https://github.com/Microsoft/winfile was open source recently, so I built it for rt.
It doesnt ran under WinRT8.1 with same error like WinDjView "number 1566 didn't fnd in the library". Rebuilded new one WinDjView with leaked MFC from VS2001beta works well (with some limitation). Please research this bug. I need an 2window file manager for my RT. How can I help ya?
any chance to get the error as shown in the English ui? would be more familiar to me.
I don't think this project uses mfc.
my guess is some linked dll has an ordinal of 1566 which moved in the dll between rt8.0 and rt8.1. if i get some time I'll recreate the libs from custom def and avoid including ordinal values, so the linker will be forced to load by symbol name.
a note to remind myself how to do that:
lib.exe /def:libfile.def /out:libfile.lib
Please look at there its my opened issue
https://github.com/Microsoft/winfile/issues/6
Unfortunately even when I install English UI some parts of UI still in prenstalled language (Russian in my case) ecen when it sets to English and reboot. This error is still in Russain and Im not sure how it sounds correctly in English.
hooddy said:
Please look at there its my opened issue
https://github.com/Microsoft/winfile/issues/6
Unfortunately even when I install English UI some parts of UI still in prenstalled language (Russian in my case) ecen when it sets to English and reboot. This error is still in Russain and Im not sure how it sounds correctly in English.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Privet! Yes, thanks, I am in that github thread also.
Please try this one if you have the time and willingness.
TLDR; Made libs without ordinals to force the system to load libraries and symbols by name. Based upon your error message containing a numerical value and not knowing whether the system will fail if incorrect ordinal or will retry by name.
Steps to produce are different from these: http://www.wanderinghuman.com/blog/archives/000123.html
In addition to that workspace, here's the changes:
Linked without each library individually to see which symbols were used
For each library
created a library.def file with the missing symbols obtained from linked errors
used this command: lib /def:library.def /out:library.lib /MACHINE:ARM
If First time;Observed linker error on resulting library about 0x1c0 (MACHINE:ARM) and remembered that's the Windows CE ARM thumb1
Hex edited library.lib to replace 0x1c0 with 0x1c4 (THUMB2) where relevant
end
Adjusted linker properties to hard code my libraries, so it didn't search default libraries.
Linked and produced what is attached here.
Edit, had typo in a def file, so fixing binary after fixing it/
smb_gaiden said:
any chance to get the error as shown in the English ui? would be more familiar to me.
I don't think this project uses mfc.
my guess is some linked dll has an ordinal of 1566 which moved in the dll between rt8.0 and rt8.1. if i get some time I'll recreate the libs from custom def and avoid including ordinal values, so the linker will be forced to load by symbol name.
a note to remind myself how to do that:
lib.exe /def:libfile.def /out:libfile.lib
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
NEVER LINK WITH ORDINALS, JUST NEVER. That made me lose a metric ton of time reporting stuff which was already ported to RT otherwise. It's a very bad idea, it's worse having builds with ordinals than no builds at all; a fixed version is attached by the way.
Why are you doing it by generating .libs? that's not required anymore, just add the ARM desktop SDK in individual components on VSinstaller
black_blob said:
NEVER LINK WITH ORDINALS, JUST NEVER. That made me lose a metric ton of time reporting stuff which was already ported to RT otherwise. It's a very bad idea, it's worse having builds with ordinals than no builds at all; a fixed version is attached by the way
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the build. I miss some dll to run it. Can ya share it please?
And please share your Far manager build. I really miss them.
smb_gaiden said:
Privet! Yes, thanks, I am in that github thread also.
Please try this one if you have the time and willingness.
TLDR; Made libs without ordinals to force the system to load libraries and symbols by name. Based upon your error message containing a numerical value and not knowing whether the system will fail if incorrect ordinal or will retry by name.
Steps to produce are different from these: http://www.wanderinghuman.com/blog/archives/000123.html
In addition to that workspace, here's the changes:
Linked without each library individually to see which symbols were used
For each library
created a library.def file with the missing symbols obtained from linked errors
used this command: lib /def:library.def /out:library.lib /MACHINE:ARM
If First time;Observed linker error on resulting library about 0x1c0 (MACHINE:ARM) and remembered that's the Windows CE ARM thumb1
Hex edited library.lib to replace 0x1c0 with 0x1c4 (THUMB2) where relevant
end
Adjusted linker properties to hard code my libraries, so it didn't search default libraries.
