Related
Alright, noob here. Since I cannot post in the PACMAN development thread (http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2164406) I will put this here.
- Problems installing PACMAN ROM
- After receiving "Errors Flashing", failures, downgraded recovery to TWRP 2.3.3.0
- 2.3.3.0 displayed "Error 7"
- Searching on error 7 led me down the path of the assert checks
- updater-script assert command in PACMAN ROM package is checking for model "ville".
- My HTC One S Special edition returns "villeplus" from "adb shell getprop ro.product.device"
My understanding is that the North American S4 and the Special Edition share identical hardware, only differing in drive size (16 vs. 64GB), so I am assuming any ROM designed for the ville will work on my phone.
Assuming it will I should be able to edit the "updater-script" file, but when I extract it windows is telling me that 23 files are duplicates. I'm not sure if this is because its windows vs. Linux that I'm extracting it on?? In any case, I don't seem to be able to modify the file without adversely affecting the integrity of the archive. Also would assume replacing the file will affect the MD5 hash which I believe TWRP checks when loading the ROM?
So first off, can someone confirm that this ROM will be compatible with my phone and 2, any suggestions on modifying the updater-script file within the archive?
Update
I was able to modify the updater-script file tonight using file X-Plore and text edit, so now the script is looking for "villeplus" rather than ville. My phone is S-OFF which I read means that it does not do signature checks... however, I'm not sure if that also means it bypasses MD5 checksums - I suspect not since I'm pretty sure I saw it verifying MD5 previously. So, since I tampered with the ZIP it still may not work.
My real question now that remains is even if it will work, do I want to flash a ROM built for the ville to my villeplus. The more I read about custom ROMs the more it appears that they are extremely specific to models.
I am still extremely curious to try it... rumor has it that curiosity didn't work out so well for the cat though. :-/
merovingian_a51 said:
I was able to modify the updater-script file tonight using file X-Plore and text edit, so now the script is looking for "villeplus" rather than ville. My phone is S-OFF which I read means that it does not do signature checks... however, I'm not sure if that also means it bypasses MD5 checksums - I suspect not since I'm pretty sure I saw it verifying MD5 previously. So, since I tampered with the ZIP it still may not work.
My real question now that remains is even if it will work, do I want to flash a ROM built for the ville to my villeplus. The more I read about custom ROMs the more it appears that they are extremely specific to models.
I am still extremely curious to try it... rumor has it that curiosity didn't work out so well for the cat though. :-/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately, i have to fully disappoint you.
The villeplus is having the exact same hardware as the ville. Theoretically ideal. Unfortunately, HTC decided to make it a "/data/media" device unlike its brother, the ville.
Explained: the Ville has a partition for the SDCard and its mounted with its own mountpoint, /sdcard.
The Villeplus has a partition for the SDCard too, but its mounted inside the /Data partition as /data/media. This means a lot of problems from every imaginable aspect.
I spend a week together with Torxx from ViperOneS to get Viper to run on it and we found out that a.) the Kernel needs to be adjusted and b.) some libs and etc. which is real dev work and which no dev in the OneS section has time for.
Later i spent another two weeks with Philz and mdmower trying to at least get recovery to mount the sh.it thing as USB, which turned out to be impossible at this time as it is only possible through the MTP protocoll, which no recovery supports as of yet.
Since i am a n00b myself i did not entirely understand the nature of the problem, but it seems to be very complex.
At some point i suggested to actually rewrite the partitions on the phones so they would work the same way as on the ville. I even tried myself and flashed a Ville RUU to my Villeplus (it works, doesnt break anything) but with the same effect as custom roms: my SD was then in Data/media and the internal apps memory and RAM were shifted to somewhere else with not enough space so the phone kept running out of space and crashed often. Also all system components trying to access stuff on the SD failed to find their stuff and crashed.
Since we don't actually have means to change the chip controller programming so it offers the partitions differently to the ROM we cannot go that way either (Zarboz tried to explain it to me but i failed understanding it, somehow the device pathes are put into the actual chip and not part of any RUU, so to change them one would need to have some special software tool like we could have done on the HD2 back then).
