Related
Sometime in the next few days (maybe this weekend), we will be merging https://gerrit.omnirom.org/#/c/1169/
This will allow TWRP to build properly on userdebug builds. As a warning, it WILL break anyone who doesn't have TWRP config in their device tree when it is merged! (You will get errors about missing files in bootable/recovery/res if I recall correctly)
See http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1943625 for info on various TWRP device tree configurations. At an absolute minimum I believe you will need the device resolution added to avoid breaking your build.
For additional details, see:
Find5:
https://gerrit.omnirom.org/#/c/1633/
Yuga:
https://gerrit.omnirom.org/#/c/1682/ (Depends on fusion3-common changes)
pollux-common (pollux_windy and pollux don't have specific items and just inherit common):
https://gerrit.omnirom.org/#/c/1155/ (Depends on fusion3-common changes)
fusion3-common:
https://gerrit.omnirom.org/#/c/1152/
flo:
https://gerrit.omnirom.org/#/c/1634/
mako:
https://gerrit.omnirom.org/#/c/1635/
@Entropy512
Hey there!
Add me on hangouts sir:
[email protected]
What about this TWRP configuration for honami?
https://github.com/Omni-Xperia/android_device_sony_rhine-common/commits/cm-10.2
i have built one for pollux and it works
Just wondering, does this recovery actually get flashed when installing? I.e. do all the parameters need to be set properly to build the ROM, or just enough to not break the build? I'm already using TWRP and I'm not sure of the right BoardConfig.mk settings but if I'm just trying to port it to my device that shouldn't matter right? Though I noticed there are device trees on the TeamWin GitHub for building TWRP, for my device (n8013) it seems out of date.
Edit: well cool, turned out not to matter and it seems like my build actually booted, I'm pleasantly surprised .
iofthestorm said:
Just wondering, does this recovery actually get flashed when installing? I.e. do all the parameters need to be set properly to build the ROM, or just enough to not break the build? I'm already using TWRP and I'm not sure of the right BoardConfig.mk settings but if I'm just trying to port it to my device that shouldn't matter right? Though I noticed there are device trees on the TeamWin GitHub for building TWRP, for my device (n8013) it seems out of date.
Edit: well cool, turned out not to matter and it seems like my build actually booted, I'm pleasantly surprised .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty much what happens is, TeamWin will get a device tree, modify it to be compatible with TWRP, and use that to build for that device. The actual core source for TWRP itself is in a separate repository that is constantly updated. So pretty much its like this : once your device tree is modified to build TWRP for your device during a build, it will build using TWRP source , which is android_bootable_recovery, for omnirom specifically.
Think of it like this: you setup a device tree to say "build TWRP using this source code" . once the device tree is looking for that source code, it'll always build twrp without issues (for the most part). Now the location your device tree looks to is the twrp source itself, which is updated and improved all the time, so if you're device tree is setup properly for tarp, you will have a recovery.img in your out directory after a build that is as up-to-date build of twrp to when you last did a repo sync
Sent from my SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
jakew02 said:
Pretty much what happens is, TeamWin will get a device tree, modify it to be compatible with TWRP, and use that to build for that device. The actual core source for TWRP itself is in a separate repository that is constantly updated. So pretty much its like this : once your device tree is modified to build TWRP for your device during a build, it will build using TWRP source , which is android_bootable_recovery, for omnirom specifically.
Think of it like this: you setup a device tree to say "build TWRP using this source code" . once the device tree is looking for that source code, it'll always build twrp without issues (for the most part). Now the location your device tree looks to is the twrp source itself, which is updated and improved all the time, so if you're device tree is setup properly for tarp, you will have a recovery.img in your out directory after a build that is as up-to-date build of twrp to when you last did a repo sync
Sent from my SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah thanks, that's useful, but not really what I was asking about. I got that part, I just wanted to know if flashing the ROM actually flashes the recovery that was built in tree as well, and it seems like the answer is no (at least for me my recovery didn't change). As such it seems like the main point that Entropy512 was making is that if you don't add the resolution to your BoardConfig.mk the build won't complete, but otherwise it doesn't really matter if you set the other parameters correctly.
The paths I was referring to were the mount points for the internal and external SD, I thought they had changed since ICS but I think they might still have symlinks to the old paths for compatibility's sake.
iofthestorm said:
Ah thanks, that's useful, but not really what I was asking about. I got that part, I just wanted to know if flashing the ROM actually flashes the recovery that was built in tree as well, and it seems like the answer is no (at least for me my recovery didn't change). As such it seems like the main point that Entropy512 was making is that if you don't add the resolution to your BoardConfig.mk the build won't complete, but otherwise it doesn't really matter if you set the other parameters correctly.
The paths I was referring to were the mount points for the internal and external SD, I thought they had changed since ICS but I think they might still have symlinks to the old paths for compatibility's sake.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mention mount points for the SD, I have been building for the HTC One S and while all the mount points in the my ville/rootdir are correct for example in the fstab.qcom file
# SD card
/devices/platform/msm_sdcc.1/mmc_host/mmc0 /storage/sdcard0 auto defaults voldmanaged=sdcard:36
The rom shows it as unavailable/missing and asks me to format the SD card, I tried and the message keeps popping up.
Basically my question is, will building twrp recovery for the device sort out the missing SD card.
iofthestorm said:
Ah thanks, that's useful, but not really what I was asking about. I got that part, I just wanted to know if flashing the ROM actually flashes the recovery that was built in tree as well, and it seems like the answer is no (at least for me my recovery didn't change). As such it seems like the main point that Entropy512 was making is that if you don't add the resolution to your BoardConfig.mk the build won't complete, but otherwise it doesn't really matter if you set the other parameters correctly.
The paths I was referring to were the mount points for the internal and external SD, I thought they had changed since ICS but I think they might still have symlinks to the old paths for compatibility's sake.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
flashing a ROM will never flash a recovery, but some devices have the recovery as part of the boot.img, so when you flash a new kernel, for example, you will be flashing a new recovery as well
iofthestorm said:
Just wondering, does this recovery actually get flashed when installing? I.e. do all the parameters need to be set properly to build the ROM, or just enough to not break the build? I'm already using TWRP and I'm not sure of the right BoardConfig.mk settings but if I'm just trying to port it to my device that shouldn't matter right? Though I noticed there are device trees on the TeamWin GitHub for building TWRP, for my device (n8013) it seems out of date.
