Related
I won't pretend I know about how the lag fix increases the performance of my phone. I greatly appreciate the work Developers put into these releases, so this not meant to bash either.
I been using the one click from the market for a while (newer version doesn't work on my Fascinate), the phone is snappier and my quadrant scores are around 2500+ with my noticing it has something to do with I/O being very high with the default setting of about 680MB when installed. I also follow the other defaults loading on boot.
I never tried the older lag fix on the forum...
I'm running Voodoo .02 now and even though I know it's running EXT4 instead of EXT2 on Ryanza's, I notice quadrant scores of 1700+ and not that snappy feel (could be imagined). I do notice that Voodoo uses much less space.
Will the Voodoo fix increase in time with OC kernels or other fixes I'm ignorant of?
Will there be a fix for the 56FPS limit? (not that it's important)
Thanks in advance for the responses. I've always thought the Galaxy S line devices were the fastest, just wondering how to measure or take advantage of this.
Ryan's is ****.
Sorry, but that was mean. There is literally no comparison. Voodoo is miles better than the old lagfix. There is absolutely no doubt in anyone's mind that Ryan's was a temporary fix before Voodoo.
yeah, i was told that the OCLF was a loopabck command or something along those lines, therefore your quadrant scores are completly inflated, where as voodoo is actually closer to the real filesystems that other phones use or what sould have actually been implemented in the phone in the first place, so in reality the OCLF is jsut inflating your benchmarks, and voodoo is more along the lines of what the phone is actually capapble of. i think voodoo is much smoother and can tell a huge difference, i ran the OCLF for one day and got rid of it, also its pretty inpressive that with a real lafix(voodoo) this blows away all other phones that are out, even then ones on Froyo.
Gitykins said:
Ryan's is ****.
Sorry, but that was mean. There is literally no comparison. Voodoo is miles better than the old lagfix. There is absolutely no doubt in anyone's mind that Ryan's was a temporary fix before Voodoo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you be any douchier? Why apologize for something you say in a post when you can just delete what you say before posting it. If you really were sorry you wouldn't have posted that part. It's fine to say that you think one is better than the other, but to call something ****, then apologize right after....on a message board is the beyond doucheness.
tonyb81 said:
Could you be any douchier? Why apologize for something you say in a post when you can just delete what you say before posting it. If you really were sorry you wouldn't have posted that part. It's fine to say that you think one is better than the other, but to call something ****, then apologize right after....on a message board is the beyond doucheness.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was an edit. However, I'm not going to delete what I said just because it was my first instinct.
Gitykins said:
That was an edit. However, I'm not going to delete what I said just because it was my first instinct.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sometimes our instincts can get the better of us.
I really don't know what you're getting at. I've seriously been a pretty nice guy about stuff lately and this is one instance where I've said something douchy. I do believe that Ryan's fix was a ****ty quick fix. It's better than stock but terrible because it inflates scores and uses terrible loops.
Gitykins said:
I really don't know what you're getting at. I've seriously been a pretty nice guys about stuff lately and this is one instance where I've said something douchy. I do believe that Ryan's fix was a ****ty quick fix. It's better than stock but terrible because it inflates scores and uses terrible loops.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe I'm just being overly analytical, one of my pet peeves is someone apologizing for something they say on a message board, right after posting what they are apologizing for.
I mean, imagine how it would have looked had I just left "Ryan's is ****" or I had deleted it but the edit was still viewable by clikcing the "Edit by Gitykins" thing. I would have looked like even more of a dickhead.
Gitykins said:
I mean, imagine how it would have looked had I just left "Ryan's is ****" or I had deleted it but the edit was still viewable by clikcing the "Edit by Gitykins" thing. I would have looked like even more of a dickhead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
good point
ANYWAY, back to what we were talking about...
Yes, Ryan's OCLF was a great interim fix, but unless I am completely mistaken, even he wasn't thinking of it as the permant solution...
Voodoo, on the other hand, is the real deal, the ACTUAL fix.
Agreed, got mine and looking for a 2.2 rom now.
destroyerbmx said:
Agreed, got mine and looking for a 2.2 rom now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let us know if you find it.
tats_06 said:
Let us know if you find it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think samsung has it, but they are being meanies and wont release it :[
First I need to apologize for making this thread in the first place since most of my question was answered in the Original Voodoo thread (I shouldnt have scanned it)
Thank you for the answers, it did give me the information that I needed.