Linked and produced what is attached here.
Edit, had typo in a def file, so fixing binary after fixing it/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Privet! Ill try this new build and it's not workd with the same error as early was. What about all you write there I not really undasttod what can I do for you to improve it Im sorry for my stupidility(((
black_blob
can you tell me more about that please?
hooddy said:
Privet! Ill try this new build and it's not workd with the same error as early was. What about all you write there I not really undasttod what can I do for you to improve it Im sorry for my stupidility(((
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you'll have to install the ucrt compatibility update
smb_gaiden said:
black_blob
can you tell me more about that please?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Windows 10 SDKs for VS2017 have the full set of ARM .libs these days. Set the SDK version to 10.0.16299
black_blob said:
you'll have to install the ucrt compatibility update
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where I can get it? Some msu file please. I try to obtain this dll form powershell and dot.net at github with no luck.
@black_blob thank you
@hooddy don't try to understand, just some development information.
smb_gaiden said:
@black_blob thank you
@hooddy don't try to understand, just some development information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thinks it's an https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/3118401/update-for-universal-c-runtime-in-windows I didn't get it over WU. Can ya share direct link for KB3118401 and KB2919355 msu for WinRT please?
Maybe this can help to build proper
https://github.com/Microsoft/winfile/issues/102
Well how about working RT build? Nope?
hooddy said:
Well how about working RT build? Nope?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ended up choosing the nuclear option, and that seems to work alright.
black_blob said:
Ended up choosing the nuclear option, and that seems to work alright.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ya make my day! Thank ya really much!
black_blob said:
Ended up choosing the nuclear option, and that seems to work alright.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh cool, you saved my future self some time! I ordered a surface RT in order to run 8.1 and leave my main one undisturbed. However, still have some work to do elsewhere, so can you elaborate on the nuclear option in order to save my future self more time? Thank you very much!
Static linking for everything + LTCG + removal of all unused code. It ends up working so well that it has the same size as the binary with outside depends.
I got my new (used) surface rt a few days ago, spent 3 days discovering the service pack update black screen error, installing all the service packs, then using the tool provided by Qiangong et. all.
Reproduced the error with my Winfile and realised that there was one critical library that was being linked with ordinals. Drum roll... kernel32.lib due to not using /NODEFAULTLIBS.
Anyway, it has been corrected and attached is a dynamically linked winfile.exe which runs on Windows RT 8.1. It has already been signed.
Related
As an experiment I am trying to rebuild some standard android applications and replace them in system/app on the G1. I have been through all the steps to get the source code and build for the dream platform and have built the various .apk files of interest (e.g. AlarmClock.apk, Browser.apk etc)
To put the files on the device I delete the old .apk and .odex files and copy my newly built .apk file on to the device. However when I try to run the application it crashes with the following message.
The application Alarm Clock (process com.android.alarmclock) has stopped unexpectedly. Please try again.
I know that replacing the applications like this is possible, because the AutoRotating Browser build works fine when copies over in this manner.
I'm using JF1.31 (RC8)
My initial reaction was that I was not signing the applications properly but having read some posts I think the default built .apk should have the right key already in it.
Another theory I have is that perhaps the applications from the head of the source tree are not compatible with the RC8 (or RC30) Android OS releases. Can anyone tell me how to get the source tree which corresponds to this baseline, I've done some reading around but cannot figure it out. I presume I need to do a repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platofrm/manifest.git -b BASELINE but I can't figure out what BASELINE should be.
Many thanks in advance for any help you can give me!!!
There are some branches in android sources:
master
cupcake
release-1.0
Apps from the first two will not run on default G1, you need to reinstall a whole system. I think by default, following google docs you'll get master. So you need to download a release-1.0 sources.
I may be wrong, but that is what I'm see from my experience.
Thanks for that, I'll get the 1.0 branch downloaded and have a go with that.
Cheers for your help!
I was also trying to recompile some of the built-in apps, specifically the browser, but I can't even get it to build. I get a bunch of import errors, stating that it can't find some of the android libraries, such as android.net.http.AndroidHttpClient, android.os.AsyncTask, etc. I've got the android.jar from the SDK in my build path, and it finds some of them, such as android.webkit.URLUtil.
