Related
yeah guys source code for ICS was released today. to bad we dont have a lot of developers and thanks to the ones who stayed with us.
And you cant post this in one of the many threads open for this exact same reason?????
fcisco13 said:
And you cant post this in one of the many threads open for this exact same reason?????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope. Apparently He/She is a special snowflake
Thanks for the info but we will add this thread to the previous 30 threads about ICS.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App
I wish I was a special snow flake...
Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio using XDA App
This is so tiring. Another thread about worthless source code. Source code without drivers compiled for our device against ICS is worthless. Devs cannot build an ICS build that will be stable without specific drivers built for iCS and the new kernel. Until LG releases or at least leaks an ICS build for our phone, we are not going to get a stable ICS rom, despite their being AOSP source code.
jboxer said:
This is so tiring. Another thread about worthless source code. Source code without drivers compiled for our device against ICS is worthless. Devs cannot build an ICS build that will be stable without specific drivers built for iCS and the new kernel. Until LG releases or at least leaks an ICS build for our phone, we are not going to get a stable ICS rom, despite their being AOSP source code.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i never said anything about the devs to start making rom didnt i???? now that source code is release brands like lg will start working on then since they said they would. i know htc said that ics will come to my sensation earlier 2012
and even though developers make an ics rom without the manufacture release its versio it would not work correctly because of the drivers. it will have problems with gps etc etc
jboxer said:
This is so tiring. Another thread about worthless source code. Source code without drivers compiled for our device against ICS is worthless. Devs cannot build an ICS build that will be stable without specific drivers built for iCS and the new kernel. Until LG releases or at least leaks an ICS build for our phone, we are not going to get a stable ICS rom, despite their being AOSP source code.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Release of ICS source code is still an important development for community rom development.
We can still get a stable build by compiling ICS against Gingerbread kernel.
We have fully working drivers for Gingerbread kernel.
Yes but the cookie in Ice Cream Sandwich is not Gingerbread.
raddy said:
Release of ICS source code is still an important development for community rom development.
We can still get a stable build by compiling ICS against Gingerbread kernel.
We have fully working drivers for Gingerbread kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really hope you're right. My only concern before getting this phone was that of NVIDIA providing the devs with the drivers that we need for further Android updates.
Ice Cream Sandwhich AOSP source code has been released since late last year, I am just curious as to why the Skyrocket doesnt have a working ICS custom rom as yet.
I am a noob, but I notice many other phones have alpha builds and/or beta builds while all we have( much credit to its developers) are themed roms that look like ICS
Why is this?
ICS source code does NOT equal Samsung Kernel Source code....
you must have all the proprietary bits and blobs in order for it to work....
Drivers for the device. There has been plenty-o-talk about the subject. Samy has to release the source ICS kernel with the ICS drivers.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium
I'm not understanding Tjisana's question given that people like seanzscreams' have produced the Sky ICS ROM.
Is that not what he's after?
That rom is ICS themed. It is ICS in appearance only. Still a great rom but doesn't bring the features and additions that a true ICS rom will bring
Sent via smoke signal
Ah - got it. Shows you what little I know. That explains why the version number is still 2.3.6 and not 4.0.
Thanks for the quick update.
X10D3 said:
Drivers for the device. There has been plenty-o-talk about the subject. Samy has to release the source ICS kernel with the ICS drivers.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the info
Appreciate it
Who's using cornerstone and what ROM are you using and is it stable for day to day use?
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
Im wondering the same thing.. but I can only see 2 available.
CM9 and Team EOS
I tried CM9 and wifi didnt work so I couldn't really test much
Do you know any other?
Edit: Just read that Team EOS is AOSP Rom... I don't like to flash those..
Hi alls, I'm a newbie what is cornestone?
thank you
ezechiele25172012 said:
Hi alls, I'm a newbie what is cornestone?
thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOqBAfMwCAc
LOL at you not liking AOSP ROMs LMAO what do you think that CM9 is?