They haven't been heavily tested, but IRC seems relatively content with them. Mind you, these were never meant for the Fascinate, but the Mesmerize.
Voodoo
ec10_voodoo.zip
or
http://adbdev.com/danknub/ec10_voodoo.zip
Nonvoodoo
ec10_nonvoodoo.zip
or
http://adbdev.com/danknub/ec10_nonvoodoo.zip
Once again, thanks jt1134 for his scripts.
adrynalyne said:
They haven't been heavily tested, but IRC seems relatively content with them. Mind you, these were never meant for the Fascinate, but the Mesmerize.
Voodoo
ec10_voodoo.zip
Nonvoodoo
ec10_nonvoodoo.zip
Once again, thanks jt1134 for his scripts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ill give it a go . thank you .
Downloading now. Any notable differences over your eb16 kernel?
Hi Adrynalyne!
Just installed. Everything's looking good so far. Will need more time with it though. Thanks.
Installing now. Hopefully no explosions =P
EDIT: I've played with it for 5 or 10 minutes now. Seems quite nice. I'll test the battery and all that fun stuff tomorrow.
Thanks adrynalyne.
Curious about this, however my battery is just settling in on EB01 so ill wait and see what everyone thinks...
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
A description of features would be nice, thanks!
Downloading and installing
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Same here, but since i'm still getting only 30hrs max on light usage I figure what the heck.... give it a try.
chargerfn909 said:
Curious about this, however my battery is just settling in on EB01 so ill wait and see what everyone thinks...
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What is different from the [KERNEL][3.15.2011]EB16 Kernels?
Can we flash EC10 right over the EB16 Kernel?
Hotspot monitoring dummy kernel in both versions?
fitti28 said:
Can we flash EC10 right over the EB16 Kernel?
Hotspot monitoring dummy kernel in both versions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wiped both caches (dalvik+ regular) and then flashed right over EB16. No issues here.
I don't know about the monitoring dummy kernel but I'd be surprised if it wasn't in here.
MaskaMage said:
Same here, but since i'm still getting only 30hrs max on light usage I figure what the heck.... give it a try.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's excellent! I never go easy, between texting, this place, and the web in general in lucky to get 17 or so hours lol.. I can charge all day at work or whenever I need if I'm not going to be home though..
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
fitti28 said:
What is different from the [KERNEL][3.15.2011]EB16 Kernels?
Can we flash EC10 right over the EB16 Kernel?
Hotspot monitoring dummy kernel in both versions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should be fine flashing over eb16 but adrynalyn would have said they have the dummy file if they did. Plus they are very new (ec10 is code for march 10th 2011), so I doubt they have any mods yet.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA Premium App
They have the dummy file.
There, I made you honest.
Not that it matters, but for those interested Quadrant scores (voodoo):
1470, 1593, 1659, 1641
So don't use your precious Quadrants as a reason to not install this
So an average quadrant of 1600??
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Flashed over SC 2.9.1 w/ stock EB01 kernel ... (non-voodoo here)
> Wifi still works! Already major improvement over the EB16s for me.
> *228/2 PRL update worked
> Still holding a wakelock on Gps Location Provider on boot, don't know if that has anything to do with the Kernel or not. Running a GPS app clears the lock just as it did before.
> Quadrant (non-voodoo): 946
So far so good. Will see how the battery is tomorrow.
cat /proc/version:
Linux version 2.6.32.9 ([email protected]) (gc version 4.4.1 (Sourcery G++ Lite 2009q3-67) ) #1 Thu Mar 10 12:52:44 KST 2011
Many thanks as always Adrynalyne!!
kuronosan said:
A description of features would be nice, thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
fitti28 said:
What is different from the [KERNEL][3.15.2011]EB16 Kernels?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Description:
It does mostly everything EB16 does, in mostly the same way.
Unfortunately, Verizon isn't nice enough to include a changelog in their leaked beta internal release software.
There seems to be a misunderstanding about what happens when stock beta kernels are leaked. Maybe people are coming from devices that have custom compiled kernels, where the kernel dev actually helped modify the source code. In this case, yes, a dev will know most everything about said kernel.