Can anyone shed some light on what I need to do to get it to see the missing libraries? Thanks.
UndeadCretin said:
Thanks for that, I'll get the 1.0 branch downloaded and have a go with that.
Cheers for your help!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are around a dozen build breaks in release-1.0... all of them are due to missing header #includes in various .c and .h files. So, when it doesn't work, don't give up. Fix the breaks and everything will build properly.
Are you resigning the .apk files? Cuz you have to do that for them to work correctly.
Koush said:
There are around a dozen build breaks in release-1.0... all of them are due to missing header #includes in various .c and .h files. So, when it doesn't work, don't give up. Fix the breaks and everything will build properly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep I fixed these problems but I have now hit upon the following problem:
(unknown): error 17: Field android.hardware.SensorManager.LIGHT_NO_MOON has changed value from 0.0010f to 0.001f
******************************
You have tried to change the API from what has been previously released in
an SDK. Please fix the errors listed above.
******************************
I've been in and modified SensorManager back to 0.0010f and that let me build get further but I hit the same error again later in the build.
Given that release-1.0 should be a stable branch is it normal to get all these build issues?
Managed to fix the java issue by modifying public_api.xml. Then hit several more C++ problems which I fixed and finally I can build the lot!
Just tried building the AlarmClock application and running on the G1 and it works fine. Thanks everyone for your help!
>Managed to fix the java issue by modifying public_api.xml. Then hit several more C++ problems which I fixed and finally I can build the lot!
Can you write, what did you fix?
^ Agreed, let us know which files need modifying and what needs doing, i've been trying to get my release-1.0 build root working too!
Alternatively, UndeadCretin, could you build the firmware (release-1.0) with a modified framework-res i can send you?
Ok, I managed to compile it without any editing of xml.
Just added stdlib, string, vector headers to dozen of cpp/h.
worry said:
>Managed to fix the java issue by modifying public_api.xml. Then hit several more C++ problems which I fixed and finally I can build the lot!
Can you write, what did you fix?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To fix the java issue, I modified frameworks/base/core/java/android/hardware/SensorManager to change the LIGHT_NO_MOON value to 0.0010f (from 0.001f) and in out/target/common/obj/PACKAGING I modified the <field name="LIGHT_NO_MOON" to have value-"0.0010f">
After this there were several other c++ files which were missing relevant includes. I'm afraid I didn't keep a note of these so cannot provide much detail but mostly they were missing one of the following
#include "stdlib.h"
#include "string.h"
#include "stdio.h"
I think one file needed the following include
#include <string>
and there were a couple of other files that needed other includes. The best way to find these is to google for the function name that isn't building and you should be able to find the appropriate include (that's how I did it).
Hope that helps a bit!
were you able to repo sync after adding the local_manifest.xml?
ximonx said:
were you able to repo sync after adding the local_manifest.xml?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did try that previously but it didn't work. I don't think the relevant files for the dream build are available in the release-1.0 branch. This wasn't a problem for me since I'm only interested in building the applications which work fine with the generic build.
I would like to do the same for the mms application. Could you give me the steps or a link how to do it? I mean do I need the whole sources from android platform to do it? How can I just compile one application?
Phlogiston said:
I would like to do the same for the mms application. Could you give me the steps or a link how to do it? I mean do I need the whole sources from android platform to do it? How can I just compile one application?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I downloaded the whole Android source (the release-1.0 branch) and compiled the lot. It may be possible to just build the individual application but I do not know how. It is not vital to build for the dream platform if you only care about the applications since they will work fine with the generic build.
So the basic steps to start are:
Get yourself a Linux or Mac OS platform (I use Ubuntu running in VMWare on my XP box).
Follow the instructions here: http://source.android.com/download but when you come to repo init add the flag -b release-1.0
Fix various build problems
When recompiling individual apps to replace system apps is there a way of just building a single application or does the entire thing need making?
ximonx said:
When recompiling individual apps to replace system apps is there a way of just building a single application or does the entire thing need making?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My experience is that you have to do the whole thing if you are building from source. There is one way I know of to get around this, which is to use baksmali and smali.
