000 emails, no one hears about it. But if they get 1000 tweets, or an article on Engadget, it's bad PR. This is basically what happened with the GSM Hero:
slashdot article - tech.slashdot.org/story/09/10/16/1720224/HTC-Dragging-Feet-On-GPL-Source-Release-For-Hero-Phone
acknowledgement - twitter.com/htc/status/4928377685
compliance - twitter.com/htc/status/5071201112
admission of responsibility - twitter.com/htc/status/5071514606
(sorry, I've been a member for almost 3 years but this is my first post... can't post links)
I tweeted the following, please retweet or write your own similar: @htc When can we expect to see the CDMA (Sprint) Hero kernel source code? It's been 3 months, this is ridiculous! #gplviolation

I posted a tweet, lets hope this will push them to at least acknowledge the requests.

posted a tweet too hope it helps

Posted a Tweet, i pray engadet will pick up on this.

lol been posting at least 2 tweets a day for the last 3 days. glad to see others are joining in.

Yup. Tweeted
@HTC come on, it's long past the weekend.CDMA Hero sources please.#HTC get your act together #GPL #Violation #CDMA #Hero #Sources
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to try and get as many tags in as possible...
EDIT: Well, a search for #gplviolation on twitter is certainly interesting! (Try it...)

if you search htc you get a lot of people asking how to update to 2.x reply tweeet them to get the word out if you can.

Done! I hope we see something soon.

Done! Tweeting twice a day.

If you post a tweet regarding this, please be sure to include @htc, @sprint, and add the #gplviolation hashtag for tracking purposes.

tweet sent!

Does it really matter much if we get the kernel? As I understand it, there's a load of closed-source proprietary software running under the hood on our devices.

It depends. If HTC compiled proprietary code into the kernel itself, they're between a rock and a hard spot. Under the GPL, anything physically compiled into the kernel MUST have its source released. If HTC licensed proprietary camera drivers from anyone (Qualcomm, most likely) under terms that forbid them from disclosing the source, it's *their* problem to worry about.
IMHO, if that's the situation HTC is in, the best thing they could do to at least get everyone off their back would be to just go ahead and release their best 2.1 internal build (officially, for testing with the Android Emulator, since they can't officially condone rooting) as a "developer's preview". If they did, the necessary files would be ripped and built into a working 2.1 heroc distro within days, if not hours, and pretty much everyone would forget about the source for now & give them some breathing room for a few months.
As I understand it, even if HTC's 2.6.29 kernel had bugs, as long as those bugs weren't with msm_camera itself, we could use THAT 2.6.29 kernel to bootstrap newer builds of 2.6.29 (kind of like how Microsoft used prerelease versions of Visual Studio 2010 and Windows 7 to build Windows 7 itself). The problem now is that there's a literal hole in the 2.6.29 kernel that we can't fill, because we have neither the include file's source nor a compiled binary to drop in place.
Now, it's important to remember that we can't actually demand the 2.1 kernel yet under the GPL, since it hasn't actually been released yet. I'm only mentioning that as an *alternative* that would satisfy pretty much everyone for now, to give HTC some constructive alternatives to consider if releasing the full 1.5 kernel source for heroc is, in fact, completely out of the question due to licensing problems arising from msm_camera. Regardless of whether or not HTC can release the source to msm_camera for heroc, they can obviously redistribute 2.6.29 binaries built from it... and one of those binaries would be more than adequate for our purposes right now.

miamicanes said:
, it's important to remember that we can't actually demand the 2.1 kernel yet under the GPL, since it hasn't actually been released yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I realize you are referring to a CDMA-specific kernel (I thought 2.0 and after would be GSM and CDMA ready?), but the kernel for 2.1 HAS been commercially released. It's running on the Nexus One. Demanding the code under GPL is perfectly reasonable.
I mention this because this problem is now beyond any specific device. The manufacturers and carriers are, in my opinion, abusing the GPL and we ought to have a united front on that fact.

5tr4t4 said:
I realize you are referring to a CDMA-specific kernel (I thought 2.0 and after would be GSM and CDMA ready?), but the kernel for 2.1 HAS been commercially released. It's running on the Nexus One. Demanding the code under GPL is perfectly reasonable.
I mention this because this problem is now beyond any specific device. The manufacturers and carriers are, in my opinion, abusing the GPL and we ought to have a united front on that fact.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The source for the kernel compiled for the Nexus One, which uses completely different hardware, is (or must be) available. HTC does not need to provide it, as they are not the company selling the device - Google is.