Edit: well cool, turned out not to matter and it seems like my build actually booted, I'm pleasantly surprised .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ideally you should have a goal of building a fully functional recovery.
However, with the exception of older Samsungs (galaxys2 family and older for the most part) and Sonys, you don't NEED the recovery to be fully functional. With the galaxys2 family and Sonys - yeah you need it. (Actually Sonys do have a workaround, but the GS2 family does not.)
That said, leaving a partially configured recovery configuration is bad practice.
jakew02 said:
flashing a ROM will never flash a recovery, but some devices have the recovery as part of the boot.img, so when you flash a new kernel, for example, you will be flashing a new recovery as well
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, that'd be what I was thinking of. My first Android phone, the Samsung Fascinate, had a weird setup like that.
Entropy512 said:
Ideally you should have a goal of building a fully functional recovery.
However, with the exception of older Samsungs (galaxys2 family and older for the most part) and Sonys, you don't NEED the recovery to be fully functional. With the galaxys2 family and Sonys - yeah you need it. (Actually Sonys do have a workaround, but the GS2 family does not.)
That said, leaving a partially configured recovery configuration is bad practice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright, that's what I figured. Yeah, I'll fix it later for sure, I just didn't have the time this weekend and I didn't plan on submitting a patch to make it officially supported anyway, as I just wanted to try it out for myself at this point. And I figured since it's the n8013 you'd be the best person to support that anyway, I only know enough to get myself in trouble.
(do you still have your N8013 by the way?)
iofthestorm said:
Yeah, that'd be what I was thinking of. My first Android phone, the Samsung Fascinate, had a weird setup like that.
Alright, that's what I figured. Yeah, I'll fix it later for sure, I just didn't have the time this weekend and I didn't plan on submitting a patch to make it officially supported anyway, as I just wanted to try it out for myself at this point. And I figured since it's the n8013 you'd be the best person to support that anyway, I only know enough to get myself in trouble.
(do you still have your N8013 by the way?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do, but it mostly collects dust these days. At some point I'll try to get Omni up on it, I've just had too much else to do lately.
So another question, what is the mechanism by which twrp.fstab is used? I decided to flash my recovery for the heck of it (sidenote: on the 4.4 branch it still has the AOSP recovery in the manifest, but I just added omnirom/android_bootable_recovery to my local_manifests.xml) and it actually runs but nothing appears to be mounted. I notice that some TWRPify commits have a twrp.fstab but they don't do a PRODUCT_COPY_FILES for that file so I'm wondering how it even gets used? I see for example that your commit for flo is doing it: https://gerrit.omnirom.org/#/c/1523/ but then this guy didn't actually add it to PRODUCT_COPY_FILES for hammerhead: https://gerrit.omnirom.org/#/c/1588/ . Is that just a mistake on Mithun's part, or am I misunderstanding how this fstab is used? Is there any reason for it to be any different than the fstab.smdk4x12 in the device tree? Just trying to figure out how things work here.
Also, is it preferable to use the by-name symlinks over the raw /dev/block/mmcblk0p9 type device identifiers? Should I open another thread for this?
My hackjob device trees are https://github.com/ibrahima/android_device_samsung_n80xx-common and https://github.com/ibrahima/android_device_samsung_n8013 .
Edit: I guess my main question is, how is that twrp.fstab different from TARGET_RECOVERY_FSTAB? Some of the device trees with it (eg. your flo changeset that I linked above) don't seem to set this unless I'm looking in the wrong place, and I've seen at least one that sets TARGET_RECOVERY_FSTAB to /etc/twrp.fstab. Found this quote from @Dees_Troy:
You can create a twrp.fstab file and then use PRODUCT_COPY_FILES += device/oem/codename/twrp.fstab:recovery/root/etc/twrp.fstab to get the twrp.fstab into the recovery ramdisk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
from http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=45164117 . If I already have an /etc/recovery.fstab it should work without the twrp.fstab right?
Edit2: Oh, derp, the twrp.fstab explanation is in the "How to Compile TWRP" thread. Filing away for later reading... (this is fun and all, but my professors aren't going to accept an Android 4.4 build in place of my homework )
Edit3: My god, this is basically me: http://xkcd.com/356/ and the truck is my homework/midterms... welp, at least I got a recovery with proper fstab, so for anyone else trying to TWRPify yes, you do need a twrp.fstab because the new fstab format in Android 4.3+ is not used by TWRP yet so you need one in the older format for it to mount your stuff. Haven't actually tried flashing anything with my recovery yet, but I feel like it should probably work, but again... trucks and all that
If it's not in PRODUCT_COPY_FILES - yes, that is a mistake.
(hopefully that commit isn't merged - accessing omni's gerrit is problematic for me from some locations. If the TWRP FSTAB is added to the device tree but isn't being copied that's grounds for a -1)
Yeah, he -1ed it himself for other reasons I suppose. Cool cool, looks like I'm learning stuff
By the way, after the hard drive meltdown and subsequent loss of two weeks of gerrit data, a lot of the links in your OP are broken in that they go to different tickets which have now subsumed those ticket numbers that were lost. For those who are curious and have been foiled by Gerrit's somewhat obtuse search box, if you type message:TWRP in the search box (to search commit messages) you'll find examples.
sediROM for LG Optimus F3Q - Custom ROM (codenames: fx3q, d520)
This is about building a custom ROM like Cyanogenmod or AOSP working on the LG Optimus F3Q.
Introduction
First of all: At the moment there is no CM or AOSP based ROM available for the F3Q. Not yet.
That said it means I try to port CM (or build pure AOSP) to the F3Q and this is this thread about.
Some words about me and what I do:
I do Android ROM development since June 2014 mainly doing things based on stock.
Before the F3Q I never had to do with porting CM or AOSP to a brand new (no not such "new" anymore) device before.