The only viable way would be to adjust ROM modules and Kernel to this structure, which won't happen as no dev has this device and there are like maybe 5 active users here.
You are out of luck my friend. Sorry. I too was full of hope and gave it up when all devs i contacted signalled that there is no benefit for them and they wouldn't waste their time basically.
Sneakyghost said:
Unfortunately, i have to fully disappoint you.
The villeplus is having the exact same hardware as the ville. Theoretically ideal. Unfortunately, HTC decided to make it a "/data/media" device unlike its brother, the ville.
Explained: the Ville has a partition for the SDCard and its mounted with its own mountpoint, /sdcard.
The Villeplus has a partition for the SDCard too, but its mounted inside the /Data partition as /data/media. This means a lot of problems from every imaginable aspect.
I spend a week together with Torxx from ViperOneS to get Viper to run on it and we found out that a.) the Kernel needs to be adjusted and b.) some libs and etc. which is real dev work and which no dev in the OneS section has time for.
Later i spent another two weeks with Philz and mdmower trying to at least get recovery to mount the sh.it thing as USB, which turned out to be impossible at this time as it is only possible through the MTP protocoll, which no recovery supports as of yet.
Since i am a n00b myself i did not entirely understand the nature of the problem, but it seems to be very complex.
At some point i suggested to actually rewrite the partitions on the phones so they would work the same way as on the ville. I even tried myself and flashed a Ville RUU to my Villeplus (it works, doesnt break anything) but with the same effect as custom roms: my SD was then in Data/media and the internal apps memory and RAM were shifted to somewhere else with not enough space so the phone kept running out of space and crashed often. Also all system components trying to access stuff on the SD failed to find their stuff and crashed.
Since we don't actually have means to change the chip controller programming so it offers the partitions differently to the ROM we cannot go that way either (Zarboz tried to explain it to me but i failed understanding it, somehow the device pathes are put into the actual chip and not part of any RUU, so to change them one would need to have some special software tool like we could have done on the HD2 back then).
The only viable way would be to adjust ROM modules and Kernel to this structure, which won't happen as no dev has this device and there are like maybe 5 active users here.
You are out of luck my friend. Sorry. I too was full of hope and gave it up when all devs i contacted signalled that there is no benefit for them and they wouldn't waste their time basically.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, Sneakyghost, I can't thank you enough for your prompt (I just PM'd him last night folks) and very thorough response.
I'm wondering why HTC did this - thinking maybe to prevent/protect users from tampering with the device - perhaps other ROMs wouldn't run on it in a stable fashion.. or they just don't want people messing with custom ROMs. Perhaps this was a new architecture for them (wondering if the One and One X followed this same design?).
In any case, looks like I'll be sticking to looking at launchers and custom widgets. I'm actually quite happy with 4.1.1 and Sense (maybe because I'm new to Android, not sure), I mainly wanted to try experiment with custom ROMs, and learn about how all this stuff works. At least till the M4 comes out anyways..
Thanks again so much for your response, it is much appreciated and well explained.
Sneakyghost said:
... Unfortunately, HTC decided to make it a "/data/media" device unlike its brother, the ville.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh the irony, the (unreleased) 4.2 update for ville actually reformats partitions for data media. I don't think the update will ever be officially available to US users, but it is funny nonetheless.
This, my friend, is indeed ironic, if not even sad.
Considering what it means, I come to understand that porting ROM's from Ville to Villeplus would have gotten much easier then. Only that it is too late.
Torxx and I gave up due to the amount of work attached to the previous system structures, but if the Ville turns into a datamedia device with that update, many ROM devs and chefs would have to deal with it plus HTC would have done the most difficult part already anyway...
What a shame that this comes so late now and doesn't even get released probably...
mobile post
Hi all,
I'm planning to root my encrypted Nexus 5 with Lollipop by the latest CF Auto Root. Is it still the case that encrypted phones will be wiped by CF Auto Root? Chainfire said that would no longer be the case on 11 October 2014 (head to his Google+ page for the post). I'm wondering if the latest CF Auto Root for Nexus 5 Lollipop will wipe my encrypted storage.