AOSP = Android Open Source Project. It is when Google releases the source code to a particular version of android (GB, HC, ICS) and this source is adapted to your device by usually taking existing kernels (or kernel source code) and drivers for your device and making the Google source code run, pretty much without many additions..although, if you like spice, you will find it in an AOSP ROM. Asus' Stock ROM is also based on Googles source, but then Asus is not obligated to release it's proprietary source (what it adds to the OS that Google AOSP ROM did not have, bloatware, drivers, etc). Therefore what we are able to do in a ROM based on Asus' is limited compared to what can be done in an AOSP ROM. Some are stable, some aren't..it isn't a function of it being an 'AOSP' ROM lol it's just how developed or underdeveloped the ROM is. CM9 for TF101 is way more unstable than CM9 for my Epic, they are both AOSP and from the same source even, and they run differently- because they are at different stages of development and being developed by different teams of people.
Don't be so quick to scoff at AOSP ROMs..they are not all the same, and nothing in the term 'AOSP' means 'unstable' or otherwise anything to be afraid of.
luna_c666 said:
LOL at you not liking AOSP ROMs LMAO what do you think that CM9 is?
AOSP = Android Open Source Project. It is when Google releases the source code to a particular version of android (GB, HC, ICS) and this source is adapted to your device by usually taking existing kernels (or kernel source code) and drivers for your device and making the Google source code run, pretty much without many additions..although, if you like spice, you will find it in an AOSP ROM. Asus' Stock ROM is also based on Googles source, but then Asus is not obligated to release it's proprietary source (what it adds to the OS that Google AOSP ROM did not have, bloatware, drivers, etc). Therefore what we are able to do in a ROM based on Asus' is limited compared to what can be done in an AOSP ROM. Some are stable, some aren't..it isn't a function of it being an 'AOSP' ROM lol it's just how developed or underdeveloped the ROM is. CM9 for TF101 is way more unstable than CM9 for my Epic, they are both AOSP and from the same source even, and they run differently- because they are at different stages of development and being developed by different teams of people.
Don't be so quick to scoff at AOSP ROMs..they are not all the same, and nothing in the term 'AOSP' means 'unstable' or otherwise anything to be afraid of.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok thank you very much for your perfect explanation. But why do you say that CM9 for TF101 is unstable? In the relative thread i read that the users are very satisfied by this rom.
Dont lol at me! hehehe
I know CM9 is AOSP.. that was the first and only AOSP Rom I ever tried..
I'm not scoffing AOSP Roms off I just didn't see the advantage but I didn't know that Asus doesn't release it's proprietary source.
Don't be so quick to lol at people apart from that it was a good reply... I might give them a go again in the future
Malandro2011 said:
Dont lol at me! hehehe
I know CM9 is AOSP.. that was the first and only AOSP Rom I ever tried..
I'm not scoffing AOSP Roms off I just didn't see the advantage but I didn't know that Asus doesn't release it's proprietary source.
Don't be so quick to lol at people apart from that it was a good reply... I might give them a go again in the future
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi Malandro, what is your experience with CM9 ROM? Are you satisfied, is it fast?
thanks
ezechiele25172012 said:
Hi Malandro, what is your experience with CM9 ROM? Are you satisfied, is it fast?
thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried that cm9 with cornerstone and it is buggy...
The non cornerstone cm9 would be better but I didn't try it...
Malandro2011 said:
I tried that cm9 with cornerstone and it is buggy...
The non cornerstone cm9 would be better but I didn't try it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok but I had read it's come with ICS 4.0.4; what are the differences you noticed between 4.0.4 and 4.0.3 ICS version?
thank you
What, in your opinion, is the best AOSP/AOKP ROM for the Verizon Galaxy SIII that is based on the latest SOURE CODE (4.2.1)?
Thanks in advance!
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
RBarnett09 said:
What, in your opinion, is the best AOSP/AOKP ROM for the Verizon Galaxy SIII that is based on the latest OTA?
Thanks in advance!
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you wont find one. AOSP and VZW software are independent of each other.
do some research for yourself. visit the original development section for AOSP options, and developement for TWouchwiz options.
check out Jellybeans, its got AOPS theming with TW functionality.
RBarnett09 said:
What, in your opinion, is the best AOSP/AOKP ROM for the Verizon Galaxy SIII that is based on the latest OTA?
Thanks in advance!