^^^ Just to add to what he said, the kernel for the Nexus One also lacks the compiled-in driver for the CDMA Hero's camera.
Here's an example to illustrate why the GPL places so much practical importance upon the availability of ALL source used to build the kernel... and why it's generally accepted that proprietary binary kernel loadable modules are OK (at least, among pragmatists like Linus). Suppose the maker of your PC used a proprietary NVIDIA chipset with no public documentation, and shipped it with Ubuntu Linux on the hard drive. However, suppose they compiled the video driver directly into the kernel.
Anyone who bought the computer would be put in a needlessly bad position -- unless someone reverse-engineered the chipset, you wouldn't be able to use any distro of Linux not officially blessed and released by the computer's maker. You might be able to use a slightly newer build of Ubuntu if someone did a binary diff on the newer kernel and pulled out the metaphorical duct tape. You might possiblybe able to get away with using the old kernel in a newer distro (enjoying some bugfixes in the other programs besides the kernel itself). You might even be able to diff a newer build of Linux on a newer, but similar, computer released by that maker that they happened to ship with a newer kernel. But you'd never really be able to build your own kernel the way God and Linus intended, because the kernel and proprietary video driver would be inseparable. If you tried, the compiler would complain because it was missing a very, very important #include file -- the proprietary video driver.
On the other hand, suppose the manufacturer bundled the proprietary video driver as a loadable kernel module (.ko file). NOW, things change significantly. Richard Stallman might still grouse because you don't have the source to the video driver, but in utilitarian terms, you're much better off than you were in scenario #1. Although you're still dependent upon the manufacturer for a newer video driver, because it's physically separate from the kernel itself, you can build your own newer, better, and different kernels whenever and however you'd like. As long as the low-level interface between the kernel itself and the kernel module doesn't change on your platform, the two are sufficiently abstracted from each other to allow one to change without affecting the other.
IMHO, the most disgraceful part of this whole thing is that we theoretically have phones running an open platform, but we're still reduced to ripping binary images and tacking them together with metaphorical duct tape, just like we were with Windows Mobile. If anything, it's gotten worse. At least Windows Mobile didn't have to be rooted, and the newer versions generally didn't break the previous version's device drivers. Sigh.

miamicanes said:
^^^ Just to add to what he said, the kernel for the Nexus One also lacks the compiled-in driver for the CDMA Hero's camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right, I understand this. I was making the point that the fact that 2.1 has a commercial release means the we can demand the code under GPL. Shouldn't we be aiming for a unified android kernel source with GSM and CDMA support, adding binary drivers/libs (or setting device-specific compile flags) as needed? Nexus being controlled by Google (who seems to be releasing their modifications immediately on git) might be a starting place for this de facto Android.
I'm simply advocating for thinking beyond our own personal devices.

Holy shut!!! Welcome to the age of technology.... **** with us and we will tweet Ur ass to death. Lol. It's an all Twitter offensive. Were declaring Twitter war on HTC until we get source. ROFL

@5tr4t4: well, it was more for the benefit of others who might stumble on this thread and aren't quite sure why it's such a big deal
I think what Jonnythan was saying is that there's no need to get the source to the Nexus One's kernel from HTC, because you can download it right now directly from Google.
As far as platform neutrality goes, we'd be 99.9% of the way there if HTC would just move the proprietary stuff out of the kernel proper and into loadable kernel modules so they'd simultaneously be in compliance with the GPL and not making our lives needlessly difficult by making us jump over hurdles that shouldn't be blocking our way in the first place

miamicanes said:
As far as platform neutrality goes, we'd be 99.9% of the way there if HTC would just move the proprietary stuff out of the kernel proper and into loadable kernel modules so they'd simultaneously be in compliance with the GPL and not making our lives needlessly difficult by making us jump over hurdles that shouldn't be blocking our way in the first place
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If they were to move some stuff to binary *.ko's they'd most likely move all non-boot-essential hardware support out there, which would actually make things much, much more challenging for us. That way they could have a "universal" kernel (and GPL source tree) that is used across devices, and each device just has its own *.ko's. They'd only have to release one (fairly useless) tarball for GPL compliance. Be careful what you ask for.

