[PETITION]Kernel source - Xiaomi Mi A1 Guides, News, & Discussion

https://www.change.org/p/people-xio...are_petition&utm_term=share_for_starters_page
Sign the petition guys....

nothing gonna happen by going to that site.. pretty much useless..

But a petition like this gave success to moto g4 plus for getting official oreo

If Xiaomi decides to put out kernel source, they will do it regardless of the petition or community begging. If they don't want to do it, they won't do it. Simple as that.

matcho13579 said:
If Xiaomi decides to put out kernel source, they will do it regardless of the petition or community begging. If they don't want to do it, they won't do it. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They will surely, but it might take months to release it.

Guys, let's be patient, if they released source for pretty much all their other recent devices running QCOM there is no real reason to doubt they will for this device as well, just wait, we already have stock android, so need to suffer the horrors of MIUI while we wait

matcho13579 said:
If Xiaomi decides to put out kernel source, they will do it regardless of the petition or community begging. If they don't want to do it, they won't do it. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is not an option this time. As it is a Google device they open themselves up for a lawsuit if they don't.
Was wondering if this was gonna happen.
Also remember that the source only has to be provided upon request. Most post-it to github.com just to cut down on having to fill the request. Has anyone asked them about it?

It seems they are planning to release the kernel source within the next three months, according to this post.