New means "no file device tree" etc available. So I dive into porting months ago and still learning every day new things here.
Porting is nothing you can learn in a week or so The main problem with porting is that there is not much you can read or
where you can get many help for. The guides out there are very generic and to be honest the best would be having a pro on your site
which guides you through all the problems which WILL occur when porting.
Before starting I never heard about "loki", doesn't know how TWRP gets compiled or created an Android kernel with or without CM
automatism. In the meantime I compiled a working TWRP version, having a kernel in place which allows to boot unsigned system
images and many more. The only "little" thing left is to get CM ready.. Nevertheless I have 2 things which helped me a lot over
the years: patience and "never-give-up".
The state:
If you ever tried to compile Android or CM by your own you know that you need a valid file device tree (in this case "device/lge/fx3q/")
which contains all the stuff which describes the hardware, the things to do, proprietary files you cannot compile because their sources
are kept by LG and so on. Building that from scratch is a pain in the a.. so you need to find another device whose hardware is as much
the same as yours. In this case this means LG Optimus F6 which has the same processor etc. The great thing is that there are people
out there who had build a working device tree for the F6 which means it should be possible to have the same for the F3Q!
The problem is that before I used the DT from hroark and fixed several build errors there and well now I use the very much more newer
one from dm47021 and this means: adapt everything again, fixing build errors again..
Even when there is such a valid base available from a device with same specs this does not means it would simply work when copying
it over.
I need to adapt nevertheless many things to get the sources at least compiled! and then the question is what works and what not.
This is where we are atm: Fixing compilation errors (fix 1 and you get 2 new) and then we will see..
For updates about the state scroll down to the "current state" topic.
Here what we achieved so far :
Root:
Saferoot: http://www.andromods.com/root-unlock/d520-one-click-rooted-tmobile-lg-optimus-f3q.html (Original: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2565758)
Recovery:
CWM (I cannot recommend that CWM version atm! Because it was build with not a full valid device tree and is missing features TWRP has included!): https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.pressy4pie.oudhs.manager
TWRP (highly recommended!): http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2867339
Kernel:
sediKERNEL thread
ROM related:
AROMA installer for customized ROM installation
Stock based "hLe Storm ROM" by @joel.maxuel: [ROM][STOCK][JB 4.1.2] LG Optimus F3Q / D520
Guides & Discussions:
General talk: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2650840
Revert to STOCK again: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=54667480&postcount=181
If you want to help let me know and I provide you the sources and whatever else needed.
Current state (as of 2015-04-30):
Spent time = about 244 hours... any "Thanks" click still HIGHLy motivating..
Done:
Lokifying (without that we were absolutely L-O-S-T!!! BIG thx @djrbliss) process is done automatically by my self created build-script (took me some time but was it worth)
Lokifying means: due to a hack by @djrbliss (click here and click at his THANKS button!!) we can trick the locked bootloader to boot whatever we want!
boot a modified compiled kernel with the stock ROM / or hLe stock ROM
custom 3.4.0 kernel with kexec(disabled atm), xattr, selinux support and much more based on the stock kernel sources (sediKERNEL thread)
the ability to boot unsigned ROM's provided by sediKERNEL
Fully (or mostly) working TWRP version where storages correctly mounted and backup/restore working fine (TWRP thread)
adapt hroark's device tree of the LG optimus F6 to the F3Q (superseeded by dm47021)
adapt DM47021 DT to F3Q and compiling CM KK systemimage/full otapackage (do not expect too much it simply means that I was able to fix all the thousands of compilation errors. which is GREAT but now the debuggin starts)
Rebasing EVERYTHING of the file device tree to the f6mft one by Dm47021. Reason: CM is now available for the F6 which is damn great because we use the same hardware in many cases. I currently rewriting everything from scratch, adding the correct proprietary files etc. Will take a while but hopefully then we get more in the right direction then before.
Build system:
Intel® Core™ i7-3632QM CPU @ 2.20GHz × 8 (Quadcore. Due Hyperthreading 8 threads/CPU's)
8 GB RAM
Ubuntu Server 14.04 - 64 bit, running in a highly optimized VM based on KVM
CM11 compilation time (full cleaned working directory)
real 56m47.417s - up to 80m
user 213m6.612s
sys 20m9.400s
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Current progress:
Testing and debugging CM KK image
Building a custom kernel without stock initrd (Details on the process here: sediKERNEL thread)
To do:
must-have: Building a custom kernel without stock initrd
must-have: having a working device tree (depends on having an own initrd)
undecided: compiling AOSP JB
undecided: compiling CM JB
Stalled:
compiling CM11 kernel based on the F6 device tree (too many compilation failures)
compiling AOSP Jellybean including the LG sources works (but different issues with booting)
compiling AOSP KitKat including the LG sources fails (doesn't start at all because of several changed vars maybe. Didn't investigate that further cause I focus on kernel now)
compiling CM JellyBean fails with the adapted LG Optimus F6 device tree
MultiRom (discontinued as sediKERNEL can now do all I need):
Multirom TWRP = compiling OK but no screen shown?!
Multirom binary = compiling OK
Multirom trampoline = compiling OK if it works or not? Cannot test it until TWRP
Kexec Kernel = Porting to F3Q (hopefully) finished. compiling OK but it has problems with mounting the correct places (I think. Didnt investigate that further atm)
For testers: ALPHA/BETA testing download area
http://tinyurl.com/q7fwcf3
(password protected - PM me to get access)
For developers: my sources
My current device tree of the fx3q AOSP build can be found here: device_lge_fx3q_aosp (updated from time to time, PM me for an immediate commit)
My current device tree of the fx3q CM11 build can be found here: android_device_lge_fx3q_cm (updated from time to time, PM me for an immediate commit)
My build tools (useful tools I developed for me to speed up build/compile etc): buildtools (updated from time to time, PM me for an immediate commit)
.
