Has anyone got Android 2.0 working on the hero? Seems "Steve Kondik" has got it running on his G1.
http://source.android.com/
the community there did it, among others also cyanogen ;-) and they ported it to g1.
You MIGHT have read about it, but:
1: The code ported to AOSP isn't complete yet, and there are a few things which still don't work, like calendar.
2: ROMs running on the G1 were either ported from droid/sholes or partly, from the SDK.
Than again, the G1 has a 2.6.29 kernel, which the Hero doesn't.
A.
and HTC has announced that there will be an 2.0 update for the HERO, but when it will be released only they know...
> darn connection; dbl post <
no1 is currently working on 2.6.29 for hero. isnt it? tht means we will have to wait for the official release.
dying4004 said:
no1 is currently working on 2.6.29 for hero. isnt it? tht means we will have to wait for the official release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im learning about this stuff as fast as I can but HTC will probably release it before I learn enough to port it. That said, I'm trying to become an uberdev
I've been following the development of so-called ROMs for the Vibrant (and other SGS devices), but I have yet to see a single AOSP ROM. Even when Samsung released the original kernel sources for 2.1, there were no AOSP 2.1 ROMs. Why not? Is it because they don't know which BLOBs to pull for insertion or the proper vendor overlays?
Some developers have done great work with SGS kernels (especially supercurio and his Voodoo kernels ... eugene373's tend to always wipe the internal SD card unnecessarily ...). But, a kernel does not a ROM make ... therefore I ask, what is truly missing to build an AOSP ROM. I've gone through the sources, but I don't follow makefiles too well.
I know we have another month or so before Samsung is obligated to release their 2.2 kernel sources, but that should have no impact on 2.1 AOSP ROMs. Therefore, I ask "what is the hold up?" What is missing, and what might I contribute ...
Need 2.2 source code...
2.1 is a dead horse--why bother when 2.2/2.3 are out?
The reason to bother is to at least get AOSP running. Once its on 2.1, it'll be easier to get 2.2 AOSP running on it. But claiming 2.1 is a "dead horse" is the wrong path ... the real question still stands: after 9 months on the market their still are no AOSP ROMs.
MIUI
Now that vibrant 2.2 source is released ... we finally have a REAL AOSP port and my all time favorite from my old HD2 the MIUI.... so keep your heads up and wait for it to get finished.
Get a custom rom. There are so many good devs doing them don't waste your time on AOSP....... until they release the actual source code...... on April 22
sarim.ali said:
Now that vibrant 2.2 source is released ... we finally have a REAL AOSP port and my all time favorite from my old HD2 the MIUI.... so keep your heads up and wait for it to get finished.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except, the 2.2 source for the Vibrant has not been released. The SGH-T959D that shows Froyo sources on Samsung's site is for the Canadian Fascinate, not the US T-Mobile Vibrant. Samsung has yet to release the 2.2 sources.
oka1 said:
Get a custom rom. There are so many good devs doing them don't waste your time on AOSP....... until they release the actual source code...... on April 22
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except the so-called "custom ROMs" are just modifications on the stock theme, a replacement kernel and a change of some of the supplied applications.
There is nothing close to a full "custom ROM" such as CyanogenMod or MIUI because we don't have Samsung's sources. What is passing for a "custom ROM" for the Vibrant are just repackaged files. It is akin to the "ROM cooking" that took place for the WinMo phones, not a truly ground-up build from source that is possible with Android.
EDT/Devs4Android has the MIUI build. From Source.
TW has a 2.2.1 in testing.
EDT has a 2.2.1 Beta released.
TW has a 2.3 AOSP in testing. From Source.
EDT has 2.2 AOSP in testing. From Source.
What you want is out there for you.
Watch the forums and reply when a call for Alpha testers is posted.
Hopefully it won't be long before you see a full TW/EDT/Devs4Android collaboration!
I think what the original poster is trying to ask (and I have the same question) is why were there never any real 2.1 AOSP, cyanogen5 for the vibrant. The source for 2.1 has been around for many months. Were some other proprietary bits missing, was the released source code such a mess that it was unbuildable, something else? With those questions in mind, why will things be any different when the 2.2 source comes out?
mattb3 said:
I think what the original poster is trying to ask (and I have the same question) is why were there never any real 2.1 AOSP, cyanogen5 for the vibrant. The source for 2.1 has been around for many months. Were some other proprietary bits missing, was the released source code such a mess that it was unbuildable, something else? With those questions in mind, why will things be any different when the 2.2 source comes out?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, this is more towards what I was getting at. We do not have Samsung's kernel sources for 2.2. And, we do not have a Samsung provided vendor overlay.
When we receive these two pieces, then a true AOSP build will be possible. However, we do have the 2.1 kernel sources, so why wasn't a true AOSP build possible then? What was missing, and can we actually expect Samsung to release the overlay that's needed?
Actually, that's true. I know it was old but why didn't anyone build a 2.1 cyanogen or aosp rom? (Not to say its easy.)
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
A noob question, kindly can someone explain what is the vendor overlay stuff?
Many thanks!