Related

Submitting Patches to the Repo / Forking

Hi all!
I'm an android developer, and I regularly read the official android-dev and android-porting lists, but on all the fan blogs and from lurking here, it seems that all the good development is coming from XDA-dev!
So why don't you guys do some patch submission? Features like auto-rotating browser and the transition animations should really, really be in the main source, but the official Android team have their thumbs up their asses in regards to UI/polished stuff.. (I bet they're too busy working on the lower level cellular stuff and the ARM-generating stuff like in the *flinger libraries).
So you guys should make some patch submissions over at (http://source.android.com/submit-patches)!
That way, the next RC will have all of these lovely features you guys have implemented.
((Or, alternately (but more ambitiously), fork the entire codebase. Strip out the DRM and add a framework for native code execution. Perhaps that's a pipe dream, though..))
Thoughts?
I think forking the Android source would be a very nice touch, if Google doesn't pull it together. We could still add on to stuff from the official code, but add on all the special stuff that Google refuses to (they've said they won't add the ability to change CPU speed, etc).
Oh, absolutely, there would be numerous advantages to having a fork. It should definitely be discussed! I'm afraid that Google may be trying to exert too much control on their platform in ways that we don't always want, so there is nothing legally to stop us from forking and maintain a more badass tree. GitHub could provide the hosting.
Of course, it might be a waste of effort. If you submit the badass patches, then the good features here go out into all the phones in the next versions. Work on the fork, and only the selected users who are able to flash their own phones can use it, unless some Chinese companies start using it or something like that.
Names?
XanDroid? I'd rather like to see Mandroid with in a slick black theme..
Well to me it seems like the only people doing cool things right now with android have rooted devices
So why cant you ***** a little on google lists to make them actually do some work. The Roadmap @ http://source.android.com/roadmap is a joke. Either they give us root or they start working imo. =)
Seanambers said:
Well to me it seems like the only people doing cool things right now with android have rooted devices
So why cant you ***** a little on google lists to make them actually do some work. The Roadmap @ http://source.android.com/roadmap is a joke. Either they give us root or they start working imo. =)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you think that the release of the new unlocked Dev phones will change things?
Yeah it'll most probably shake things up a bit, however what about all those that already have a g1?
I for sure isnt buying a new phone to get root.
But even so, we're still talking about modifications to the OS and the packaged applications, which would be released in the next RC version, so even non-root users would get the features in the next update, along with anyone running Android on something besides a G1.
my .02
Id say submit some of the things found here and see what goog does with it, if they openly add these things that need root at this point and let xda dev participate in the OS with such submitions...then cool thats how open source works best, when anybody can add to the project, a phone OS utopia
If they ignore it then, a fork is the way to go but give google a chance to do the right thing first before, just leaving them in the xdadevs dust with a custom distro...
bhang said:
Id say submit some of the things found here and see what goog does with it, if they openly add these things that need root at this point and let xda dev participate in the OS with such submitions...then cool thats how open source works best, when anybody can add to the project, a phone OS utopia
If they ignore it then, a fork is the way to go but give google a chance to do the right thing first before, just leaving them in the xdadevs dust with a custom distro...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google has refused to add multiple features. They feel that they aren't necessary, or that your average consumer wouldn't want it (main thing I can think of atm is CPU speed).
If they don't add the features we request, simply because *they* don't like them, then a fork would get us exactly what we want/need. After we fork it, and the number of users using stock Android plummet, maybe they will listen .
I see a problem with forking... who says what is allowed and not allowed? That is the main problem. Now if you wanted to just add an app that would be one thing but there is not going to be an easy way to do this.
Gary13579 said:
Google has refused to add multiple features. They feel that they aren't necessary, or that your average consumer wouldn't want it (main thing I can think of atm is CPU speed).
If they don't add the features we request, simply because *they* don't like them, then a fork would get us exactly what we want/need. After we fork it, and the number of users using stock Android plummet, maybe they will listen .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Given the number of G1s with modified fw installed compared to the total number of sold units, I somehow doubt the number of users is going to plummet.
IMHO it would be a needless fork unless some new or considerably modified features were planned. Better to just patch the functionality into the official builds, if at all possible.
I'm not convinced by that logic. There would be an important difference between a fork and patched versions of the firmware, as a fork would have a totally different design philosophy. Whereas Android is focused on speed (or whatever the hell they're concentrating on..but to be honest, I think they're dicking about over there), Mandroid could have more focus on polished features and low-level access. ((And! No DRM, and I'd like to see some more security features..ZRTP?))
Either way, I think it's really important for the success of the open future of phones that the open source community take and give back. There's no need for the back-and-forth like with, say, PSP-cracking as we have the source code and we are allowed to do whatever we like with it. If we just keep patching what they give us and keeping the modifications closed, then we aren't really in control.
As for project management, I'm absolutely sure there are people who are capable of maintaining an active open-source project such as this, as long as there is a well-thought out design philosophy. I'd love to be involved, if enough people are willing to give it a shot. But, first, it'd be easier just to submit patches.
Miserlou! said:
PSP-cracking
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PSP cracking is insanely different. If you were in that scene, does my name look familiar ? Was net admin at toc2rta/malloc, admin of psp-hacks.com, worked with a lot of people on a lot of stuff that I barely remember as it was years ago .
But for the PSP, we were working with a system we knew nothing about. So yes, Android would be a lot simpler to work with. But if Google doesn't listen to us, it's not like it would really matter.
neoobs said:
I see a problem with forking... who says what is allowed and not allowed? That is the main problem. Now if you wanted to just add an app that would be one thing but there is not going to be an easy way to do this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android is licensed by both the Apache Software License (do whatever you want with it) and the General Public License (do whatever you want with it as long as you make the source code available for others). We are certainly allowed to do this, but the problem lies with the G1 owners running the official RC30. They wont have the rights required to flash the image which leaves them out of the party.
2 words
The community(did I spell that right?)
Bhang
Datruesurfer said:
Android is licensed by both the Apache Software License (do whatever you want with it) and the General Public License (do whatever you want with it as long as you make the source code available for others). We are certainly allowed to do this, but the problem lies with the G1 owners running the official RC30. They wont have the rights required to flash the image which leaves them out of the party.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I meant who is going to the be decision maker of what features will be added... The Community as a whole? What about some that want it but only 25% of the community wants it?
neoobs said:
I meant who is going to the be decision maker of what features will be added... The Community as a whole? What about some that want it but only 25% of the community wants it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what project leads are for. And hypothetically when enough people are dissatisfied with the xda-dev fork they will go and create their own fork. Except I don't think there is any real argument yet to go and create an xda-dev fork in the first place. Forking an operating system meaningfully is not a weekend project for a single person.
I have said it before, let's give them a bit more of a chance, a fork isn't something a guy can do in a weekend.
So let's see what happens in RC3X, the next release will give folks a bbetter idea of where their heads are at. If enough of the community is unhappy there will be a fork
Bhang