This is not the case with leaked stock kernels (or any leaked data). The person who posts the leaked data is rarely an active part of development with the pre-compiled source code. They usually can only see exactly what you see: a compiled binary file. They usually install them on their phone, do some general testing to make sure basic functionality is intact, then they give them to the public.
That's where the public comes in. There are virtually infinite amounts of configurations on everyones' phones. The leaker usually only has one phone. If they are thorough, they MAY test it in a few different environments. Everyone has something unique about their set up or something that they really care about and notice about the behavior of their phone. However, no dev or even a small group of beta testers have the time or resources to test every single application/configuration/feature.
On top of this, the public wants immediate leaks ("You've been running something newer than me?! I WANT IT NOW"). They want the bleeding edge, without any of the bleeding edge problems. This creates a conflict between someone sitting on a leak for too long vs. thoroughly testing a kernel.
So if that's too long of a story, or I haven't made myself clear, I offer this summary: You are the beta testers. You are the changelog writers. You find out the description of features. The leaker merely leaks. Someone who actually cares a bit about public safety/performance (like Adryn) will take an additional step and optimize/mod/lightly test. But after that, the public is just one giant test group, and this is the way it is supposed to be.
If that scares anyone, they are welcome to wait a while and read through people's reports of their experiences with the kernel. If that is still too scary, then I hear that Verizon might be releasing this software on the 12th of Never.
And just in case I hurt anyone's feelings, I'm not singling you two out, and I'm not flaming you. This is a general public post aimed at addressing the overall concern behind this issue that comes up in every new dev thread. You both seem genuine and non-confrontational, but there is a wide range of people who come into these types of threads and whine and complain. So it's nearly guaranteed that someone else will enter and be like "OMG guize my phone iz broked how come you didnt say phone is broked???!!!!!" Then, everyone can point to this post.
GizmoDroid said:
Description:
It does mostly everything EB16 does, in mostly the same way.
Unfortunately, Verizon isn't nice enough to include a changelog in their leaked beta internal release software.
There seems to be a misunderstanding about what happens when stock beta kernels are leaked. Maybe people are coming from devices that have custom compiled kernels, where the kernel dev actually helped modify the source code. In this case, yes, a dev will know most everything about said kernel.
This is not the case with leaked stock kernels (or any leaked data). The person who posts the leaked data is rarely an active part of development with the pre-compiled source code. They usually can only see exactly what you see: a compiled binary file. They usually install them on their phone, do some general testing to make sure basic functionality is intact, then they give them to the public.
That's where the public comes in. There are virtually infinite amounts of configurations on everyones' phones. The leaker usually only has one phone. If they are thorough, they MAY test it in a few different environments. Everyone has something unique about their set up or something that they really care about and notice about the behavior of their phone. However, no dev or even a small group of beta testers have the time or resources to test every single application/configuration/feature.
On top of this, the public wants immediate leaks ("You've been running something newer than me?! I WANT IT NOW"). They want the bleeding edge, without any of the bleeding edge problems. This creates a conflict between someone sitting on a leak for too long vs. thoroughly testing a kernel.
So if that's too long of a story, or I haven't made myself clear, I offer this summary: You are the beta testers. You are the changelog writers. You find out the description of features. The leaker merely leaks. Someone who actually cares a bit about public safety/performance (like Adryn) will take an additional step and optimize/mod/lightly test. But after that, the public is just one giant test group, and this is the way it is supposed to be.
If that scares anyone, they are welcome to wait a while and read through people's reports of their experiences with the kernel. If that is still too scary, then I hear that Verizon might be releasing this software on the 12th of Never.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very nicely said. But i think most of the time when people ask they are not trying to be rude or annoying. They are just not aware or hoping the person who leaked it might have the changelog as well.
Thanks adrynalyne...
MOD EDIT: THIS IS THE Q&A SECTION FOR [BL1.1][BL1.2] GtabComb by zyhong
ALL Q&A FOR THIS ROM HAPPENS HERE.
Thanks.
BL1.1 ONLY
MOD EDIT: THIS IS THE Q&A SECTION FOR [BL1.1][BL1.2] GtabComb by zyhong
ALL Q&A FOR THIS ROM HAPPENS HERE.