Where have you been?
rpcameron said:
I've been following the development of so-called ROMs for the Vibrant (and other SGS devices), but I have yet to see a single AOSP ROM. Even when Samsung released the original kernel sources for 2.1, there were no AOSP 2.1 ROMs. Why not? Is it because they don't know which BLOBs to pull for insertion or the proper vendor overlays?
Some developers have done great work with SGS kernels (especially supercurio and his Voodoo kernels ... eugene373's tend to always wipe the internal SD card unnecessarily ...). But, a kernel does not a ROM make ... therefore I ask, what is truly missing to build an AOSP ROM. I've gone through the sources, but I don't follow makefiles too well.
I know we have another month or so before Samsung is obligated to release their 2.2 kernel sources, but that should have no impact on 2.1 AOSP ROMs. Therefore, I ask "what is the hold up?" What is missing, and what might I contribute ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude theres been a true AOSP ROM for the Vibrant since like december and thats CM 6.1
Im running it now
rpcameron said:
I've been following the development of so-called ROMs for the Vibrant (and other SGS devices), but I have yet to see a single AOSP ROM. Even when Samsung released the original kernel sources for 2.1, there were no AOSP 2.1 ROMs. Why not? Is it because they don't know which BLOBs to pull for insertion or the proper vendor overlays?
Some developers have done great work with SGS kernels (especially supercurio and his Voodoo kernels ... eugene373's tend to always wipe the internal SD card unnecessarily ...). But, a kernel does not a ROM make ... therefore I ask, what is truly missing to build an AOSP ROM. I've gone through the sources, but I don't follow makefiles too well.
I know we have another month or so before Samsung is obligated to release their 2.2 kernel sources, but that should have no impact on 2.1 AOSP ROMs. Therefore, I ask "what is the hold up?" What is missing, and what might I contribute ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For probably the same reason that many phones with non AOSP firmware running 1.5/1.6 did not bother with AOSP 1.5/1.6 when they were released around the time 2.1 source hit. Why bother developing at all for what is essentially an "out of date" OS.
The only people it seems who actively continue to develop for existing (as opposed to new) firmware are manufacturers and carriers. This stupidity should be left to the manufacturers who still do this.
One of the larger snags way back then (sits in his rocking chair on the porch) was a lack of understanding of the phones proprietary aspects and how to work around them. But we have a fairly clear understanding of Samsung's boot process now, and RFS can now easily be turned into a distant memory.
I would wager a guess that the apathy towards 2.1 will not repeat itself once we have 2.2 source widely available and the low level similarities between 2.2 and 2.3 should have Gingerbread being more than the experiment it currently is. It's been barely more than a week since Eugene's little present manifested and there are already proper and stable kernels available.
Keep in mind that the devs we do have, have done a phenomenal job of cleaning up, speeding up, and drastically enhancing our existing 2.2 release. And perhaps to the point where many will not really care, though I know many would still like to see CyanogenMod6/7 properly on this phone.
Master&Slave™ said:
Dude theres been a true AOSP ROM for the Vibrant since like december and thats CM 6.1
Im running it now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um, that's not quite true. The CyanogenMod.com website lists 0 files available for download for either experimental or stable files. The CM6.1 you must be running is not a true CM build.
Also, CM is not AOSP, but rather AOSP with modifications.
phrozenflame said:
A noob question, kindly can someone explain what is the vendor overlay stuff?
Many thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The vendor overlay tells the AOSP build system which proprietary files are needed from the device that are not available in source form. This includes things like GPS and video drivers, baseband firmware for wireless radios, &c.
hi everybody !
a month age i decided to compile a new rom for my Galaxy S absolutely from AOSP source ( branch 2.2.1_r1 ) after some compile-time problem and many painful steps to resolve ,eventually the rom successfully built and can boot it up flawlessly on emulator.
i create a nandroid backup of current rom and installed the compiled one. but i am facing new problem :
1- the phone successfully boots but after short while screen began
flicking several time and the phone go in deep sleep and never wakeup
( power button or menu button does not do any thing )
2- touch screen works only for some second that I can unlock the
phone
3- there is no network available
4- I have downloaded samsung opesource package for GT-I9000. it
contains a folder named 'platform' but when i merge these files to
AOSP , the compile process stops and fails again. if there any one can
help me which files from samsung source should i merge and how ? if
you now the answer and dont have spare time then some internet link or
online document is really useful .i have no problem studding and
reading and searching . reaching to target is my only hope .