[CLOSED] - [Q] Honeycomb

Ok, I know this is a subjective question and I probably wont get an exact answer but does anyone have a estimate when the first Honeycomb based ROM beta will be available for testing? I'm interested to see if it will make a better remote access platform than the current phone based ROMs.
Search... My friend. All good things come to those who wait. Of course, if you want Honeycomb now, you could just swing over to Best Buy and pick one up.
still waiting for the source
source still hasn't been uploaded
I thought Google was in the habit of releasing the source at the same time as the product?
jbirdvegas said:
source still hasn't been uploaded
I thought Google was in the habit of releasing the source at the same time as the product?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No they generally wait 30 days and release source. Of course honeycomb source based on gpl will be released but it doesnt force nvidia to release proprietary drivers or anything else that is proprietary from google.
Heres the ETA for honeycomb........Now if you buy a xoom.....sometime between now and 2020 for everyone else.
thebadfrog said:
No they generally wait 30 days and release source. Of course honeycomb source based on gpl will be released but it doesnt force nvidia to release proprietary drivers or anything else that is proprietary from google.
Heres the ETA for honeycomb........Now if you buy a xoom.....sometime between now and 2020 for everyone else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HAHAHA! Your posts make me laugh every day. Seriously though, people need to relax. I'm having tons of fun every day bug hunting and streamlining current dev projects. Stop waiting around for the future and make the current community projects better by testing roms and communicating with devs. Dive in to the guts of a real and current build and strive to make what we have better. And have fun for gods sake. That's why we are all here in the first place.
Closing thread. Answered time and time again.

Lets put the pressure on nVidia [UPDATED 10/07]