It would be great if Chainfire could answer my question.
Thanks!
yes, it will no longer touch the data.
See his October 10, 2014 post.
CF-Auto-Root
There have been a few changes to the CF-Auto-Root installer as well. One noteworthy one is that in preparation for L having encryption enabled by default, it no longer touches /data. This is both good and bad.
The good is that it doesn't need to know your decryption key, the process remains automatic, and encrypted phones are no longer wiped on usage of CF-Auto-Root.
The bad is that this means some /data cleanup code is run on first boot after rooting, which may trigger a (one) reboot in the process. I do not expect bootloops because of this, it works fine on all the devices I have tested it on, but you never know.
Additionally, because CF-Auto-Root cannot distinguish between a garbage and an encrypted partition, it no longer fixes OEM unlock issues. On several fastboot based devices, the OEM unlock command, instead of formatting /data and /cache, wipes them. Android will not automatically re-format them anymore (used to in 2.x days), which means that your device will forever bootloop until you manually format /data and /cache (which CF-Auto-Root did for you automatically in the past).
Last but not least, some changes have been made to allow the progress to be visible on some new Qualcomm based devices. While I would normally not waste words on something as trivial as this, I would like to point out that these devices no longer support fbdev to put content on screen, but instead use something called Qualcomm overlay. Nothing basically wrong with that either, aside from the absolutely horrid fact that the interface to this changes between different kernels in a completely incompatible way, pretty much requiring a userspace program to use the exact right version of kernel headers to do something as basic as putting anything onscreen. Making a non-kernel specific binary that support a wide range of devices is thus now nigh impossible unless some very ugly code and errorprone methods are employed. As such, I expect that ultimately there will be no visual progress for CF-Auto-Root anymore on Qualcomm based devices, as I certainly can't be bothered keeping track of these shenanigans.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. This is the post that I was referring to.
Has anyone with encrypted Nexus 5 tried it out yet?
matthew01202 said:
Thanks. This is the post that I was referring to.
Has anyone with encrypted Nexus 5 tried it out yet?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Encrypted Nexus 6 works fine. Didn't wipe anything. I'm sure it's the same for the N5.
Hello everybody,
I created a tool - initially for the nexus 9 (flounder|flounder_lte) - that gets rid of the ForceEncrypt flag in a generic way (meaning it should work no matter what rom you are on). It does that by patching the currently installed boot.img.
I enhanced that tool to make it work for other devices too. (See the list below to see if your device is supported)
Disclaimer
Code:
/*
* Your warranty is now void.
*
* I am not responsible for bricked devices, dead SD cards,
* thermonuclear war, or you getting fired because the alarm app failed. Please
* do some research if you have any concerns about the features in this tool
* before using it! YOU are choosing to make these modifications, and if
* you point the finger at me for messing up your device, I will laugh at you. Hard. A lot.
*/
Background
The Android CDD (Compatibility Definition Document) suggests demands that all devices with the appropriate horse power SHOULD MUST enable full disk-encryption (FDE) by default. Even though I support every step towards more security I have to criticize this approach. Full-disk-encryption comes at a price. Encryption takes time because some component has to de- and encrypt the stuff on the disk at some point and in current devices it's the CPU's task. Even though modern devices have quite fast CPU cores you can still easily feel the difference between FDE in the on- or off-state. The I/O is faster and boot-times take only half as long. (I did not do any scientific measurements though)
There is an ongoing discussion about this topic in cyanogenmod's gerrit for the nexus 9. Although it's a fun read it is pretty clear that this exchange of views is not going anywhere near a useful outcome. Additionally, Google's stock ROMs always have forced encryption enabled on newer devices.
Because performance is important to me and at least my tablet does not need the extra security I created the FED-Patcher (ForceEncrypt Disable Patcher).