Thanks.
Thank you very much! Just got it running, so far no issues or force closes. I have been waiting on a 1.1 bl honeycomb. Thank you!
Wow! Great news, definitely gonna give this a try, had lots of issues the last time I used a 1.2 based bootloader,so I'm really glad to see this!
Thanks!
Justin
Editing out, as I PM'd the OP instead.
Thanks in advance.
there's a 1.1 version of this now????
Sm0k3d 0uT said:
there's a 1.1 version of this now????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm actually surprised that it took this long.
We used the 1.2 bl initially because we had to as we ported directly from the Adam devs. But once there were Clem kernel ports, it wasn't technically a requirement anymore. I just never changed my port as my opinions on 1.2 are already well-stated and sticking with it made sense to me, at least. But that doesn't mean that a 1.1 based HC ROM was impossible.
However, if NI releases a HC port and it's using a .36 kernel to make everything work, this 1.1 ROM might have issues with porting that. But this is all speculation, at this point - I don't know if a NI port will even work on a GTAB yet, regardless of the bootloader used.
does this has the same bl 1.2 version issues or just the usb to pc?!
bl 1.2 version has these issues:
(copied from other forum)
- Camera isn't working (pulled out the app for now)
- Browser is working, but OpenGL is disabled for it to work. That means no Flash on the stock browser.
- (High-def) video playback does not work, yet.
any testers can confirm this? i'm a bit feeling lazy to try it today
confirmed but very smooth i love it its not reading my sdcard though how can i get it to read sd card?
Sent from my Bottle of Smoke using XDA Premium App
Editing out , as I PM'd the OP. Nothing bad, just some suggestions is all.
Awwwww, yeah! I'm pumped. Is this essentially the same as Roebeet's BOS, with the same features not working yet?
This is great news!
Is it accelerated?
Does it run Flash 10.3?
TIA
Sent from my Atrix using Tapatalk
remove as it is personal chat
jesemalave1 said:
confirmed but very smooth i love it its not reading my sdcard though how can i get it to read sd card?
Sent from my Bottle of Smoke using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Odd...seems to work ok on mine.
I did notice that it's called "/external_sd" though, might want to check to see if you have that on your device.
Justin
never mind i cpoied to external sd need to change storageto external as sdcard please as default had to copy all my info from external to internal usb..and flash and everything is working good QUICK QUESTION EVERYONE IM USING SETCPU AND LETS ME OVER CLOCK TO 1GHZ IS THIS A OVER CLOCKED KERNEL IF NOT WHICH APP SHOULD I USE TO OVERCLOCK
Sent from my Bottle of Smoke using XDA Premium App
(Editing out the first part, as I PM'd the OP directly. But leaving this part in....)
One other thing, on a good note -- I'm definitely happy to see more modders our there for the GTablet. Options are always a good thing and I plan to pull back a bit, starting new month. So the more HC ports we have, the better!
Quick question... If I'm running Vegan 5.1.1, what do I need to do to install this ROM? Full wipe? Just flash it from CWM? Something else entirely?
Sorry, I'm still a bit of a noob at all of this, but I promise I'm trying to learn!
roebeet said:
I was really hesitant to post anything, as I really don't want you taking this the wrong way. I apologize if it came off as anything else but a concern for post-support, that was not my intent (and, in retrospect, a PM would have been better. My bad).
The branding, for me, is mostly about post-support. Remember, I'm a sysadmin by trade so when I get PM's on issues, I usually ask the usual questions like what mod, what version, how did you install it, etc. That's actually why I started branding "TNT Lite" as such back in November, as it was easier for me to know if a user was actually using my ROM or not. That's really my only concern, here. When two different mods are branded the same, it will get confusing. Especially if they are on two different development branches. It is fun, I agree - that's why I do this. But for users who soft-brick, it's sometimes a major panic attack and a lot of them are hesitant to use nvflash.
One other thing, on a good note -- I'm definitely happy to see more modders our there for the GTablet. Options are always a good thing and I plan to pull back a bit, starting new month. So the more HC ports we have, the better!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Robeet, I think you were spot on, the OP is not reading it correctly. I can just see the flood of posts/PM's asking you questions and users cross posting between 1.1/1.2 because of this and the difficulty of tracking all this. it's difficult enough keeping up with all these great roms and boot loader types, I could not imagine what it is like on your guys side.