Just to be clear, making the entire thing = build from source root?
ximonx said:
Just to be clear, making the entire thing = build from source root?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you are asking me--yes, that's what I mean. Make sure to build for dream-open as the target (it's generic by default).
While browsing for apps I came through a site called www.zuneboards.com and it had a program called Liberate for Zune HD. I downloaded the v1.6.2 zip and extracted it and copied to my HTC 7 Pro and tried to run the native executables. Most of them did not work but there was one named reboot.exe and when I tried to open it from the FileBrowser it actually asked if I wanted to reboot my phone and when I tapped on yes it did reboot.
There was another executable cabinstall.exe and when it was executed gave a message to double tap on the cab file which might mean that it we can open a cab file but need to set the correct registry path for the cabinstall.exe to be called when opening a cab file which I am not able to do.
Any help will be appreciated.
I am not sure what it means but is it now possible to make native executables run on windows phone 7? I am able to open Opera Mobile by ultrashot by directly running the executable instead of the opera launcher as well.
I have added the zip file which has the executables.
Are you on a custom ROM or a stock ROM? Native executables have been possible on custom ROMs for a long time, but if this works on a stock ROM... time to investigate.
EDIT: Your link is going to a 404 error page, not a ZIP file. Re-upload maybe?
GoodDayToDie said:
Are you on a custom ROM or a stock ROM? Native executables have been possible on custom ROMs for a long time, but if this works on a stock ROM... time to investigate.
EDIT: Your link is going to a 404 error page, not a ZIP file. Re-upload maybe?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have updated the attachment. Should work now.
I am on a custom rom so I am not sure if it will work on a stock rom or not.
It uses executables built for WinCE 6.0. This is also a valid way to build native code on WP7 (WP7 uses a CE kernel version somewhere between 6.0 and 7.0) so it's no surprise that at least some of the apps will work.
Is there source code available for this hack? It would be interesting to see what they did. It's probably ZHD-specific (for the general unlock) but it *might* be useful for WP7 hacking too...
GoodDayToDie said:
Is there source code available for this hack? It would be interesting to see what they did. It's probably ZHD-specific (for the general unlock) but it *might* be useful for WP7 hacking too...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source code is in the attachment.
404 error page again (WTF? Never seen that on anybody else's attachments!)
GoodDayToDie said:
404 error page again (WTF? Never seen that on anybody else's attachments!)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@GoodDayToDie I am not sure why the attachments are giving the 404 error.
Here is the link to mediafire http://www.mediafire.com/?4g82q2eoww16kgr
@GoodDaytoDie
Did you find anything interesting or useful in the source?
Not yet, but it was a busy weekend. I'm looking through a number of things at the same time and haven't dug into that one yet.
However, it's worth noting that the Zune HD uses a very different security model from WP7. I didn't do any ZHD dev or hacking, so I'm not entirely familiar with how its app model works.
Thanks for the source though! I'll dig into it further and let you know if I find anything. I may have to create an account on that other forum too; it looks like they're doing some WP7 hacking as well.
I tried sources in VS 2008. New project must be created from old source codes and main entry point must be added to properties/link/commandline option, or changed to wmain. See http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=33649737#post33649737 , download zip.
Hi all,
Since several people have PM'd me about it, here is my port of MikTeX 2.9 for Windows RT. I've been out with the flu and ... I'll be rather busy this week, so I won't have much time to support it, but basically extract into your program files directory and run MikTeX-TexWorks.exe in the miktex\bin\arm directory. You might have to perform some configuration.... I haven't had the chance to figure out what those steps are from clean install, but it might involve running initexmf and having it initialize the file cache.
Automatic package install seems to work out of the box. Also, the JavascriptCore from Qt is compiled in interpreter mode (not JIT mode), but it seems to run just fine, even for running texworks scripts. Finally, I didn't get XeTeX compiled, so that isn't included.
http://ge.tt/8omfzEW
Awesome work! Thanks man!
awesome, this is exactly what I need to be able to bring my surface to the next conference.
sorry for this post but i was not able to compile the tex files. I got the error about dump file not found. I ran initexmf but nothing happens. Can you give me some pointer please?
Thank you.
illidanx said:
sorry for this post but i was not able to compile the tex files. I got the error about dump file not found. I ran initexmf but nothing happens. Can you give me some pointer please?