Request to Release Kernel Source; HTC's Response

I sent a request to HTC regarding their timeframe for releasing the kernel source code for the ATT/Rogers One X. This is,what they said:
"I love customizing my device and I will be glad to advise you regarding the source code for the One X. HTC will typically publish on http://developer.htc.com or htcdev.com the Kernel open source code for recently released devices as soon as possible. HTC will normally publish this within 90 to 120 days. This time frame is within the requirements of the open source community."
Looks like we have a while to go gang! Fortunately we some resourceful folks here that make magic happen with available information!
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium

90-120 days - is "as soon as possible"??? HTC, you do realize that time frame is 1/4 - 1/3 of the year, right?
IMO the strategy here is by that time a new device will be born and people would forget about old one...

This may be a stretch, but it could also be that they want to give users a time to use the device as is in order to discover any bugs that may be present and would need to be patched in a future update. No one is more adept at finding bugs than users...thousands of them.

Tell them that is a complete lie.
The HTC Sensation received the ICS source code within 15 days of its release. They got the ICS update on the 16th and they received the source code not long after.
Read what I wrote to them
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1679112

Hey Guys, we are working on the same issue in the Desire C community. I see you have plenty of custom ROMs, but let me ask if HTC has released the full source for you, and if yes how did happen, what was the process?
Thanks a lot in advance, I'm really curious about your case. Click on my signature if you want to see our email thread
And actually, we are currently sending organised emails to HTC, if you have a couple of minutes free it would be a huge help if you sent some of our templates to them.
Here are the details:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=40051652
Thank you and see you later!

neoyoli said:
Hey Guys, we are working on the same issue in the Desire C community. I see you have plenty of custom ROMs, but let me ask if HTC has released the full source for you, and if yes how did happen, what was the process?
Thanks a lot in advance, I'm really curious about your case. Click on my signature if you want to see our email thread
And actually, we are currently sending organised emails to HTC, if you have a couple of minutes free it would be a huge help if you sent some of our templates to them.
Here are the details:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=40051652
Thank you and see you later!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe we have source for all Jelly Bean bases except AT&T.
My guess is that HTC pays no attention to these petitions and letter-writing campaigns.

It's a bit more complicated in our case, since we don't have very experienced devs, and did not even know what was going on with our kernel, and we started to roll the issue up only recently, partly due to the info we got from HTC through our emails. They are more communicative now and the case got escalated, thanks to the community effort

HTC sometimes wait up to 90days(or slightly over) to release source code.
It would be an extremely rare case that after 90 days source is not released.
HTC appear to prioritize source releases based on the sales volume of the device. The more a device sells, the faster its source tends to arrive.
Also similarities in hardware to existing devices also seems to help. The newer never before seen platforms tend to take longer.
High end phones always tend to get more love.
You have source for 4.0(2.xx ROM's), what source are you waiting on?
Has you device received 4.1? If so when? Has it been 90 days yet?
Last I head Desire C will not receive Jelly Bean from HTC due to 512mb RAM. I just checked numerous of the carriers and none show updates for 2.00 ROM's, the 2.00 have source released.

You are right, we ruled out the possibility of the official JB. Although some say it would be even faster, but I'm not expert on this. What I understood so far is even if it is so, they are not doing it because it is an entry-level device. Fair enough (well, given the conditions), we can do it for ourselves.
The problem is the WiFi driver "ath6kl_sdio.ko", it fails to compile with any other ROMs then a Sense-based. It creates the folder but will be empty. However we are trying to patch it atm, and some more experienced devs joined recently.
What we still don't know is, that there might be a problem with the source of which HTC might not even aware of, since they did not test it with custom ROMs, and atm they say (in a credible, non-brush-off manner) the source is full, but escalated the case further. So we are waiting for that as well.
So things just started to cook lately. Actually if you have an experienced kernel dev, it would be a huge help if he could look into our source and tell what is going on with it:good: So that we can communicate it effectively to HTC or maybe even solve the issue directly.