XDA:DevDB Information
sediROM for LG Optimus F3Q / D520, ROM for the Android General
Contributors
xdajog, joel.maxuel
Source Code: https://github.com/xdajog/android_device_lge_fx3q_cm
ROM OS Version: 4.4.x KitKat
ROM Kernel: Linux 3.1.x
Based On: CyanogenMod
Version Information
Status: Testing
Created 2015-05-19
Last Updated 2015-05-20
Reserved
reserved 1
reserved 1
BUT IN THE MEANTIME YOU COULD USE THIS POST FOR ANOTHER THANKS CLICK
Questions & Answers
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
(in no special order)
Question #1: Is CM or pure AOSP (or similar) for this device available now?
No. Not AFAIK. If you find some please tell me! But afaik I'm the only one working on that port so if you find someone or you want to help by yourself please send me a PM!!!
I currently trying to port CM to this device and as I'm doing that alone and the whole process is very complex this is nothing you can do in 2 weeks or so.
Question #2: When will be CM or pure AOSP or similar available?
When it is ready. Sorry but for this no timeline can be made. I will update the OP from time to time so come back often to check if there are any news.
Question #3: Why are you doing this?
Well .. the main reason is I want to have an absolutely fully localized (German) Android for my wife. Yes it's that simple. There are plenty of apps who can switch the language in many dialogs but all LG ones (like settings, power menu etc) are all still English.
The following may harm you but the F3Q is not a device I would buy for myself. I do not really like it's design, it has more weight and height than my current one (Samsung i927). Ok not all is that bad: What I really like is the physical keyboard which is much more better than from the i927..
Nevertheless I own a F3Q since a while because the community sponsored one to me which makes it possible for me to continue developing for this phone. Otherwise I had stopped that at the time where my wife used her F3Q productive.
The other reasons are:
There are problems here in Germany regarding the reception: 3G (or better) is not possible (but it should be from the point of technical specs).
Besides that the displayed information about the speed seems to be wrong in some cases but that is another story..
Last but not least the problem of overfilled storage makes me mad (well in fact makes my wife mad but well that makes me mad then). There is always to less even with tricks like moving apps etc.
So in short: I want to be able to fix problems who are annoying me/my wife.
Question #4: I have bought the phone and need to unlock it (service provider lock, network lock, ...) now. How to do that?
Well there are thousands of services out there who offers unlocking and no guarantees wherever you go.
Just 1 thing before you read on:
I'm not responsible if the mentioned site doesn't work for you! For me it had worked but there are no guarantees out there in the evil internet ocean...!
The following describes my personal experiences with those services only. No guarantees no responsibilities no whatever.
I have tested 2 of them:
The first one is a "free" service named www.unlockphone.me.
Free means first of all: WAIT. As an example my request have this as the waiting time:
1027 people are in queue in front of you. 2 weeks, 3days, 10hrs, 14min remaining until you will receive your CODE
The service itself is free but as I do not wanted to wait such long I donated to them 10$ to receive the code more quickly.
Result: Well I got a code but is was not working. I send them 4 mails - never received any answer. Bad luck. That is what I mentioned above. No guarantees. Well you could try it on your own - at least the free one without a donation - and see what happens for you. It's may worth the try.
.
The second one was fine. To be sure: I do not own the following service or get anything for pointing there but I have used them 2 times and at least the service provider lock could be unlocked both times successfully. The first time used they unlocked for $2 CAD (November 2014) and today (April 2015) they unlocked for $7,50 CAD.. Well it still seems to be a reasonable price (at least for me).
freemyblackberry.com
I filled in the following:
Brand = LG
Carrier/Country = USA / T-Mobile
Model = LG Optimus F3Q
When you have received your code (the one way or the other):
if you do not see the unlock screen already type in the following in the dialer: 2945#*520#
in the displayed menu choose the type of unlock you want to do (in my case it was service provider locked so I choosen that)
type in the received unlock code (for my case the freemyblackberry named it SPCK)
the phone may reboot now automatically
enjoy.
Question #5: What can I do to help?
I thought you would never ask! :victory:
The first one EVERYONE can do even when no programming skills is: Use the "Thanks" button. :good:
This is simple, easy and can be done very quickly. This will not speed up anything of course but it keeps me motivating because it shows me that you like what I do.
.
The second one EVERYONE can do is to participate in beta testing versions.
From time to time I release a new Kernel or TWRP version or some day a CM version. If you want to help you should do that by installing those beta versions (if one is available) and telling me about the good and bad of it.
This needs always a full backup and you may need to restore things afterwards but I'm here to assist you as far as I can.
.
The third one is not for everyone: helping to port.
That means going to the steps of CM porting guide and downloading the LGE sources and cloning my git repos. Get in contact with me before so you use an uptodate repo like the device tree etc.
This one would be the biggest effort but it is the most time consuming. At least for the full port.
If you "only" want to help partly like making TWRP better or helping with Kernel development it will be much much easier because those both are already fully working and you can start with fixing things instead of try&error!
That said Option 3 here is the only option if you really want to speed up the process!
.
The last one I can think of is donating, of course. I do not beg for money here - it is simply one of the available options.
One thing about this is important: a donation is much much more motivating then the mentioned "Thanks" click but you also will not speed up anything (Ok you would speed up things when the donation is about 10.000 € or more haha)!
But seriously: I do all that in my free time atm and that means I need to cut out time somewhere else from RL. This is not a problem for me and if you donate or not I will continue until I reached my personal goal.
That simply means that it will take much more time than doing it full time. The only other option would be developing in the normal work hours which means not earning money here for this time. So there needs to be a balance for if I would do that. That said there will be times where I can work on it and may times not for weeks. It depends.
Question #6: What is that "adb" thing?
adb stands for: Android Debug Bridge and can help a lot when it comes to work with your device. It is not for developers only but they use it a lot of course.
But a normal user can use this to exchange files without the need of mounting, backing up the device, reboot the device and use it as a very comfortable way of having a terminal emulator.
.
Normally adb itself is not available as a standalone application - it comes with the Android SDK which is very big and heavy if you want to use adb and/or fastboot (another great tool) only.
But we live in a great world with many people wanting to make things easy so here you go when you want/need only adb and fastboot:
download & install adb @lifehacker
Question #7: How can I find the LG Hidden Service Menu (STOCK)?