OP he is not dissing you, he is just asking that you rename it so you can support issues and he does not have to keep getting cross questions, it's pretty much non-issue in my eyes.
OP, thanks for supporting the Gtab and the 1.1. people like all you devs that make android so much fun and android FTW over IOS.
ZebTheCalvinist said:
Quick question... If I'm running Vegan 5.1.1, what do I need to do to install this ROM? Full wipe? Just flash it from CWM? Something else entirely?
Sorry, I'm still a bit of a noob at all of this, but I promise I'm trying to learn!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, full wipe and flash it. do a backup of course just incase you want to go back. back up your apps as well so you can restore them on the other side of HC.
removed as it is personal chat
roebeet said:
And it starts....says "Bottle of Smoke" in your XDA app.
Remember - it's a fork of BoS. It has a different kernel and possibly a different ramdisk, so I don't know how it will perform versus BoS (the original one).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe this should be called something like "Bottle of Smoke MOD" since technically it is a modified version of the original.
As most of you probably know, these people cheated @ Quadrant by mounting it in a fast file system(?)
What I'd like to know, is what their reasons were, how they explained it, and apologized. (As the scripts are gone now)
Also, please discuss the moral part about cheating your fellow XDA members into a donation by faking insane performance.
forgive my ignorance.... but who/where/when was this?
I'd like to know too - out of curiosity and not malice. This was in May if I remember rightly. Think I remember one of them, but am naming no names since I'm not 100% sure.
Don't think it's too difficult to work out the "why" part...
I want to know, what was the score?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
I believe the main reason was to prove that benchmarks can't be trusted.
bruflot said:
I want to know, what was the score?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
6000+ was posted, with screenshots.
AngeloM was one of them.
Used to get around 5000 points on quadrant without OC.
In his defence, the man himself didn't post his ROM directly on XDA.Someone else did....
B3311 said:
6000+ was posted, with screenshots.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
6000+ for SGS II??? Wow! The best score I've got with my 241 apps and 75% full storage space is 3028 (see attachment), which is pretty good, I think. Without loading my apps I got a score of around 3800+ if I remember correctly. I think any score between 3000-4000 is a great score.
Cheers!
And I'm on Stock KF3 (rooted)
5000 is easy to get with kernel and 1.6GHz overclock , not possible on stock clocks , the cheat was quadrant specific only , if I'm not mistaken it mounted in RAM and got bloated IO score that's all. Pointless really as you should not judge performance on single benchmark , not to mention sgs2 doesn't need any cheats.
'Cheating' in quadrant is pretty easy (if you know what your doing anyways)
OC 1.6Ghz
tmpfs mount
stop all running apps
run a few times
=
6000+ score
ghost77 said:
not to mention sgs2 doesn't need any cheats.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This i agree with. benchmarks are overrated as different chipsets run best on optimized code for them. we do know that our exynos is capable of running tegra 2 software without breaking much of a sweat. any numerical value is just arbitrary
nemasu said:
'Cheating' in quadrant is pretty easy (if you know what your doing anyways)
OC 1.6Ghz
tmpfs mount
stop all running apps
run a few times
=
6000+ score
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this is what he did in his script, specifically for the Quadrant-package.
it was AngeloM and LitePro (Lite'ning ROM).
I wish this thread would go back in to Galaxy S II General.. considering it's not at ALL by the phone..
that way we could get some better response.
Don't you get 6000+ with Tegrak Overclocked?
(With the right settings ofc.)
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
dyallo said:
this is what he did in his script, specifically for the Quadrant-package.
it was AngeloM and LitePro (Lite'ning ROM).
I wish this thread would go back in to Galaxy S II General.. considering it's not at ALL by the phone..
that way we could get some better response.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Litepro was the one I didn't dare name in my 1st post.
Sure he's not losing any sleep over the fact that this is why I'd never use his ROMs again - took me a while to decide, but Pulser nailed it:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=14601179&postcount=4
Same for AngeloM's kernel.
Shame - Lite'ning seems to be a very good ROM, cheating is/was totally unnecessary.