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The AOSP developers are no longer developing 4.1.1 based ROMs they are making ROMs based on the 4.2.1 source code. If you want AOSP ROMs go to the original android development section. If you want ROMs based on the official ota then go to the android development section. Just so you know AOSP ROMs are never based on official ota updates but on source codes released prior to any ota by any carrier which is why they are the first to develop the latest version of Android. I can't give an opinion on the AOSP ROMs as they are all in beta and will have problems. In the meantime check out the ROMs in the android development section while the AOSP developers work out the kinks to their ROMs.
jmxc23 said:
The AOSP developers are no longer developing 4.1.1 based ROMs they are making ROMs based on the 4.2.1 source code. If you want AOSP ROMs go to the original android development section. If you want ROMs based on the official ota then go to the android development section. Just so you know AOSP ROMs are never based on official ota updates but on source codes released prior to any ota by any carrier which is why they are the first to develop the latest version of Android. I can't give an opinion on the AOSP ROMs as they are all in beta and will have problems. In the meantime check out the ROMs in the android development section while the AOSP developers work out the kinks to their ROMs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is true. I'm looking for AOSP or AOKP based on the 4.2.1 source code. Not a fan at all of TW... I like having that Vanilla Android feel.
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
RBarnett09 said:
This is true. I'm looking for AOSP or AOKP based on the 4.2.1 source code. Not a fan at all of TW... I like having that Vanilla Android feel.
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
check out Pure google in the original development section.
here you go
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2066467
If you like that vanilla feel then why are you asking for AOSP ROMs? With the exception of the Pure Google ROM, AOSP ROMs are not vanilla looking.
jmxc23 said:
If you like that vanilla feel then why are you asking for AOSP ROMs? With the exception of the Pure Google ROM, AOSP ROMs are not vanilla looking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
???
Every AOSP ROM has touhwiz removed... making it Vanilla basically. Or am I wrong?
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
RBarnett09 said:
???
Every AOSP ROM has touhwiz removed... making it Vanilla basically. Or am I wrong?
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rbarnett, I know what you mean by vanilla. I tried all the asop roms and I gotta say I liked liquid smooth the best. Rc9, built on 4.1 and still available, has a lot of nice features that the newer and less developed beta3 (4.2) does not. All the 4.2 ROMs have busted Bluetooth right now but besides for that they seem to run pretty good. If you don't mind some minor bugs, they are all pretty good to play around with.
H
afm1118 said:
Rbarnett, I know what you mean by vanilla. I tried all the asop roms and I gotta say I liked liquid smooth the best. Rc9, built on 4.1 and still available, has a lot of nice features that the newer and less developed beta3 (4.2) does not. All the 4.2 ROMs have busted Bluetooth right now but besides for that they seem to run pretty good. If you don't mind some minor bugs, they are all pretty good to play around with.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Basically a ROM that looks as if Nova launcher or Apex launcher is running... but has samsungs touchwiz removed. Also all the menus are basic ICS and not touchwiz menus. I'm glad you get what I'm saying.
I'll check out Liquid smooth RC9 then since I need working Bluetooth.
Thanks for the recommendation.
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
Hi all,
We need Developers to build CM for Micromax A110...it has a forum on XDA....and we've got open source device tree:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2324246
Please, it's a request to all the developers on XDA to help us port CM to our device...
Me and all other users will provide all the support we can...
Eagerly waiting for a Reply...
I will help for our community
Sent from my Micromax A110 using xda premium
As a user of A110 , I am also requesting to help our development team ....pls
Sent from my Micromax A110 using xda app-developers app
Here's a CM9 development on mt6577 http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2246892
Sent from my Micromax A110 using xda app-developers app
Rahulsingh190 said:
Here's a CM9 development on mt6577 http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2246892
Sent from my Micromax A110 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you confirm CM9 and CM 10 require similar specs?
Then we can use the source tree used there to edit this MMX one accordingly...
Since varun.chitre has stopped we have to get this done by ourselves....
Sent from my Micromax A110 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Guys with out the full kernel source which the OEM refuses to provide your not gonna get very far. And the source for the MTK chip is not the full source. We are in talks now about what to do with these forums as they break our gpl rules.
Wayne Tech Nexus
zelendel said:
Guys with out the full kernel source which the OEM refuses to provide your not gonna get very far. And the source for the MTK chip is not the full source. We are in talks now about what to do with these forums as they break our gpl rules.
Wayne Tech Nexus
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess the forum would be closed then...Great...I should jump towards my One then....
Sent from my HTC One 801e using Tapatalk 4 Beta
This ain't no normal phone.