Thank you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same error
Really nice to see MikTex, although I am getting the same error.
Any chance you can fix this?
I'm trying to compile MiKTeX myself, hopefully to get Xetex as well. But I'm stuck -- plenty of CMake's generated scripts don't work well in a cross-compile environment. Any tips?
lowjoel said:
I'm trying to compile MiKTeX myself, hopefully to get Xetex as well. But I'm stuck -- plenty of CMake's generated scripts don't work well in a cross-compile environment. Any tips?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CMake cannot be used for windows RT at this time. Visual Studio 2012 (possibly 2013 aswell) is the only way to build for Win32 with THUMB2 at the moment.
Yeah, I tried both. The vcxproj generated by CMake seems even more broken than the Makefiles. The main evil thing is that MiKTeX generates bootstrap binaries to generate some outputs. In a cross-compile environment you can't run the generated tools to produce the necessary outputs. So unless someone knows all the different binaries, or if I'm missing something major...
Sledgehamma said:
Really nice to see MikTex, although I am getting the same error.
Any chance you can fix this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I found the fix.
Just make sure you unzipped the entire directory to C:\Program Files\MiKTeX 2.9 (exactly); there are some hardcoded configuration that assumes it's installed there.
And to get the package manager working, fire up a shell
Code:
cd C:\Program Files\MiKTeX 2.9\miktex\bin\arm
initexmf --update-fndb
---------- Post added at 08:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:45 AM ----------
Oh; the package manager does not work properly when running in a non-administrator TexWorks. Make sure you run TeXWorks as admin if you need to install packages (should be one-off)
Hello,
i'm interessed in running MiKTeX on jailbroken Windows rt 8.1, but can't get it properly signed. Anyone got a working Version and mind sharing?
Greetings, zedi
Hello from 2023, my friend! It looks like ge.tt does not work here. Could you please upload MikTex somewhere else?
e2fstools package, statically built for arm64 devices from Google's googlecode.com Oreo branch
NOTE: These will support ANY version of android's filesystems that use ext2 or ext3 or ext4. I built them from oreo branch as that one was the closest to compiling without any editing of the Makefiles. Don't let the name throw you off
I needed to run a modern fsck on a rooted device I have that I have been doing some hacking on.
The filesystem was in bad shape and the on-device e2fsck absolutely refused to check it while it was even mounted, even with the force option. Out of part desperation part determination I decided I would just build one myself. So I went and dug up the sources from googlecode.com, transfered them to my linux workstation, and after much fighting with gcc for cross compilation, finding a place in the google git repo where they actually build (hence going with orero), and having to tweak the c code even in a few places (mostly fixing includes and whatnot, no actual coding on my part), I succeeded.
As it says in the title, these are all the e2fstools binaries built from Google's googlecode.com source tree in their Oreo release branch. They are also compiled statically (no libraries are needed for them to function) so they should work absolutely fine on any device that has a 64bit arm (aarch64) processor. I have tested a handfull of them and they work perfectly fine on my Samsung Galaxy s8. In fact I used the fsck.ext4 binary to repair my system partition which it did perfectly.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/owb76hohnjzjdwe/e2fstools-oreo-aarch64-static.tar.gz?dl=0
Hope they come in as handy to someone else as they did me.
List of files follows:
Code:
[email protected]:~> tar tzf e2fstools-oreo-aarch64-static.tar.gz
e2fsbin/
e2fsbin/e2undo
e2fsbin/e2image
e2fsbin/badblocks
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext3
e2fsbin/fsck.ext4dev
e2fsbin/e2initrd_helper
e2fsbin/fsck.ext3
e2fsbin/e4crypt
e2fsbin/e4defrag
e2fsbin/mke2fs
e2fsbin/e2fsck
e2fsbin/fsck.ext4
e2fsbin/filefrag
e2fsbin/tune2fs
e2fsbin/e2freefrag
e2fsbin/uuidd
e2fsbin/e2label
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext2
e2fsbin/blkid
e2fsbin/logsave
e2fsbin/lsattr
e2fsbin/uuidgen
e2fsbin/findfs
e2fsbin/mklost+found
e2fsbin/dumpe2fs
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext4
e2fsbin/debugfs
e2fsbin/fsck.ext2
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext4dev
e2fsbin/resize2fs
e2fsbin/chattr
e2fsbin/fsck
PS: Now that I have a working arm64 cross compilation system setup, if anyone else desperately needs a working static binary for anything relatively simple to build (as in not 50 million dependencies for me to track down and install) and can send me or link me the sources for it and its dependencies, I would be happy to oblige.