I assume apologies were made, otherwise they still wouldn't be here. Good enough for the mods and admin - we can't argue. Fair enough.
As far as I know it was never proved that it was Angelom who cheated. He didn't want to release the ROM on XDA until it was perfect. So some one else decided to release his rom here. He never give his okay for this and the thread was closed on his decision.
Quote from Angelom ROM thread on XDA:
Thread closed at the request of the ROM dev.
I personally would be careful with such allegations. Innocent until the opposite is proved.
Or give he a official statement which I didn't saw?
Nebucatnetzer said:
As far as I know it was never proved that it was Angelom who cheated. He didn't want to release the ROM on XDA until it was perfect. So some one else decided to release his rom here. He never give his okay for this and the thread was closed on his decision.
Quote from Angelom ROM thread on XDA:
Thread closed at the request of the ROM dev.
I personally would be careful with such allegations. Innocent until the opposite is proved.
Or give he a official statement which I didn't saw?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember AngeloM posting on an Italian site that someone was posting his ROM here without permission, hence you're right re allegations. Apologies.
But as said, if the mods have given the OK to whomever, case closed for me.
B3311 said:
Remember AngeloM posting on an Italian site that someone was posting his ROM here without permission, hence you're right re allegations. Apologies.
But as said, if the mods have given the OK to whomever, case closed for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The quadrant hack is easy to spot. If you look at the init.d file there will be something included called uber_quadrant. Litepro did include it in the beginning but subsequently removed it.
I posted the current stock benchmark on http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/ which is 3831. This is stock, no OC and KE2 firmware. Benchmarks with my device are consistently in this range and I believe this is the max achievable with a stock device.
GIR said:
I posted the current stock benchmark on http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/ which is 3831. This is stock, no OC and KE2 firmware. Benchmarks with my device are consistently in this range and I believe this is the max achievable with a stock device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice.
Anyone got the post where they explain why they tricked us? Or did they even admit it yet?
B3311 said:
Litepro was the one I didn't dare name in my 1st post.
Sure he's not losing any sleep over the fact that this is why I'd never use his ROMs again - took me a while to decide, but Pulser nailed it:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=14601179&postcount=4
Same for AngeloM's kernel.
Shame - Lite'ning seems to be a very good ROM, cheating is/was totally unnecessary.
I assume apologies were made, otherwise they still wouldn't be here. Good enough for the mods and admin - we can't argue. Fair enough.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think litepro didn't realize the script just cheated, he removed it once he knew.
Just poppin in from the Continuum forum with a quick question. Which defconfig are you guys using from the Fascinate Froyo kernel source? Seeing as how we are stuck on Froyo over there Anyway Im pretty new to kernel modification but looking within the source there are about 100 different defconfigs for what looks like many different devices. Not sure if the Continuum and Fascinate use the exact same kernel but it would give me a nice starting point.
P.S. did these devices have codenames?
Thanks!
Apparently the kernel is not your guys issue. Its the ticker display that basically is rendered useless and causes errors and stuff in framework-res. Sorry, ur phone is stuck.
tonu42 said:
Apparently the kernel is not your guys issue. Its the ticker display that basically is rendered useless and causes errors and stuff in framework-res. Sorry, ur phone is stuck.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Erm...that has nothing to do with the question
Iirc the continuum's code name is garnett
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA
From what I've seen, everyone seems to have their own defconfig for kernels, it's kind of the point behind having multiple choices
I haven't looked at the garnett kernel specifically, but if you are looking at Fascinate source, check out the "atlas" defconfig file(s). Those are for the I500 variants (including the VZW Fascinate). You're welcome to have a look at what I did for Froyo on the I500, but it's really not anything special and hasn't been updated in forever: https://github.com/djp952/sch-i500-froyo.
That said, the I500 EH03 Gingerbread kernel (2.6.35.7) code references garnett a lot, you may be better off grabbing that source from the Samsung OSRC and seeing how close/far a build of that code will get you. It's possible you can get most everything working if you change some #defines/settings here and there. I have my own (once again not impressive, but 100% functional) changes for that I500 EH03 kernel here: https://github.com/djp952/sch-i500-gingerbread.
Good luck ... Samsung's code changes kinda suck and they always seem to leave something critical out of their public distributions