Hy guys and gals, i have done some digging on the nVidia developers forums and have found a thread requesting info on if/when nVidia plans to drop the source for the HAL that we need so our amazing developers can get A2DP working
I'm posting the link below, maybe if enough of us go into the thread requesting this info nVidia will comply
EDIT: nVidia updated their forum and our topic was tossed into the archive and not brought over, to remind them that this is still a valid issue I have re-created the thread, please if you want to try at getting A2DP to work with non OTA based rom's go voice your opinion
New nVidia developers Forum
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using XDA Premium App
Link not working, im all for it a2dp would make cm7 perfect.
This would be great! Then I could finally buy a Bluetooth Stereo Headset.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
I'd love to see this happen, but I don't see it anytime soon. Nvidia has been historically bad at releasing their source code.
fcisco13 said:
Link not working, im all for it a2dp would make cm7 perfect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Link worked perfectly fine for me, both on my TF101 earlier and just now on my g2x.....not sure why it didn't work for u
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
Lets get this moving
Sadly, they aren't required by any license to release their source code, which is why I have no idea if/when it'll ever happen. Their drivers for their own chips are definitely not gpl, so bugging them will not put any pressure on them at all.
lawsuit??? Lol worked for lg...
It'll never work. You can't sue them because they won't release their source code. That's like saying "Hey let's sue microsoft because they won't release the source to their kernel." It's their property, and they can do what they like with it. If android didn't run on top of the linux kernel, which is gpl licensed, I'd almost guarantee that no vendor would ever release the source for it.
Not trying to be a buzz-kill or anything, I want the source code as much as anyone else. But no amount of threatening lawsuits, bugging them through email, forums, or phone calls will change their minds. If they intend on releasing the source, they'll do it in their own time, if not, we're SOL.
mstrk242 said:
Sadly, they aren't required by any license to release their source code, which is why I have no idea if/when it'll ever happen. Their drivers for their own chips are definitely not gpl, so bugging them will not put any pressure on them at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then it is probably a bad move to use Nvidia hardware on an open source platform like Android.
Spread the word...
I was kidding about it, we can wait for 2.3.4-5 ota...
It may be Nvidia's right to keep it's code proprietary, but I can't imagine buying another Android device with one of their chips in it unless something changes.
We are evolving very fast, I don't know if nVidia can assume the Windows GPU market will always be there for them. If Android dominates the next decade or so the way that Windows did the last then manufacturers are obviously going to have to adapt or perish.
No way, there will always be a market for high end video cards on windows, simply for gaming if nothing else. Sure, they may not make it in the cell phone market (although I doubt that too, just because they are very good with hardware, they'll work out the kinks.)
You have to remember, the vast majority of people who buy these phones don't even know what a rom is, let alone the fact that they can customize it. The modding community is a small (albeit very vocal,) minority.
Also, please no one read between the lines on these posts I've made. I'm no insider, I have no information what so ever from nvidia. I'm really only basing these educated guesses based on my experience with nvidia and linux drivers. They may very well open the source, but I'm just trying to say don't hold your breath, and screaming at nvidia is absolutely pointless.
bump for updated link
None of the companies release their proprietary drivers to the public. It is their right as the intellectual property owner to keep it secret. The only thing that is open source is the Android Kernel and the AOSP files. Everything else is proprietary and not made public. Even Google Apps are proprietary and Google never releases the source code for them. Also, only members of the Open Handset Alliance can license them and legally put them into their rom builds. Any efforts contrary to this (i.e., getting companies to release proprietary driver source) is simply futile and a waste of time. They could care a rat's ass about hackers. If you don't like it don't buy their products, but then you have to stop buying everyone's product as they all have proprietary code that is never released.
Spyvie said:
Then it is probably a bad move to use Nvidia hardware on an open source platform like Android.
Spread the word...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are right-on here. I will be looking at this when I eventually upgrade down the road, and will probably select a lesser device with different hardware (as long as the manufacturer doesn't ship it with a locked bootloader - lol).
Real open source is the only way to go. But as many posters have mentioned. we represent a very small group of potential customers - most whom would never dream of messing around with their devices.
gaww said:
You are right-on here. I will be looking at this when I eventually upgrade down the road, and will probably select a lesser device with different hardware (as long as the manufacturer doesn't ship it with a locked bootloader - lol).
Real open source is the only way to go. But as many posters have mentioned. we represent a very small group of potential customers - most whom would never dream of messing around with their devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then you want to get the MI Millet MIUI phone when it is available in your country. It is a dual core 1.5Ghz Scorpion processor and they expect you to update it weekly with new MIUI builds. It is an awesome device for the low price point (1,999 Chinese Yuan or about $300.00 US).
http://product.xiaomi.com/features.html
Go salivate.
jboxer said:
None of the companies release their proprietary drivers to the public. It is their right as the intellectual property owner to keep it secret. The only thing that is open source is the Android Kernel and the AOSP files. Everything else is proprietary and not made public. Even Google Apps are proprietary and Google never releases the source code for them. Also, only members of the Open Handset Alliance can license them and legally put them into their rom builds. Any efforts contrary to this (i.e., getting companies to release proprietary driver source) is simply futile and a waste of time. They could care a rat's ass about hackers. If you don't like it don't buy their products, but then you have to stop buying everyone's product as they all have proprietary code that is never released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not refuting what your saying but why do other phones seem to not have this problem if they all do this. Only tegra 2 devices have development ****ed because of this.
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
They deleted my account. WTF?
xsteven77x said:
Not refuting what your saying but why do other phones seem to not have this problem if they all do this. Only tegra 2 devices have development ****ed because of this.
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd imagine its for the same reason our devices and other tegra devices can only play the tegra games hence incentive tobuy a tegra phone. I think if they released code then any dev could hack their phone and play tegra games without having a tegra chip. Just a hunch.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App

[REF]Help To Release Kernel Source Code (Released 10/19/2011 Thanks to all!)