Unfortunately, my device is armv7
buengeut said:
Unfortunately, my device is armv7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I forget, is that 32bit? If so i could fairly easily build new ones that are 32bit. Did you try them and they didnt work? If its 64bit they may work anyway, as these dont use any fancy instructions, and i did not build them even with -O1. I thought the main differences between the different "v"s of the same arch (32v64) was in libc and friends, of which these dont use as they are completely static so libc is built in.
I was even thinking of making this a flashable zip, but i hadnt bothered as no one replied to my initial post so i didnt think anyone cared ?️
partcyborg said:
I forget, is that 32bit? If so i could fairly easily build new ones that are 32bit. Did you try them and they didnt work? If its 64bit they may work anyway, as these dont use any fancy instructions, and i did not build them even with -O1. I thought the main differences between the different "v"s of the same arch (32v64) was in libc and friends, of which these dont use as they are completely static so libc is built in.
I was even thinking of making this a flashable zip, but i hadnt bothered as no one replied to my initial post so i didnt think anyone cared ?️
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ARMv7 is ARM 32bit, 64bit program will not work on a 32bit system.
Can you build e2fstools for ARMv7.
Sadly your link is down.
would you care to reupload?
LNQ said:
Sadly your link is down.
would you care to reupload?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure. I'll even make it flashable this time ?
Thanks alot, good sir!
Legend! I'd been dealing with not being able to repair my /data errors for the past few days since my Oreo update. The current TWRP (3.2.3.4) still has an ancient e2fsck that doesn't support the ext4 quota option that LG formats their Oreo data partition with. The updated version in /system/bin works while the OS is running which is why I knew I had errors, but I couldn't get it to run in TWRP to fix them because of the incompatible library files.
I was all set to reinstall my Android SDK and compile another version with inbuilt libraries when I decided to do one last search and found this thread where you'd already done it. So thanks for saving me a few hours of downloading/installing/remembering how to compile for Android all over again
I guess I can also vouch for it working on an LG V20. I don't know if it's just LG's version of Oreo that needs the later e2fsck or others too, but anyone who can't repair errors on their ext4 partitions in TWRP due to needing a newer e2fsck version should be able to use this version. I just copied the file fsck.ext4dev to /cache and ran it from there on my data partition.
Your link is dropbox banned...
Any chance you could attach the zip here...?
quotient said:
Your link is dropbox banned...
Any chance you could attach the zip here...?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seconded!
@partcyborg
Any chance you could put this file somewhere else? The above link is banned.
Thanks!
Hi,
I have a Oneplus 3 that after 3 years of use became sluggish as hell at file system access.
After reading thus document https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/hotstorage16/hotstorage16_ji.pdf
I would give a try to your e2fstools build.
Can you repost a link to download?
Thanks in advance
partcyborg said:
I forget, is that 32bit? If so i could fairly easily build new ones that are 32bit. Did you try them and they didnt work? If its 64bit they may work anyway, as these dont use any fancy instructions, and i did not build them even with -O1. I thought the main differences between the different "v"s of the same arch (32v64) was in libc and friends, of which these dont use as they are completely static so libc is built in.
I was even thinking of making this a flashable zip, but i hadnt bothered as no one replied to my initial post so i didnt think anyone cared ?️
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Late to this thread, great work!
I have the exact same problem.
Could you please post flashable zip and/or instructions how to load this into android?
Thank you
I found a binary on website, tested on Nexus 5 (ARMv7L 32bits)
GitHub - FerryAr/e2fsprogs-arm: Static build of e2fsprogs for Android Magisk Module
Static build of e2fsprogs for Android Magisk Module - GitHub - FerryAr/e2fsprogs-arm: Static build of e2fsprogs for Android Magisk Module
github.com
partcyborg said:
e2fstools package, statically built for arm64 devices from Google's googlecode.com Oreo branch
NOTE: These will support ANY version of android's filesystems that use ext2 or ext3 or ext4. I built them from oreo branch as that one was the closest to compiling without any editing of the Makefiles. Don't let the name throw you off
I needed to run a modern fsck on a rooted device I have that I have been doing some hacking on.