Normally you will not need this! But you may want to enable the USB DIAG mode if you're a developer or you simply want to make your phone unusable - so here we go:
As usual: Use on your own risk!
adb shell
su
am start -a android.intent.action.MAIN -n com.lge.hiddenmenu/com.lge.hiddenmenu.HiddenMenu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
or simply by typing the following in the dialer:
3845#*520#
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know I am getting ahead of myself, but I know some devices have a /datadata partition (like the Samsung Infuse) when ported for a KitKat ROM.
When it comes time to design for KitKat, can this separate partition be eliminated? I know it is done for performance reasons, but with such limited userdata space as it is, another partition would come as a detriment. This has already proved a problem on the Infuse, and they have much more space to deal with (albeit ~600mb /datadata).
The alternative would be building Link2SD into the ROM, knowing that there will still be only a small collections of apps that can be installed.
Unfortunately, because of our limited userdata, we probably won't be able to develop past KitKat, at least end up with something usable. ART will prove to be too much of a pig for this device (storage wise).
Just my nickel's worth...
Bad news..
The Desire Z of my wife is completely broken now.
That means I cannot develop anymore..
- I ported and released the latest TWRP version to the F3Q
- I'm able to build AOSP JellyBean (not booting yet though),
- I compiled and released a custom AOSP Kernel (named sediKERNEL)
.... and a lot more..
I have everything I need to continue here in place...
I have the will and the ability to continue...
But no device anymore..
If someone has a F3Q to give away.. then I will continue but I'm not willing to buy a F3Q for developing only. So if you have an idea how we could continue let me know.
Otherwise that will end here for me unfortunately...
Hopefully not.
Yours
Xdajog.
Update:
Check out the following link if you want to help http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2952919
-----
Sent from my SGH-I927 using XDA Android mobile app
xdajog said:
sediROM for LG Optimus F3Q - Custom ROM (codenames: fx3q, d520)
Recovery:
CWM (I cannot recommend that CWM version atm! Because it was build with not a full valid device tree and is missing features TWRP has included!): https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.pressy4pie.oudhs.manager
TWRP (highly recommended!): http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2867339
Done:
Lokifying succesful and is done automatically by my build-script (took me some time but was it worth)
I am able to boot a modified compiled kernel with the stock ROM
Custom JB kernel with kexec support based on the stock sources (stock initrd)
Custom JB kernel with xattr support based on the stock sources (stock initrd)
Custom JB kernel with selinux support based on the stock sources (stock initrd)
Fully (or mostly) working TWRP version where storages correctly mounted and backup/restore working fine (TWRP thread)
Current progress:
Building a custom kernel without stock initrd (Details on the process here: sediKERNEL thread)
To do:
Building a custom kernel without stock initrd
having a working device tree (depends on having an own initrd)
compiling AOSP JB (depends on device tree)
compiling CM JB (depends on device tree)
compiling CM KK (depends on device tree)
Stalled:
compiling CM11 kernel based on the F6 device tree (too many compilation failures)
compiling AOSP Jellybean including the LG sources works (but different issues with booting)
compiling AOSP KitKat including the LG sources fails (doesn't start at all because of several changed vars maybe. Didn't investigate that further cause I focus on kernel now)
compiling CM JellyBean fails with the adapted LG Optimus F6 device tree
compiling CM KitKat fails with the adapted LG Optimus F6 device tree (mainly because some of the adaptions enforces the goldfish emulater?! Havent found out why! damn.)
MultiRom:
Multirom TWRP = compiling OK but no screen shown?!
Multirom binary = compiling OK
Multirom trampoline = compiling OK if it works or not? Cannot test it until TWRP
Kexec Kernel = Porting to F3Q (hopefully) finished. compiling OK but it has problems with mounting the correct places (I think. Didnt investigate that further atm)
Well one of the ideas is to have a working MultiRom installation which then would boot a custom ROM like CM with the kexec technique.
That way we could boot a "insecure" ROM with our locked boot loader.
That really seems to be possible because I can flash a TWRP image to the BOOT partition for example. That means TWRP would start up everytime.
If we could get MultiRom in place where the boot partition sits we COULD be able to boot everything we want.
Sources:
My current device tree of the fx3q AOSP build can be found here: device_lge_fx3q_aosp
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just so im clear what exactly is incomplete about the cwm that was compiled? you say its not a valid device tree (crazy because ive never heard those kind of terms even used before) what exactly makes it invalid to you?
what was the point of labeling this thread? gain some thanks by saying you spent 200+ hours on compiling the stock kernel source that has a guide to compile it in teh source zip? cuz it doesnt appear to make any progress on booting aosp even though you forked an oudhs device tree from another device. then you talk about needing hacks etc to get past the locked bootloader yet you dont seem to understand that there was an exploit tahts how there even was a cwm.
instead you are pulling in search results giving false hope to people looking for cm in hopes they donate to you so you can buy a phone when you obviously dont understand how it works.
Just so im clear what exactly is incomplete about the cwm that was compiled? you say its not a valid device tree (crazy because ive never heard those kind of terms even used before) what exactly makes it invalid to you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Never said that CWM is incomplete but to be honest it was and it is missing features TWRP has, of course. It is a while ago that I took a look at that CWM version so I would need to check again maybe. The last time I tried it the mounting of /data/media (the internal usb storage) was not possible as backup, too. But that may have changed.
cuz it doesnt appear to make any progress on booting aosp even though you forked an oudhs device tree from another device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You may have more experience in porting to a complete new device so what is wrong with forking from a device which has more or less the same hardware specs ? That is the recommended way mentioned in the porting guides.
The reason why there was no progress since a while is:
I had no device anymore
Donation offer took some weeks
Then the new (used) device need to be shipped for about 2 weeks
Then I was on vacation for 2 and a half weeks
Then I needed to bring down the workload in RL to continue which took me another week
Then I started with development again since 1 day
Today
The main focus is to develop a fully working initial ram disk build from scratch instead of using the stock one. Then I will continue on porting AOSP as the ram disk is an essential part as you know.
then you talk about needing hacks etc to get past the locked bootloader yet you dont seem to understand that there was an exploit tahts how there even was a cwm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well it seems that you do not understand but that is not a problem I explain it for you:
The locked bootloader is a problem because normally we have not the possibility to install a custom kernel and/or custom ROMs. There is a hack available named "loki" which makes it possible to circumvent that fact. The only thing you need to do is to use the loki patch on the kernel/boot image.