How does it work?
FED-Patcher is a simple flashable ZIP that is supposed to be run in a recovery that has busybox integrated (like TWRP or CWM). This is what it does:
Checks if your device is compatible
Dumps the currently installed boot.img.
Unpacks the dump of your currently installed boot.img. The unpacking process is done via a self-compiled, statically linked version of unmkbootimg.
It patches the filesystem tables which include the force-encrypt flags. This process will change "forceencrypt" to "encryptable".
Then, if necessary, it patches the filesystem tables to not use dm-verity. This is done by removing the "verify" mount-parameter.
Creates a new boot.img. The unpacking process is done via a self-compiled, statically linked version of mkbootimg.
Flashes the modified boot.img
Supported devices
HTC Nexus 9 WiFi (flounder)
HTC Nexus 9 LTE (flounder_lte)
Motorola Nexus 6 (shamu)
LG Nexus 5X (bullhead)
Huawei Nexus 6P (angler)
Version History
v1 - Initial version with HTC Nexus 9 WiFi (flounder) support
v2 - Added Motorola Nexus 6 (shamu) support
v3 - Added support for HTC Nexus 9 LTE (flounder_lte)
v4 - Added support for signed boot-images
v5 - Changed error handling to compensate for missing fstab files. Some roms seem not to ship with the complete set of boot-files from AOSP.
v6 - FED-Patcher will enforce the same structure for the patched boot.img that the original boot.img had. Additionally, the kernel commandline will also be taken over. This should fix pretty much every case where devices would not boot after patching.
v7 - FED-Patcher will now disable dm-verity in fstab to get rid of the red error sign on marshmallow roms.
v8 - Added support for LG Nexus 5X (bullhead) and Huawei Nexus 6P (angler)
What do I need to make this work?
A supported device
An unlocked bootloader
An already installed ROM with forceencrypt flag. (like cyanogenmod CM12.1)
A recovery that includes busybox (TWRP, CWM)
How do I use it?
Make a thorough, conservative backup of your data if there is any on your device
Go into your recovery (TWRP, CWM)
Flash fed_patcher-signed.zip
If your device is already encrypted (You booted your ROM at least once) you need to do a full wipe to get rid of the encryption. This full wipe will clear all your data on your data-partition (where your apps as well as their settings are stored) as well as on your internal storage so please, do a backup before. If you don't do a backup and want to restore your data... well... Call obama.
How do I know if it worked?
Go into your "Settings"-App. In "Security", if it offers you to encrypt your device it is unencrypted. If it says something like "Device is encrypted" it indeed is encrypted.
IMPORTANT: If you update your ROM you have to run FED-Patcher again because ROM-updates also update the boot-partition which effectively removes my patch. So, if you are on CM12.1 for example and you used my patch and do an update to a newer nightly you have to run FED-Patcher again. If you don't do so Android will encrypt your device at the first boot.
Is it dangerous?
Well, I implemented tons of checks that prevent pretty much anything bad from happening. But, of course, we're dealing with the boot-partition here. Even though I tested FED-Patcher quite a lot there is still room for crap hitting the fan.
Screenshot
Scroll down to the attached thumbnails.
Credits
* pbatard for making (un)mkbootimg (dunno if he is on xda)
* @rovo89 for his xposed framework - I used some of his ideas by reading the source of his xposed installer flashable ZIP for FED-Patcher.
GibHub: https://github.com/gladiac1337/fed-patcher
XDA:DevDB Information
FED-Patcher, Tool/Utility for all devices (see above for details)
Contributors
gladiac, rovo89
Version Information
Status: Beta
Current Beta Version: v8
Beta Release Date: 2015-10-27
Created 2015-10-27
Last Updated 2016-10-23
Hi @gladiac and first of all thanks for the work and time spent developing this amazing tool.
I'm currently running stock Marshmallow on my Nexus 6 and i plan to stay like that, but would like to test my device with ForceEncrypt disabled. Here are my doubts.
1 - Does this work on stock?