Stepping down from ROM Development & Releases

Heya everyone,
As some of you know, I’ve been developing Android for the HTC Desire S for over a year now. Initially working alongside SuperKid, then maintaining CM7 alone. nk111 joined me as joint maintainer when developing CM9 and he has done a truly spectacular job with both CM9 and CM10. I cannot express how grateful I am to him for his tireless effort.
CM7 development was nice and straightforward, leading to a quick initial release. It rapidly reached a stable state and became an officially supported device with CM7.1. However, the the road to CM9/10 has been anything but smooth. Even today we rely on code to use both the older 2.6 kernel and Gingerbread libraries in ICS and JB. Whilst this code mostly works, the bugs and crashes keep the ROM from losing its alpha status. For example, issues with outdated touchscreen drivers, corruption in the Android interface, hard-crashes when using heavy 3D applications, and more.
HTC promised the official ICS upgrade for the Desire S in the June to July timeframe but, aside from a single chinese release, there hasn’t been any further progress. Whilst HTC have removed the release schedule from their website, they still publicly state they are committed to releasing the Desire S update:
We’re happy to confirm that we are still on schedule to deliver ICS to the Desire S. Stay tuned for more details!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
However, the scheduled release was the June-July time-frame. I don't need to tell you that it's now August.
HTC have not been forthcoming with the 3.0 kernel source either, this is a key requirement for pushing forward ICS / JB development. The chinese ICS OTA brought hope that we would see this code sooner rather than later, but numerous attempts at contact with HTC have proven fruitless.
Development has largely stalled for me. The time spent on trying to port the Desire S to the 3.0 kernel taught me a lot, but ultimately lead to nothing. Aside from a couple of minor maintenance releases, I haven’t managed any real Android development in 2 months due to a complete lack of both motivation and time.
Regrettably I’ve decided to stand down as the maintainer for CyanogenMod. It’s been a wild ride over the past 12 months, I’ve met many new friends and learned a lot, but for now I feel it’s time to just be a regular user.
I still plan to hang around the XDA forums, help out where I can and keep in touch, but I won’t be doing ROM development or releases for the foreseeable future. What of CyanogenMod? nk111 has already agreed to take over as the full maintainer and my access to push changes won't be removed, so the door is open for the future. nk111 and I will discuss how to handle the CyanogenMod development threads tomorrow.
So before I end this post, there is one last thing I want to say, and it’s by far the most important:
Thank you to every single one of you who has sent kind messages, clicked that “Thanks” button, or parted with your hard-earned cash and sent a donation my way. It’s truly an honour to be part of this community. To see the work I’ve contributed to be used by tens of thousands of users is just an amazing feeling, I’m truly touched.
Thank you!

Sorry must break the trend...but
The amount and method of thanks that you've received (by button and not wasteful comments) shows that you're appreciated by those in the know - that count!
Others please take note!
Apologies for sounding like an arrogant [email protected], but this forum, especially the Development section would greatly benefit from this lesson.
Sywepd form my DsereiS

I am so sorry to hear this but I fully understand your reasons, this is no fortunate situation for anyone.
Thank you so very much for all the time and effort you've put in during this time, I know the whole community will miss your dedicated work!