The other thing around this is that the bootloader send kernel boot parameters which avoid starting a custom or modified ROM. This is one of the examples I fixed as you can see in the kernel thread and the reason why the modified stock ROM from @joel.maxuel is booting.
The multirom thingy (you may point to) was about having a special boot image (based on TWRP) named multiROM. With this it would be possible to power on the device and choose different ROMs you may have installed (that means different ROMs on 1 device in parallel). Great thing and at the time of writing one thing I tested. The main problem here is not using the Loki patch mentioned above but instead the /data/media internal storage which need to be mounted correctly and some other things as well. Nevertheless is multirom nothing I want to work on atm because the main part of work is to have CM/AOSP compiled and working.
what was the point of labeling this thread? gain some thanks by saying you spent 200+ hours on compiling the stock kernel source that has a guide to compile it in teh source zip?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never said that I spent 200+ hours for compiling a stock kernel. Please read carefully before getting rude. This thread here is for developing on the F3Q ROM not the kernel. Kernel things are located in the Kernel thread. (Btw. compiling the stock kernel was never a problem or somehow time consuming there are other things like the initial ram disk and correct mounting paths etc which had taken some time but that is another story and as said not related to this thread.)
You may have heard about people porting ROMs to new devices? I try to do so and that is the reason why this thread exists. Not for some thanks clicks - some people define their self not with this you have to know. To be honest I do not get paid for everything here - which is ok. So a thanks click is appreciated, of course. Nothing more nothing less.
btw: I believe that a user can decide on their own if they want to click thanks when they want right? TWRP and Kernel are both things ready to use and the ROM porting is a WIP which a user can or can not say thanks for. That should be decided by the user IMO.
instead you are pulling in search results giving false hope to people looking for cm in hopes they donate to you so you can buy a phone when you obviously dont understand how it works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be honest it seems obvious that you do not understand. That is not a problem because I can explain it to you again.
As stated before and in the OP I try to port AOSP and/or CM to this device. Well it is true that I'm still learning and will learning forever but that is the truth for everyone (maybe not for you, ok ).
The donation part is something which was an offer to continue the work because I do not owned the device anymore but I was and I am willing to continue. As stated in the the donation thread I do not use the device for anything other then development because I do not really like the phone itself. But my wife uses the phone and she needs CM / AOSP to be able to be fully in German language and having a smoother Android experience than with the stock ROM.
If you know everything better than me then why you do not share your knowledge so we can speed up the process of porting? Would be more efficient than writing
Check out the brand new FAQ: :good:
Frequently Asked Questions
.
.
.
.
......and another thing I want to mention today!
The following has been done 10 minutes ago:
adapt DM47021 DT (device tree) to F3Q and compiling CM KK systemimage/full otapackage
This is 1 step further into the right direction but do not expect too much it simply means that I was able to fix all the thousands of compilation errors for the new adapted device tree.
Which is GREAT, of course but now the debugging starts and recompiling etc ..
The first boot was a mess I believe it has to do with a wrong used gcc version but I need to investigate that further in the next days/hours whatever..
just wanted to keep you updated
greetings from the front
xdajog
EDIT:
if someone interesting in This is the time duration of a full cleaned compilation (real = the actual duration):
Build system:
Intel® Core™ i7-3632QM CPU @ 2.20GHz × 8 (Quadcore. Due Hyperthreading 8 threads/CPU's)
8 GB RAM
Ubuntu Server 14.04 - 64 bit, running in a highly optimized VM based on KVM
CM11 compilation time (full cleaned working directory)
real 56m47.417s
user 213m6.612s
sys 20m9.400s
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
.
Thanks for the update. It's amazing how difficult it can be just to get all the variables of a dev environment to agree. Certainly getting somewhere.
xdajog said:
.
.
.
......and another thing I want to mention today!
The following has been done 10 minutes ago:
adapt DM47021 DT (device tree) to F3Q and compiling CM KK systemimage/full otapackage
This is 1 step further into the right direction but do not expect too much it simply means that I was able to fix all the thousands of compilation errors for the new adapted device tree.
Which is GREAT, of course but now the debugging starts and recompiling etc ..
The first boot was a mess I believe it has to do with a wrong used gcc version but I need to investigate that further in the next days/hours whatever..
just wanted to keep you updated
greetings from the front
xdajog
EDIT:
if someone interesting in This is the time duration of a full cleaned compilation (real = the actual duration):
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My hat is tipped to you xdajog. I'm looking for a qwerty slider replacement phone for my wife as her current one is reaching 5 years old soon.
Your efforts have tipped me towards this phone as a working ASOP or CM would be necessary as I do not think this phone will be updated by anyone else. I'm always leery of putting a family member on anything past a feature phone unless I can be confident of keeping it patched. Since there are no flagship phones with qwerty keyboards the efforts of devs like you are all the rest of us have.
@xdajog than you truly for your continued support on this device, i am a late adopter to this phone but is there any hope for getting android 5 on it?
vordhosbn said:
@xdajog than you truly for your continued support on this device, i am a late adopter to this phone but is there any hope for getting android 5 on it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well.. lets talk about that when we have KK ready
-----
Sent from my SGH-I927 using XDA Android mobile app
already has a ready rom CyanogenMod with kk ask you to take a look, you just need to fix the camera, can test or basaer it?
link: http://androidforums.com/threads/t-mobile-metropcs-beta-4-4-4-cyanogenmod-11-unofficial.923379/
GhostDwl said:
already has a ready rom CyanogenMod with kk ask you to take a look, you just need to fix the camera, can test or basaer it?
link: http://androidforums.com/threads/t-mobile-metropcs-beta-4-4-4-cyanogenmod-11-unofficial.923379/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thx but this is for the F3 not F3Q.
-----
Sent from my SGH-I927 using XDA Android mobile app
xdajog said:
Thx but this is for the F3 not F3Q.