2 - Would i be able to flash the monthly security update images without having to wipe my device every time?
3 - In your opinion, do the speed gains justify the all the work?
Thanks in advance.
cyberon said:
Hi @gladiac and first of all thanks for the work and time spent developing this amazing tool.
I'm currently on stock Marshmallow and i plan to stay like that, but would like to test my device with forcencrypt disabled. Here are my doubts.
1 - Does this work on stock?
2 - Would i be able to flash the monthly security update images without having to wipe my device every time?
3 - In your opinion, do the speed gains justify the all the work?
Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi @cyberon,
good questions!
Yes, FED-Patcher works on stock! Marshmallow made it necessary to do a new release, v7, to get rid of an error message at boot but other than that, FED-Patcher works just fine on Android 6.
Well, I don't know how the monthly security-updates will be deployed. I guess it will be done by OTA (Over the Air) updates. OTA will probably not work after modifying the boot-image. However, flashing factory images should work just fine. Additionally, most of the time, OTA-zips are being posted here on xda or androidpolice whenever they become available so doing manual OTA updates is another possibility to do updates.
To get back to your question - wiping should not be necessary after an upgrade - be it via OTA or factory images. Google did a fantastic job with the upgrade-functionality in newer Android versions. However, whenever you do an update, be sure to run FED-Patcher afterwards because, in case the boot-partitions got updated, forced encryption will be in place again and on the first boot it will encrypt you device.
Well, I do all my tests on a HTC Nexus 9 (flounder). It is a pretty fast beast. However, on an unmodified stock rom, it was clearly tangible that the GUI had more latency than necessary. Apps loaded pretty slowly - compared to my Sony Xperia Z1 (honami) it took like twice as long to start youtube - and in general it just did not behave like a beast. This was why I started writing FED-Patcher. In my opinion it was worth my time. (it wasn't that much actually)
I hope I could help.
Enjoy, gladiac
Thanks for the quick and detailed answer @gladiac, now regarding point number 2.
I never wait for the OTA, but always flash the images manually.
As far as i understand from your answer, it would it be ok to flash all the img files manually, then flash TWRP and finally flash FED without booting the OS.
Am i missing something?
cyberon said:
Thanks for the quick and detailed answer @gladiac, now regarding point number 2.
I never wait for the OTA, but always flash the images manually.
As far as i understand from your answer, it would it be ok to flash all the img files manually, then flash TWRP and finally flash FED without booting the OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's pretty much how I would do it. You don't even have to flash TWRP if you just skip flashing the recovery.img which is included in the factory-image package.
Thanks @gladiac, will try that way.
PS: I have a feeling that if we had this option added to a toolkit like Wugfresh Nexus Root Toolkit, it would be an instant success.
hi @gladiac
first of all thanks for your patch
I'm on Nexus 6 with stock Marshmallow and all I want to do is disable encryption and enable root.
Is your patch + SuperSU enough or I need something else?
Thanks a lot
Worked on my N9 - thanks!
provolinoo said:
hi @gladiac
first of all thanks for your patch
I'm on Nexus 6 with stock Marshmallow and all I want to do is disable encryption and enable root.
Is your patch + SuperSU enough or I need something else?
Thanks a lot
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi @provolinoo,
well, FED Patcher will disable the forced encryption for you. However, SuperSU will not work so easily. The reason for that is that the stock ROM has SeLinux enabled in "enforcing" mode. SuperSU does not work without adding more SeLinux Policies to the stock ROM. Unfortunately, it's not in the scope of FED Patcher to add SeLinux policies for SuperSU. This should be done inside the flashable ZIP of SuperSU instead.
The last time I tested SuperSU with marshmallow stock was with version 2.52 BETA. It did not work. The result was a boot-loop because of one or more SeLinux denials. A little more info on that matter is here.
So, to get SuperSU working you would have to set SeLinux to "permissive" mode. Alternatively, you can use @Chainfire's boot.imgs to make SuperSU work.