The filesystem was in bad shape and the on-device e2fsck absolutely refused to check it while it was even mounted, even with the force option. Out of part desperation part determination I decided I would just build one myself. So I went and dug up the sources from googlecode.com, transfered them to my linux workstation, and after much fighting with gcc for cross compilation, finding a place in the google git repo where they actually build (hence going with orero), and having to tweak the c code even in a few places (mostly fixing includes and whatnot, no actual coding on my part), I succeeded.
As it says in the title, these are all the e2fstools binaries built from Google's googlecode.com source tree in their Oreo release branch. They are also compiled statically (no libraries are needed for them to function) so they should work absolutely fine on any device that has a 64bit arm (aarch64) processor. I have tested a handfull of them and they work perfectly fine on my Samsung Galaxy s8. In fact I used the fsck.ext4 binary to repair my system partition which it did perfectly.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/owb76hohnjzjdwe/e2fstools-oreo-aarch64-static.tar.gz?dl=0
Hope they come in as handy to someone else as they did me.
List of files follows:
Code:
[email protected]:~> tar tzf e2fstools-oreo-aarch64-static.tar.gz
e2fsbin/
e2fsbin/e2undo
e2fsbin/e2image
e2fsbin/badblocks
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext3
e2fsbin/fsck.ext4dev
e2fsbin/e2initrd_helper
e2fsbin/fsck.ext3
e2fsbin/e4crypt
e2fsbin/e4defrag
e2fsbin/mke2fs
e2fsbin/e2fsck
e2fsbin/fsck.ext4
e2fsbin/filefrag
e2fsbin/tune2fs
e2fsbin/e2freefrag
e2fsbin/uuidd
e2fsbin/e2label
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext2
e2fsbin/blkid
e2fsbin/logsave
e2fsbin/lsattr
e2fsbin/uuidgen
e2fsbin/findfs
e2fsbin/mklost+found
e2fsbin/dumpe2fs
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext4
e2fsbin/debugfs
e2fsbin/fsck.ext2
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext4dev
e2fsbin/resize2fs
e2fsbin/chattr
e2fsbin/fsck
PS: Now that I have a working arm64 cross compilation system setup, if anyone else desperately needs a working static binary for anything relatively simple to build (as in not 50 million dependencies for me to track down and install) and can send me or link me the sources for it and its dependencies, I would be happy to oblige.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi nice compilation job! I know it's not always easy to compile these binaries from source...
Can you please reupload you archive here as attachment? Thanks!
lebigmac said:
Hi nice compilation job! I know it's not always easy to compile these binaries from source...
Can you please reupload you archive here as attachment? Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's a Magisk module that does cross-compilation specifically, you should get it.
By the way, the link for that drop box is dead.
Hi, I'm trying to build Android 11. When I run the command
repo sync
I obtai the error
fatal: remove-project element specifies non-existent project: platform/prebuilts/gcc/darwin-x86/mips/mips64el-linux-android-4.9
What it means? How can I resolve it?
Many thanks
Check this report from GitHub. It doesn't look like a big deal. Maybe missing resources/files that you probably don't need if you are building an OS for a phone.
I see they simple removed a line from local_manifests/untracked.xml of which contains the error.
Hi, many thanks for your reply. I have removed more than 10 lines from the xml files.
Is it a normal behaviour? Why the files are not correct?
denisgottardello said:
Hi, many thanks for your reply. I have removed more than 10 lines from the xml files.
Is it a normal behaviour? Why the files are not correct?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't find a direct answer. But I've searched the errors, and found that your error on the OP has a darwin-x86 on it.
So I did Google that, and found that it is an Operating System that has something to do with Mac OS, released in 2000, still active.
So as the errors of other builders. I noticed that they're building an OS for mobile phones, which does not include, for an example, darwin-x86. So I asked myself .. What's the point of including an arch that you won't need?
I think when you're building the OS, you do export the arch you're targeting, right? So did it include darwin-x86?