-----
Sent from my SGH-I927 using XDA Android mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes, but the lg optimus f3 and f3q have the same specifications and the same kernel, the difference among them is where it was manufactured and the f3q comes with a keyboard and different touch buttons, take a look at the comparison below:
http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=5998&idPhone2=5509&
GhostDwl said:
yes, but the lg optimus f3 and f3q have the same specifications and the same kernel, the difference among them is where it was manufactured and the f3q comes with a keyboard and different touch buttons, take a look at the comparison below:
http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=5998&idPhone2=5509&
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course. Thats the reason why I use the F3 device tree as base for development. But there are many differences in compiling. If you want you can try would be nice to have another dev here.
-----
Sent from my SGH-I927 using XDA Android mobile app
xdajog said:
Of course. Thats the reason why I use the F3 device tree as base for development. But there are many differences in compiling. If you want you can try would be nice to have another dev here.
-----
Sent from my SGH-I927 using XDA Android mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, i will try, give me the a one time
So I've got an Ubuntu 14.04 LTS VM set up on my machine and I downloaded the Android source tree (AOSP) and configured the build environment per the instructions. I ran a build and everything came out okay (but slow ). I have some additional RAM on order for my machine so I can dedicate more resources to the VM.
I have an extra F3Q I can use for testing and I have a pre-paid SIM on order so that I can actually use my test device in real-world scenarios.
I'm ready to start digging in here. :good:
Edit: RAM arrived today, have 32GB now which means I can dedicate a full 16GB to the Ubuntu build environment!
Hi, I'm new in XDA so sorry if i do some error. Also sorry for my bad english.
I'm trying to port lolliop to our device with this guide but I'm encourted in two errors: First the recovery [TWRP] declare failed the flash and the other is the bootloop. Can anyone help me?
I atached the logcat and the updater-script.
android1111 said:
Hi, I'm new in XDA so sorry if i do some error. Also sorry for my bad english.
I'm trying to port lolliop to our device with this guide but I'm encourted in two errors: First the recovery [TWRP] declare failed the flash and the other is the bootloop. Can anyone help me?
I atached the logcat and the updater-script.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have to build it using Ubuntu.
Its a pretty hard task so I recommend you avoiding it unless you want to become a developer.
Search tutorials about how to use ubuntu and build a ROM from scratch. Read Cyanogenmod's tutorial as well
What ROM are you porting from?
Liam D. said:
What ROM are you porting from?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm porting from the lollipop xperia u rom, the similest device that has received lollipop.
If you're talking about Xperia STOCK ROM, you would have better luck building the ROM from scratch instead of porting. Stock ROMs contain Sony-specific configurations, whereas our device needs a Samsung device tree.
I suggest looking at the GitHub profile of SpeedGroup or my GitHub profile for a working CyanogenMod 11 device tree, which can be used as a starting point to start work on Lollipop.
Keep in mind though, that Android L runs ART and has Dalvik completely removed, so unless you're willing to let most of your phone storage go for ART, we better stick with KitKat. ART uses more space, as it pre-compiles application data. While it is a ton faster, it also consumes twice, or maybe thrice the amount of data Dalvik uses.
Liam D. said:
If you're talking about Xperia STOCK ROM, you would have better luck building the ROM from scratch instead of porting. Stock ROMs contain Sony-specific configurations, whereas our device needs a Samsung device tree.
I suggest looking at the GitHub profile of SpeedGroup or my GitHub profile for a working CyanogenMod 11 device tree, which can be used as a starting point to start work on Lollipop.
Keep in mind though, that Android L runs ART and has Dalvik completely removed, so unless you're willing to let most of your phone storage go for ART, we better stick with KitKat. ART uses more space, as it pre-compiles application data. While it is a ton faster, it also consumes twice, or maybe thrice the amount of data Dalvik uses.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wasn't porting from the stock rom but from this project, but thanks anyway, I think so I'll listen to your advice.:good:
Can anyone also tell me what part i need to create a rom?
Sorry I just noticed this now.
To create a ROM, you need these 3:
The kernel (android_kernel_msm7x27a or android_kernel_trebon [depending on the source])
The device tree (android_device_msm7x27a-common AND android_device_s7500)
The proprietary files from Samsung (proprietary_vendor_samsung_msm7x27a)
For references, see the local manifests I put up on GitHub: https://github.com/xenLiam/android_local_manifest_trebon
Download these as a zip and place this inside .repo/local_manifests (create a folder named local_manifests inside the .repo folder of your source directory first).
Hey folks,
i'm trying to get a "vanilla" aka unmodified device tree for the Shield Tablet K1. I know that you can sync over from nvidia's gitweb, tough the device tree is looking weird.
When i look at let's say cm's android_device_nvidia_shieldtablet it looks different. So i wonder how i would go from nvidias mutated tree to cm's layout without actually just forking it from cm.
Reason is, i want to port another custom rom over to the shield tablet, but i can't neither figure out how i'd do that with nvidias sources, nor how i would create a device tree similar to cm's, without any modifications.
I googled around for about 2-3 months now and still have no clue, so if anyone could give me a hint, i'd be very grateful!
What's wrong with the cm tree?
Unjustified Dev did the initial port of everything by hand. I've done maintainance manually since then. And to my knowledge, there's only been one other person to do a manual conversion (vartom). All custom ROMs derive from my tree. Should work in aosp as well. If there's something you need different from the cm tree, you can just add it on top. Or if something is broke in general, I need to know and fix it.
There's nothing "wrong", just not " clean", if you catch my drift. It's just a matter of reverting inwanted things, but yeah.. feels dirty.
Anyways, thanks for the info, man.
*shrugs* Okay, if you want to set up a new tree, nothing's stopping you. I wouldn't mind someone else knowing how to do it (pretty sure I'm the only active dev that has experience there), but it's a lot of parsing and research. I'll say that CMs trees are 95% unmodified from Nvidia's upstream, though. It's just rearranged into an aosp style tree. The kernel is a merge of the console and tablet since they were 98% identical anyways. I do my best to keep everything as clean as possible since I don't want to do through the work of making a lot of modifications every time a new release comes out... Engineers are lazy like that. I think the only things that aren't pure identical copies are the LTE init files and the unified device stuff (making the wifi only and lte models work in one ROM).