Have fun, gladiac
Thank you gladiac. Your FED patcher (v8) works flawlessly on my Nexus 9. Edit: I am using TWRP 2.8.7.1
The gerrit conversation you linked is interesting. I am grateful that someone with your skills decided to support our ability to choose whether or not to encrypt. CM thinks I am smart enough for root priveleges but I am too stupid to be trusted with decryption?
Don't some major vendors allow the disabling of encryption from within Android?
Anyway, thanks for the patcher.
dmantilal said:
Thank you gladiac. Your FED patcher (v8) works flawlessly on my Nexus 9.
The gerrit conversation you linked is interesting. I am grateful that someone with your skills decided to support our ability to choose whether or not to encrypt. CM thinks I am smart enough for root priveleges but I am too stupid to be trusted with decryption?
Don't some major vendors allow the disabling of encryption from within Android?
Anyway, thanks for the patcher.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, I love CM roms but their decision to force encryption when most of cm users are power-user is a nonsense
Sooo....basically, I cannot use a stock Marshmallow that is FEDpatched and with root (using SuperSU, unless there is alternative)? If I want those, I have to get one of the custom ROMs?
EDIT: also, I tried using Chainfire's modified boot. It is stated that it will disable the forceencrypt. It didn't work in mine, still encrypted.
jamesalfred said:
Sooo....basically, I cannot use a stock Marshmallow that is FEDpatched and with root (using SuperSU, unless there is alternative)? If I want those, I have to get one of the custom ROMs?
EDIT: also, I tried using Chainfire's modified boot. It is stated that it will disable the forceencrypt. It didn't work in mine, still encrypted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you follow the directions and format the entire "data" partition?
dmantilal said:
Did you follow the directions and format the entire "data" partition?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I too have the same problem didnt work for me.
im on the the new 6.0 L build but went ahead and flashed the modified boot image for K build just so I could flash the TWRP img.
Once TWRP was installed, I installed the Fed path ZIP and that went well supposedly. and then after that I did a factory reset, then I WIPED the DATA, CACHE and Dalvik.. I rebooted setup my device and it still shows encrypted.
nextelbuddy said:
I too have the same problem didnt work for me.
im on the the new 6.0 L build but went ahead and flashed the modified boot image for K build just so I could flash the TWRP img.
Once TWRP was installed, I installed the Fed path ZIP and that went well supposedly. and then after that I did a factory reset, then I WIPED the DATA, CACHE and Dalvik.. I rebooted setup my device and it still shows encrypted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It did not work because you did not follow the directions.
Flash TWRP. Flash FED. Full wipe (or format, depending on your choice of terminology). OP goes on to clarify by saying "This full wipe will clear all your data on your data-partition (where your apps as well as their settings are stored) as well as on your internal storage so please, do a backup before.", meaning if you did not lose everything on data, which includes "/sdcard", you most likely did it wrong.
Give us more info so we can help (assuming you fid it right initially).
P.S. - 6.0 is M(arshmallow), not L(ollipop).
dmantilal said:
Did you follow the directions and format the entire "data" partition?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dmantilal said:
It did not work because you did not follow the directions.
Flash TWRP. Flash FED. Full wipe (or format, depending on your choice of terminology). OP goes on to clarify by saying "This full wipe will clear all your data on your data-partition (where your apps as well as their settings are stored) as well as on your internal storage so please, do a backup before.", meaning if you did not lose everything on data, which includes "/sdcard", you most likely did it wrong.
Give us more info so we can help (assuming you fid it right initially).