We need to bomb HTC's website with comments to encourage them to release the kernel source code for our device. I suggest we all go to the following link daily and request its release;
http://htcdev.com/contact
HTC just sent me a link to take a survey, another good tool to blast them with.
http://survey.htc.com/worldwide
Code has been released, I like to think all our complaints helped. Feel free to lock this thread if need be!
http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
We have been. I've sent them several notices on a near daily basis.
Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using xda premium
I doubt that that link is anything more than a placebo.
http://www.htc.com/us/about/contact-by-email
Say something along the lines of "you're in violation of GPLv2 which requires that source be released along with binary. GPLv2 does not allow for anything besides release of source NOT being ANY LATER than binary distribution."
I.e., though GPLv2 doesn't specify an exact time frame, the implication of this is that the source must be made available by the EXACT MOMENT that the binary is distributed. It *does* allow for the source to be released BEFORE the binary, but does NOT allow for the binary to be released before the source.
IMO, the kernel source archive should be included within the system partition of the phone, at least for early releases while there is sufficient storage space for it all to fit. This would greatly simply source distribution.
Even though I went to that page and asked for the kernel source code to be released, it looks like they're on a pretty routine schedule as far as what and when they release things and we're probably still a little ways out on the source code. But it can't HURT to keep trying, right?
Submitted. Hopefully they'll listen up.
BiggJurk said:
We need to bomb HTC's website with comments to encourage them to release the kernel source code for our device. I suggest we all go to the following link daily and request its release;
http://htcdev.com/contact
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, we have been. As unclespoon said they are on a fairly set release schedule that they must be comfortable with [legal-wise].
Read my replies here, there is another link that got me a response that was from a human:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1247374
HTC does this **** on purpose. They have a bunch of new devices coming out and if they were to release the code that would impact there profit margins. This processor can handle 1.5 ghz as a daily driver. The new HTC amaze has exact same processor but is overclocked 300mhz more then our device. And it has a 1gb of RAM. Samsung has gotten great at releasing there code within 1 week or even earlier. HTC PLEASE TAKE NOTES FROM SAMSUNG.
Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using xda premium
FYI
I filled out a customer service survey from HTC and gave them all bad ratings in regards to their non-response for the kernel source code. A representative just personally called me and is trying to get an eta on the release if not email me a copy of the code. I would suggest everyone completes a survey with negative comments at the following location:http://survey.htc.com/worldwide. I know surveys like this affects their metrics and gets managements attention. The guy on the phone also said that Android is released under the Apache license agreement.
Regards,
Filled out the survey.
Let's see if they respond.
cal3thousand said:
Filled out the survey.
Let's see if they respond.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it took them 2 weeks to get back to me.
BiggJurk said:
I think it took them 2 weeks to get back to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My guess is that they'll "get back to you" in a month or however long until they would have normally released the source code. I think they're too big to be bothered by people complaining about lack of source code. Bottom line is there probably won't ever be any "consequences" as a result of them taking their time on releasing kernel source. We only complain because we want it, but it's not like they are really doing anything wrong by just releasing it on their own schedule.
BiggJurk said:
The guy on the phone also said that Android is released under the Apache license agreement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've heard that before, but I don't see how that's possible since Android is based on Linux. If it were based on BSD that'd be another matter.
BiggJurk said:
The guy on the phone also said that Android is released under the Apache license agreement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, congrats to phone guy!! Unfortunately, either he was trying to get you to shut-up or misunderstood what you wanted them to release. Google mostly licensed Android with the Apache 2.0. This allows others to customize Android and they don't have to release their changes i.e. customizations made by phone manufacturers (it means other things too but this was Google's main reason for this license). HTC doesn't have to give us their Android source. The Linux kernel is GPL - there is no way around that. The GPL states that the source must be released at the same time as the binary is released to the end-user (it even states that the source should be no harder to obtain than the binary is i.e. we should get the kernel source with our devices - on the sd card or something). Still have no idea where HTC gets 90-120 days from the GPL wording.
I sent a note to EFF asking if they were aware of whats going on. They said they were and were researching the situation.
---------- Post added at 06:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:37 PM ----------
unclespoon said:
but it's not like they are really doing anything wrong by just releasing it on their own schedule.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are though. They are directly violating the GNU GPL but you are right - there are too few of us who actually want the kernel source for them to really worry. Can't believe one of the actual Linux kernel devs hasn't caught wind of this and made a statement.
I sent a couple of requests. Let's hope they move their asses.
Source has been released:
http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
HebrewToYou said:
Source has been released:
http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you were the first one to find it. I thanked you elsewhere you've mentioned it as well.
Maybe the OP can come through and update the thread title.
Edit to add - download reads 94.0MB on the HTC page, but my download over Tmo 4g is saying out of 89.6MB and my home pc is saying 89.7MB...so we'll see what's up when I get it.
YES!!! Time to OC this bad boy..
Please get on it Devs..!!!
RazoE said:
YES!!! Time to OC this bad boy..
Please get on it Devs..!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All ready on it
Sent from my Senseless Doubleshot using xda premium
That's funny.
I just received the HTC reply to my request. I'm going to play like my request was the straw for that camel's back... Your Welcome Everybody!!!
j/k. This is wonderful news though. I'm stoked
Thread locked by OP request

BLU Finally got around to kernel source...