Rahulsingh190 said:
Here's a CM9 development on mt6577 http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2246892
Sent from my Micromax A110 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The version you stated uses the same thunderzap kernel by vatun.chitre[most part of it]..and it will work without much problem because cm9 is based on 4.0.4 and thunderzap is based on mmxa110 4.0.4 kernel sources which was released by mmx at the first place....and we still do not know if they will release JB kernel sources or not…so I am not sure if cm10 works will go the same way as of the cm9....I will try to compare the two kernels later today though......
Sent from my HTC One 801e using Tapatalk 4 Beta
This ain't no normal phone.
Guys for now we should first CM 9 booting with the sources available. Then we should think of CM 10.I m learning these things now, so I can contribute something valuable
Sent from my Micromax A110 using xda app-developers app
Rahulsingh190 said:
Guys for now we should first CM 9 booting with the sources available. Then we should think of CM 10.I m learning these things now, so I can contribute something valuable
Sent from my Micromax A110 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CM9 is not a problem, IMO. I think If someone just starts it it can be completed within a week[atleast boot].. Because everything is available.[ kernel source + CM sources + device tree]. But CM10 requires 4.2 kernel sources which has not been released while CM9 requires 4.0.4 kernel[source code available publicly + thunderzap is based on 4.0.4 kernel, so no need to do much work on kernel.]
EDIT:
A110 Device tree : https://github.com/varunchitre15/android_device_a110
Thunderzap[based on 4.0.4 kernel sources] : https://github.com/varunchitre15/thunderzap_canvas_2
and CM9 sources links : you can get from their website...
4.0.4 Similar Stock Kernel : https://github.com/aquila-dev/wiko_s9081_stock_kernel
Now what I found yesterday is WIKO Cink-King JB kernel sources : https://github.com/wiko-sources/cink-king
So, I now think that If we do some progress we can correctly boot CM10 by using the JB kernel to edit and get a custom kernel for a110...I am not very sure...This is what I think...If anyone can advice, It would be great...
fyi - those build DO NOT REQUIRE any Custom Kernel. i switched zImage in the CM9 boot.img and worked like a charm. we`ll need to get those mediatek propietary sources working. im working on a CM9 myself, does not get further than our french friends here http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2246892 .
Chrizzly92 said:
......we`ll need to get those mediatek propietary sources working.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have no idea on this part...because, till today I thought kernel customizations are needed to run cm. So we can use the cink-king sources + device tree a110 for this. I really have no idea...
Sent from my HTC One 801e using Tapatalk 4 Beta
This ain't no normal phone.
me neither xD does not have such coding skillz yet. for this build, on this point, it isn`t necessary. maybe you cant use e.g. TUN/TAP when not compiled in the kernel, but basic features should work.
Delete
I'm one of those frenchies that try to make it work. As you saw we made it boot actually without that much problem, but before saying it works there's a lot of work.
I'd like to explain one small thing here since it seems people or thinking that because Cyanogen released the sources, we can get something working on any device. THIS IS WRONG. Even if we have a kernel sources or a "device tree"
Cyanogen includes some vendor sources, like Qualcomm for exemple. This why you'll get some things like
Code:
BOARD_USES_QCOM_HARDWARE := true
COMMON_GLOBAL_CFLAGS += -DQCOM_HARDWARE -DBINDER_COMPAT -DANCIENT_GL
COMMON_GLOBAL_CFLAGS += -DQCOM_LEGACY_OMX
in your "device tree" configuration.
Then take a look at the stuff that are in android_hardware_* there's some source code for qcom, some for samsung some for texas instrument and strangely nothing regarding mediatek. Those files are important otherwise we need to use the binaries already compiled to make them work.
Looking at the assembly code from the actual wiko-peax running under ICS, some modifications have bee done on hwcomposer. So we can't use directly the provided headers that are inside cyanogen sources since they are not the one used by mediatek. Mediatek hwcomposer for instance uses a mmumapper that nobody else uses.
I didn't look deeply at the JB binaries from mediatek, but I don't think that they like miraculously decided to switch and be directly compatible with the AOSP sources, so here there's a lot of work to do on the sources themselves.
This is why we're trying to work on CM9 since some partial sources have been leaked about an actual device running ICS. Thoses sources are much more modified then the one that goes with the binaries we have, but can be start point.