P.S. - 6.0 is M(arshmallow), not L(ollipop).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i solved my issue. i was wiping DATA but not choosing internal storage. i did that and rebooted and now it says ENCRYPT not ENCRYPTED
THANKS!
so currently I have a modified boot image from the K build, TWRP and now a modifier boot.img kernel for no force encrypt BUT I am not rooted and dont plan on it. does this mean I can still get OTAs?> i would guess not since my boot image has been modified and i am unlocked? would i even want an OTA? wouldnt that just give me a stock boot.img again causing me to get encrypted on the next boot after OTA?
nextelbuddy said:
i solved my issue. i was wiping DATA but not choosing internal storage. i did that and rebooted and now it says ENCRYPT not ENCRYPTED
THANKS!
so currently I have a modified boot image from the K build, TWRP and now a modifier boot.img kernel for no force encrypt BUT I am not rooted and dont plan on it. does this mean I can still get OTAs?> i would guess not since my boot image has been modified and i am unlocked? would i even want an OTA? wouldnt that just give me a stock boot.img again causing me to get encrypted on the next boot after OTA?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Side-loading the OTA then following that with a FED flash seems much safer.
Loading an OTA directly would over-write the boot.img with a ForceEncrypt boot.img, logically Forcing Encryption (derp) at boot.
I am using chroma ROM which doesn't force encryption and my device is still encrypted. Can I still use this?
jamespat93 said:
I am using chroma ROM which doesn't force encryption and my device is still encrypted. Can I still use this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can if you want But if you want to unencrypt your phone, backup your ROM, copy sd content to your computer, wipe everything! in recovery (twrp) including Format Data, Factory reset, internal storage etc. Connect your phone while in recovery to your computer (you'll see 25.98GB instead of 23.03GB), copy sd content back to your phone, restore your rom backup and you'll be fine.
I can't get it work on Nexus 6 and chroma rom r26.
My steps: wipe everything, push folder (rom,patcher and gapps), flash chroma, flash gapps, flash patcher, wipe everything but system
after boot in setting/security it is again encrypted. what I am doing wrong?
I have a 8T (KB2005), and I've been recently reading up on different mods and came across some posts from around 2014-2016-ish, like https://www.xda-developers.com/dual-boot-on-android-a-power-users-holy-grail/, which show that it was possible to install multiple firmwares and be able to choose which one to boot into similar to like on a PC (there was even a grub4android.)
But I can't seem to find any information about doing this with newer devices like the 8T. Does anyone know if it is possible? I already have my bootloader unocked, so I would assume that this and root would be required, but likely also the device needs to be able to use whatever mechanism that actually handles the actual multi-booting/choosing duties.
Thanks for any information.
blz8 said:
I have a 8T (KB2005), and I've been recently reading up on different mods and came across some posts from around 2014-2016-ish, like https://www.xda-developers.com/dual-boot-on-android-a-power-users-holy-grail/, which show that it was possible to install multiple firmwares and be able to choose which one to boot into similar to like on a PC (there was even a grub4android.)
But I can't seem to find any information about doing this with newer devices like the 8T. Does anyone know if it is possible? I already have my bootloader unocked, so I would assume that this and root would be required, but likely also the device needs to be able to use whatever mechanism that actually handles the actual multi-booting/choosing duties.
Thanks for any information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The bits that really matter are:
The app/system data files (/data excluding /data/media)
The "system" partitions (system, system_ext, odm, product, vendor) - they live inside the super partition as logical (not physical) partitions
The "boot" partitions (boot, dtbo)
Whilst the firmware and "boot" partitions exist as A and B versions, there is only one version of the data and "system" partitions.
So you can't dual boot. However, you could backup the data and system parts and restore these for the appropriate slot.
But even here there are problems. The encryption keys used by different roms, and indeed different versions of OOS, mean that you can't decrypt the data on a slot that has different keys to the other slot.
Also, different roms store system settings in /data in different ways which is why you often have to do a factory reset when changing or upgrading roms.
The upshot of all of this is this: you can't meaningfully dual boot.
BillGoss said:
The bits that really matter are:
The app/system data files (/data excluding /data/media)
The "system" partitions (system, system_ext, odm, product, vendor) - they live inside the super partition as logical (not physical) partitions
The "boot" partitions (boot, dtbo)
Whilst the firmware and "boot" partitions exist as A and B versions, there is only one version of the data and "system" partitions.
So you can't dual boot. However, you could backup the data and system parts and restore these for the appropriate slot.