I am really disappointed why there is not a good and complete step2step tutorial to compile an AOSP rom for galaxy s (GT-I9000) !!
such docs is available for phones like dell streak , desire , dream , magic , .... . i really want to to active these aspect on XDA forum and with help of all you ( mods and masters ) try to create such tutorial that any one in world can use to refer . i think XDA is the only reference on net to collect and create such help and document. please help me and leave PM or comment to agree ot disagree and from where can i start ?!! thank in advanced .
edit :
there is a google groups post that i send my question in Android-platform . if you prefer please join this group and active that post to ask any question related to 'galaxy s compile from source ' .
post located at http://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/browse_thread/thread/da5d6f18f3bd3c9b
As of May 31 it looks like Notion Adam Ink users were upgraded to Android 2.3 Since the G-tablet and the Adam Ink kernel 1.2 are very similar, I was wondering if anyone was able to port GB to the G-tablet. I know that CM 7 is based from Android 2.3, but it does not have hardware acceleration built into it. Having Gingerbread with hardware acceleration would be amazing! Here is the source link, please correct me if I have interpreted this wrong.
http://notionink.wordpress.com/2011/05/31/sales-and-updates/
The gingerbread build they released is super buggy, so I don't know if it would be worth porting. However, someone might be able to pull the hardware acceleration code from it and incorporate it into a more stable ROM. Regardless, Notion Ink said they're focusing all their efforts on making a Honeycomb build, which I think would be a lot more worthwhile to port. You can see my post about it here.
The NI Adam GB build does not have full HW acceleration working. At this point CM7 or the Vanilla AOSP or other gingerbread roms here that are still updated (Is vegan ginger still updated?) are the way to go.
You guys are aware right that Erik Hardesty a.k.a. dalingrin is wokring on ICS for touchpad and has promised (citation needed) to deliver before CM9? Now, I want to know if he indeed delivers, then will his work to taken to make the CM9 build faster and then will he be included in the official CM team. I am asking this because I have a Moto Defy and before CM7, Quarx, Epsylon and others compiled it and I think they are now in the CM team. Just curious on how it works.
He is already a part of the CM team, he is the CM maintainer for the Nook Color.
That's news.. well for me! But if there is someone else in his place who is ot in the CM team then what happens?
abhi.eternal said:
That's news.. well for me! But if there is someone else in his place who is ot in the CM team then what happens?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then its not a CM9 build. Basically the CM team are a bunch of developers on different devices. In the case of ICS each developer will build their versions and it will be pushed and integrated into the CM9 list when CM9 is ready to launch. However, in the case where a CM team member's build is ready to be tested before CM9 is ready then they will most likely post them as a under a different title because its not integrated as a CM9 device yet.
In the case that another developer releases an AOSP ROM into the wild then he can do whatever he wants with it and it has nothing to do with the Cyanogenmod team whatsoever.
Samsung Galaxy S Captivate ICS CM9, Glitch Kernel | HP TouchPad CM7 Xron Beta 2.9.1
@iamsamsamiam: I get your point but if that is the case then how come Quarx and Epsylon (for Motorola Defy) are in the official CM team now (I think they are [citation needed!]). If you are not aware, CM7 had no love for Defy for a very long time and that gap was filled by Quarx at first. Afterwards, when we had a almost complete working rom based on CM7, these devs were included in the official list. I just want to know is this how it happens?
abhi.eternal said:
@iamsamsamiam: I get your point but if that is the case then how come Quarx and Epsylon (for Motorola Defy) are in the official CM team now (I think they are [citation needed!]). If you are not aware, CM7 had no love for Defy for a very long time and that gap was filled by Quarx at first. Afterwards, when we had a almost complete working rom based on CM7, these devs were included in the official list. I just want to know is this how it happens?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And there are still a ton of devices out there without any Cyanogenmod ROM at all. I guess its more like a developer who wants to code for a particular device and wants to put a CM flavour to the ROM and gets permissions from the CM team to use it and builds a CM ROM and I guess they would become part of the team as a de facto point since they continue to support their build. Remember there are a ton of other ROM developers out there that don't use a CM base and does things their own way.
Cyanogenmod isn't always going to be the "best" ROM out there for every device, but they're trying to support many devices out there. The devices that get support are reflected upon the community and the more popular the phone the larger the community. And developers come out of said communities and maybe one of those developers wants to make it into a CM build.
Samsung Galaxy S Captivate ICS CM9, Glitch Kernel | HP TouchPad CM7 Xron Beta 2.9.1
That made sense!
Hi guys i was wondering which cm or aosp was the first released for tablets im looking into porting for a device. what would be the minimum hardware requirement for instence 2.2 froyo.
gavster26 said:
Hi guys i was wondering which cm or aosp was the first released for tablets im looking into porting for a device. what would be the minimum hardware requirement for instence 2.2 froyo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The first version of Cyanogenmod to run on tablets was Cyanogenmod 7 based on Android Gingerbread version 2.3.x. It ran on tablets such as the Advent Vega, Nook Color, HP Touchpad, Viewsonic G Tab, and ZTE V9. For AOSP, the first version of AOSP to run on tablets was Froyo Android version 2.2.x. It ran on tablets such as the Samsung Galaxy Tab. The main minimum requirements for Froyo Android 2.2.x are the device must have a touchscreen, gps, compass, accelerometer, camera, usb support and other sensor requirements. Additionally 92 MB of memory must be available to the kernel and the userspace, with a minimum of 150 MB available for the user's data (/data partition). For more information I would recommend checking out the Android compatibility definition for Froyo Android 2.2.x here.
Ok thankyou i got the info from your post. and the device is no where near capable for android. i was asked by a friend to look into it