Nexx said:
Heya everyone,
As some of you know, I’ve been developing Android for the HTC Desire S for over a year now. Initially working alongside SuperKid, then maintaining CM7 alone. nk111 joined me as joint maintainer when developing CM9 and he has done a truly spectacular job with both CM9 and CM10. I cannot express how grateful I am to him for his tireless effort.
CM7 development was nice and straightforward, leading to a quick initial release. It rapidly reached a stable state and became an officially supported device with CM7.1. However, the the road to CM9/10 has been anything but smooth. Even today we rely on code to use both the older 2.6 kernel and Gingerbread libraries in ICS and JB. Whilst this code mostly works, the bugs and crashes keep the ROM from losing its alpha status. For example, issues with outdated touchscreen drivers, corruption in the Android interface, hard-crashes when using heavy 3D applications, and more.
HTC promised the official ICS upgrade for the Desire S in the June to July timeframe but, aside from a single chinese release, there hasn’t been any further progress. Whilst HTC have removed the release schedule from their website, they still publicly state they are committed to releasing the Desire S update:However, the scheduled release was the June-July time-frame. I don't need to tell you that it's now August.
HTC have not been forthcoming with the 3.0 kernel source either, this is a key requirement for pushing forward ICS / JB development. The chinese ICS OTA brought hope that we would see this code sooner rather than later, but numerous attempts at contact with HTC have proven fruitless.
Development has largely stalled for me. The time spent on trying to port the Desire S to the 3.0 kernel taught me a lot, but ultimately lead to nothing. Aside from a couple of minor maintenance releases, I haven’t managed any real Android development in 2 months due to a complete lack of both motivation and time.
Regrettably I’ve decided to stand down as the maintainer for CyanogenMod. It’s been a wild ride over the past 12 months, I’ve met many new friends and learned a lot, but for now I feel it’s time to just be a regular user.
I still plan to hang around the XDA forums, help out where I can and keep in touch, but I won’t be doing ROM development or releases for the foreseeable future. What of CyanogenMod? nk111 has already agreed to take over as the full maintainer and my access to push changes won't be removed, so the door is open for the future. nk111 and I will discuss how to handle the CyanogenMod development threads tomorrow.
So before I end this post, there is one last thing I want to say, and it’s by far the most important:
Thank you to every single one of you who has sent kind messages, clicked that “Thanks” button, or parted with your hard-earned cash and sent a donation my way. It’s truly an honour to be part of this community. To see the work I’ve contributed to be used by tens of thousands of users is just an amazing feeling, I’m truly touched.
Thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for making me stick with my Desire S for more than 2 months

:') not just you, I'm also touched. See ya in the future brah

thank you for your works!!!!!!

Simon,
Your work on the Desire S has been greatly appreciated. Take care, and I hope all the best for you

Thanks a lot. You made a great job!

Thanks for all your hard work Nexx!

You made me love a phone more than I ever could imagine.
Thanks for all the efforts and keeping the Desire S in good hands

Samsungs's ambitious target missed while ignoring open community

What do you think of this news?
https://m.gsmarena.com/analysts_pre...ion_target_of_smartphone_sales-news-31822.php
They tend to be ambitious with their target but did not consider providing support to open source community. It is Samsung's common response to the community after they present new flagship. Though it changed in Samsung S9 and Note 8 because of treble, i wonder how they respond to support the open source community. Even though, it still Android OS they are using in ther devices.
What is your view to this?

Note 8 does not support treble

What does the article have to do with your post? They have nothing in common.

ebautista said:
What do you think of this news?
https://m.gsmarena.com/analysts_pre...ion_target_of_smartphone_sales-news-31822.php
They tend to be ambitious with their target but did not consider providing support to open source community. It is Samsung's common response to the community after they present new flagship. Though it changed in Samsung S9 and Note 8 because of treble, i wonder how they respond to support the open source community. Even though, it still Android OS they are using in ther devices.
What is your view to this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The open source community makes up such a small number of sales.Take XDA around 8.5 million users If every one of those had a Samsung that isn't even 10 % of sales
majority wins on this as development has such a small impact on sales that this isn't even arguable as Samsung could drop its whole mobile division tomorrow and wouldn't hurt one bit as Me and others have had this very discussion medical equipment,Construction of buildings,And ship building is there big income...
Mobile is like a side job
And this day in age It is apparent Not just any one but anyone can make a good decent phone.....
Either way threads like these always end badly so im closing it now:good:

Petition : LineageOS support for Nokia 8

Hello fellow TA-1004/TA-1012 users.
Nokia 8 has been a bittersweet experience for most of us. The insane price drop killing it's resale value. Stock but buggy and sub par software. It's a flagship that has ticked as many wrong boxes as it did right.
But the software experience leaves a lot to be desired.
http://chng.it/5X8ncWT6XB
Let's go ahead and sign this petition in numbers to get LineageOS official support for this device.
Please spread the word.

Eh? The issue is not at LineageOS, they would support it if there only was something to work with.
The issue is HMD Global unwilling to provide sufficient sources or provide any help for the community around their devices.
LineageOS can't just throw developers into puzzling proprietary blobs. They will just be shooting in the dark and will have a real hard time maintaining anything. You need a proper source code or clear device specifications to make anything usable..
Modding and puzzling around vendors firmware is totally another thing than actually maintain code.

Signed!