But even here there are problems. The encryption keys used by different roms, and indeed different versions of OOS, mean that you can't decrypt the data on a slot that has different keys to the other slot.
Also, different roms store system settings in /data in different ways which is why you often have to do a factory reset when changing or upgrading roms.
The upshot of all of this is this: you can't meaningfully dual boot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for the reply, for the information. I didn't know that the data partition was shared like that, which would have been nifty if multiple times could see the same apps and files, but I can see how the encryption keys would be a big problem as you said.
Thanks again.
There was an interesting project posted over on the TWRP thread that may be of interest to you.
GitHub - rain2wood/DualNine: // Generic DualBoot solution for Dynamic Android phones //
// Generic DualBoot solution for Dynamic Android phones // - GitHub - rain2wood/DualNine: // Generic DualBoot solution for Dynamic Android phones //
github.com
But, personally, it seems a bit impractical and not very useful in terms of what it offers. Mainly due to the issues regarding decryption. Also, it would need a bit of testing as the 8T has virtual AB partitions.
blz8 said:
I have a 8T (KB2005), and I've been recently reading up on different mods and came across some posts from around 2014-2016-ish, like https://www.xda-developers.com/dual-boot-on-android-a-power-users-holy-grail/, which show that it was possible to install multiple firmwares and be able to choose which one to boot into similar to like on a PC (there was even a grub4android.)
But I can't seem to find any information about doing this with newer devices like the 8T. Does anyone know if it is possible? I already have my bootloader unocked, so I would assume that this and root would be required, but likely also the device needs to be able to use whatever mechanism that actually handles the actual multi-booting/choosing duties.
Thanks for any information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have Paralloid running on my Nord N10. As soon as my 8t gets here from amazon tomorrow....Also DSU loader is a dual boot method as well.
I understand that the TWRP team is apparently still working on an official release for Android 13, but is there even an unofficial build available for the P7Pro? If not, is there a recovery alternative? I really want to be able to do a full system (all partitions) backup of my device. Thanks!
You can create dumps of your partitions using ADB shell in system; TWRP is not required to do this.
Though it wouldn't necessarily be any good for doing full partition backups, I'm currently running the recovery from the StagOS ROM in combination with the stock Pixel ROM. I like it because it allows flashing recovery zips without having to say "Yes" every time due to signature stuff.
A very similar thread with the same topic has been discussed a few days ago - you can check here
Anyone can compile TWRP - it's opensource. Pixel 6+ owners are unlikely to get an official build from TWRP since it requires a volunteer to maintain the repo, deal with bug reports, etc.
It's recommended to simply compile the image on an individual basis (you really don't want to rely on a third-party supplied image when you have no way of knowing whether it's safe or not). Compiling isn't a difficult process, but does require an hour or two of reading TWRP's and Google's applicable developer pages, along with ~30 - 60 minutes of set up time on a PC/laptop (I prefer to compile within an Ubuntu VM, but I believe it can also be done in Windows' WSL).
robroy90 said:
I understand that the TWRP team is apparently still working on an official release for Android 13, but is there even an unofficial build available for the P7Pro? If not, is there a recovery alternative? I really want to be able to do a full system (all partitions) backup of my device. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They still haven't finished official support for Android 12. Since recovery resources on A12+ are located in vendor_boot, bigbiff is trying to figure out a decent way for TWRP to live there, at least as far as the Pixel 5 is concerned. Not sure what other obstacles may be present on the Pixel 6 series and above.
nooted1 said:
Though it wouldn't necessarily be any good for doing full partition backups, I'm currently running the recovery from the StagOS ROM in combination with the stock Pixel ROM. I like it because it allows flashing recovery zips without having to say "Yes" every time due to signature stuff.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey thanks for this! How did you flash just the recovery partiton on the Pixel? I am an old hand with Odin on the Samsung devices, but Google official devices are still new to me. Will the StagOS recovery recognize an external USB-C flash drive for storage?
s3axel said:
A very similar thread with the same topic has been discussed a few days ago - you can check here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, I went over there and read everything. Much appreciated!