In theory this should be quite useful, no?
Just putting this up here for those who may have lost hope, but on a whim I checked their source repository today and it would seem they've at least uploaded Kernel source!
ftp://Kernel_End_User:[email protected]/
Directory: Pure XL P0010UU (it's a bit of a mess, you may wish to CNTRL+F this)
I haven't checked their software repo yet for ROM source, but it was not uploaded when I initially found this information about a month and a half ago.
The kernel is only VANILLA STOCK source, I haven't compiled it or anything, I'm only linking their servers because I imagine that this isn't getting checked on a regular basis (not much to expect would happen). But, something has happened, so I figured I'd draw some attention to it.
Many thanks to those ROM and kernel devs who have been working to bring us some solid software. It's honestly my only major gripe with the phone.
We (me, acheron, root-expert) tried to compile this several times with CyanogenMod repos with no luck. It's from 7th December 2015 so nothing changed.
bemolx said:
We (me, acheron, root-expert) tried to compile this several times with CyanogenMod repos with no luck. It's from 7th December 2015 so nothing changed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Darn. If only they were more willing to facilitate development.... the software is my only real issue with the phone. Thanks for your work, however.
Same thing here... I would love to have the latest CyanogenMod
Only for updating this post:
Kernel source, mostly ready for Marshmallow ROMs, you can find here on 'cm-13.0' branch.
Linux upstream 3.10.103
Still trying to boot it up.
Gonna update CyanogenMod thread soon.
Cheers
bemolx said:
Only for updating this post:
Kernel source, mostly ready for Marshmallow ROMs, you can find here on 'cm-13.0' branch.
Linux upstream 3.10.103
Still trying to boot it up.
Gonna update CyanogenMod thread soon.
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great news @bemolx
TheLastCanadian said:
Darn. If only they were more willing to facilitate development.... the software is my only real issue with the phone. Thanks for your work, however.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Out of curiosity, how have other manufacturers "facilitated" this sort of development for their products?
vicks1008 said:
Out of curiosity, how have other manufacturers "facilitated" this sort of development for their products?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Some lend active support to the venture, LG has a dedicated team for liason, better documentation, etc.
I think it's probably pretty telling that it's only now the BLU source has worked - and it took them 5 months to even release it.
BLU releases kernel source codes upon request instead of proactively providing them. If they're asked for on launch, then the kernel source is released shortly after. So I don't believe the claim that it took 5 months to release.
Can you show me proof of other manufacturers lending support to show BLU?
NVMD.
TheLastCanadian said:
Your belief is irrelevant. They have had many requests, and always it is a referral to the FTP site they host. This site did not populate with the kernel/rom source for quite a few months after I bought the phone, and I was already behind the curve by about 2. I purchased mine on the 30th of December, 2015. I made this post the day after I noticed they had Kernel/Rom. If the URL was still working, I could verify for you the time limit. With that said, it was approximately 5 months.
As for other manufacturers lending support.... ZTE for instance is collaborating with Cyanogenmod, LG proactively provides source and has actually tried to make the process quite simple for most of their phones, and ultimately, contacting BLU about the matter is functionally worthless, as BLU is a reseller and at the whim of Gionee. BLU can't help because they don't do R&D or software as I can tell for the phone.
I'm particularly pissed about the fact I asked before I bought the phone if source was available and it was GPL compliant and I was told yes. 5 months is just a little outside of Amazon's return policy. The Pure XL is a good phone, but the software is quite lacklustre. CM would really be the bees' knees.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I'm obviously not going to bother contacting my connections at BLU with that attitude. Good luck guys!
vicks1008 said:
Well I'm obviously not going to bother contacting my connections at BLU with that attitude. Good luck guys!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I should correct myself slightly. Supposing my e-mail record is correct, they released it 4 months after the phone. I say your belief isn't relevant because a fact is a fact.... as of April 5th, I was still getting apologies from them about Kernel source not being available, specifically, "No ETA on source at this time". Ergo, it could have been longer.
As for BLU, I'm just being honest. They don't develop, they're a reseller.
bemolx said:
Only for updating this post:
Kernel source, mostly ready for Marshmallow ROMs, you can find here on 'cm-13.0' branch.
Linux upstream 3.10.103
Still trying to boot it up.
Gonna update CyanogenMod thread soon.
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a small update;
Linux kernel upstream: 3.10.104
Regenerated defconfig as well, the same branch.
I'll try it with full build today.

Categories

Resources