Nah, don't get me wrong there, i don't want to discredit you there.
I'm more talking about cm specific things like gello browser and stuff. Like i said, just a matter of a few changes to not include these. I'm just a beginner in any way, i can just follow instructions at best, i don't know c, and almost no java at all. So what you do is an astounishing task - it's just a personal preference coming and starting with nexus devices to tinker around, i have had the luxury of an AOSP tree, that's pretty much "my dilemma". I'm unexperienced and thus this might take a while for me. I've started to modify your device tree the day before yesterday, but i have something done wrong, as when i start compiling it'll ask if it should use " full_eng" config. (6.0.1 is used)
Again, thanks for putting me in the right direction, also for your efforts in maintaining our device.
What ROM are you trying to build? You could look at Carbonrom or Blissrom to see the rename changes needed to use the tree in a different ROM. Those should be similar across the board. I think the only CM specific package references would be gello and snap. Those commits could be reverted easily enough. Or if the ROM doesn't have them, I think they'd be ignored even if left as is.
Hi,
you can take a look at here
the base was the official cm tree, this is not vanilla but it s a K1 only tree.
Steel01 said:
What ROM are you trying to build? You could look at Carbonrom or Blissrom to see the rename changes needed to use the tree in a different ROM. Those should be similar across the board. I think the only CM specific package references would be gello and snap. Those commits could be reverted easily enough. Or if the ROM doesn't have them, I think they'd be ignored even if left as is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm trying to port OmniROM https://docs.omnirom.org/Porting_Omni_To_Your_Device
Shouldn't be that difficult, i'm just doing something wrong.
kylon said:
Hi,
you can take a look at here
the base was the official cm tree, this is not vanilla but it s a K1 only tree.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, man.
I've forked it and will use it as a base.
Oh, omni. I build TWRP from omni. Take a look at the following two commits.
https://github.com/TeamWin/android_...mmit/c8e564a5ea44d963ab8d0e7829d9becd2ad5b0c0
https://github.com/TeamWin/android_...mmit/9b8772627795492f3380d2bf86680c09aada92c9
I haven't built the full ROM, but that should work. If you're using a K1 specific tree, the only difference should be in omni_shieldtablet.mk, instead of gsm.mk, use whatever omni has for tablet wifi only.
Steel01 said:
Oh, omni. I build TWRP from omni. Take a look at the following two commits.
https://github.com/TeamWin/android_...mmit/c8e564a5ea44d963ab8d0e7829d9becd2ad5b0c0
https://github.com/TeamWin/android_...mmit/9b8772627795492f3380d2bf86680c09aada92c9
I haven't built the full ROM, but that should work. If you're using a K1 specific tree, the only difference should be in omni_shieldtablet.mk, instead of gsm.mk, use whatever omni has for tablet wifi only.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, man. In fact i heavily orientaded on TWRP sources in this case. Also took a look at zombipop's repo.
Still whatever i do all i get is
[[email protected] omni]$ brunch shieldtablet
build/core/product_config.mk:241: *** No matches for product "omni_shieldtablet". Stop.
WARNING: Trying to fetch a device that's already there
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "build/tools/roomservice.py", line 352, in <module>
fetch_device(device)
File "build/tools/roomservice.py", line 320, in fetch_device
git_data = search_gerrit_for_device(device)
File "build/tools/roomservice.py", line 81, in search_gerrit_for_device
device_data = check_repo_exists(git_data, device)
File "build/tools/roomservice.py", line 58, in check_repo_exists
"exiting roomservice".format(device=device))
Exception: shieldtablet not found,exiting roomservice
build/core/product_config.mk:241: *** No matches for product "omni_shieldtablet". Stop.
** Don't have a product spec for: 'omni_shieldtablet'
** Do you have the right repo manifest?
No such item in brunch menu. Try 'breakfast'
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh, brunch won't work because it wants to sync from the upstream server. Use lunch instead. Then run make to build.
Steel01 said:
Oh, brunch won't work because it wants to sync from the upstream server. Use lunch instead. Then run make to build.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like a derp moment, i just had to modify the devicetree in another directory which is the actual working dir, instead on androidsrc/device/nvidia/shieldtablet directly. Like i said i just did something wrong.
It' compiling now, thank you for all the support!
I am not an experienced dev, and only know enough to be dangerous. that said, i used twrpdtgen from https://github.com/twrpdtgen/twrpdtgen to generate what ought to be the berlna device tree with the necessary board files etc.
what do i have to do, specifically, to clone the twrp source via git/repo? can anybody here explain it like you realize i don't know what i am doing i'll figure git and repo out eventually, but this will go quicker if someone would enlighten me
which android version do i want to build twrp with? apparently 12.1 support isn't finished yet, so i should use 11 with aosp source?
note, for our deivce you need to use the script on upon boot.img as we've a/b format, grab from latest stock rom to gen yourself, or see attached. also, necessary to use WSL on windows with a linux distro, or a linux vm, python on windows will not work.
please feel free to use these if it furthers the cause of compiling twrp before i learn how to use git and repo and compile it.. hehe
I wanted to try my hand at this and start digging into git and repo. I got as far as getting all the files ready, setting up the tree where it needed to be, used ". build/envsetup.sh", then lunched with option 5, which is omni-berlna_eng, which is closest to the twrp minimal manifest build option.
After I lunch, the issue arrives with the fact that omni-berlna_eng uses a depreciated PRODUCT_STATIC_BOOT_CONTROL_HAL, whatever that means. So I tried using lunch option 2, which would be an aosp-arm64_eng, but that just gives me the error "#### failed to build some targets (1 seconds) ####".
As of now, I'm at a loss. I don't have the extra time to spend working on this to make it function, and I only get a few hours at a time to get a crack at it, but nothing seems to work.
Edit:
I should mention, this is my first attempt at anything android development. I got this phone as a secondary carry on and I've dirtyflashed Pixel Experience onto it using a method found for Moto G Power TONGA. Wanted to see if I could get TWRP running since dirty flashing killed my mms and calling services.