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
hello friends,
today android 4.0 (aka ice cream sandwich) source code have been released at source.android.com website
well I can't make a ROM because i'm still learning things about making roms in general
Is there any chance to get a proprely working ICS rom for our toshiba folio 100?
thanks in advance
Ayoub.
is too soon, maybe we will have some chances after it will be ported to the vega tablet
So do I. I think that we have to wait
just for my fun, I'm compiling ICS for vbox-x86 just to see how it is in a virtualbox vm.
roglio said:
just for my fun, I'm compiling ICS for vbox-x86 just to see how it is in a virtualbox vm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Glad to found that - maybe you are able to contribute to this thread:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=19824180
Any expertise will be welcome.
It looks pretty good, thanks for the info
Android 4.0 on Toshiba AC100 Firmware - Review & installation Ice Cream Sandvich
Palastochas said:
It looks pretty good, thanks for the info
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great. In Toshiba AC100 (analog Folio) Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandvich ICS now work - last info here - tabletroms.com/forums/ac100-rom-development/3562-android-4-0-toshiba-ac100-firmware-review-installation-ice-cream-sandvich-4-0-a.html
Recently more and more Android developer start to developping and propose to upgrade their OS from old Froyo (Android 2.2/2.3 ) to Android 4.0 (ICS)system,even though low level 600MHz CPU/256Mb RAM Android phone
(ex. Huawei U8150 ) :
Refer to beneath thread of their activities:
1. Port ICS transition animations on EVERY ROM & EVERY PHONE Thread
( http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1342117 )
2. [Huawei U8150] Ice Cream Sandwich AOSP Alpha 3 WIFI+SD WORKS
: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1366404
I hope someone of our Archos developer also can consider to develop Android 4.0 (ICS)system for Gen 8 ASAP
well the answer is easy:
and if u would have spend some time in this forum - reading - u would have it already...
Atm we got 3 main developers for our archos devices: sauron/bubu/divx
Since sauron will stick to his UD for a while as it seems hes out of the race atm
The other 2 are wokring on CM7 (-> Ginger) atm.
Even they are doing a great job we still dont have a fully bug free and installable CM7 yet...
CM9 (-> ICS) is in a very early development stage (as u already can see in any other android forum here - mostly alpha builds with barely functionality) so it's kinda meanless to switch over to it atm - since we dont have enough developers for it.
Once CM7 is fully working I think bubu/divx will head on to CM9 ofc (if they still own an archos then )
Even I know u just had good intensions - I think those [Request] threads are meanless most time - as they won't "help" anyone sadly.
Imho: if u want to contribute and take the development a step further or want to help them - join the Cyanogen Bull RC development discussions and help out with bug-reports or anything else u can do...
greez
Hello FrEcP:
Thanks for your update informations.
Sorry!I do not know how to develope Linux or Android OS and just a Android system user
However I always keep watch the new OS improvement and contribute my testing result to developer all the time and wish Archos Gen8 could be better
performace than before!!
ICS Port to our gn8 started!
letama, made an alpha version of an ICS Port for our devices
Look: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1404492
Currently the only thing that seems to run is the touchscreen (Actually the launcher is pretty smooth)! And it's booting of course
nice to see progresses in ics development for ics!!
Hey guys,
So, I'm not a dev, but I'm dying for a port of CM9 for the P769. In the Original Android Development forum, there appears to be someone working on CM10, which is great and all, but we actually stand a chance of getting all the hardware working under CM9.
Just out of curiosity, I meandered over to LG's open source website and -- lo and behold -- quite clearly I see the source available for not just the P769BK, but other variants as well. I downloaded it, and it even includes instructions for building.
So... is this not the source we need for a CM port? Please, strike down my ignorance and let me know what's up.
https://wws.lg.com/global/support/opensource/opensourceList?types=MODEL&search=P769
That is what we need and the dev has it. We have a good chance of CM10 working because the source is available. So there is no big push for CM9.
kevev said:
That is what we need and the dev has it. We have a good chance of CM10 working because the source is available. So there is no big push for CM9.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excellent! I was under the impression that devs needed 4.1 sources from the manufacturer to build fully functional CM10 images. The more you know!
orrorin said:
Excellent! I was under the impression that devs needed 4.1 sources from the manufacturer to build fully functional CM10 images. The more you know!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not the most knowledgable about rom development and such, but it seems that if at least Android 4.0 source is available for a certain device, then it may be easier for devs to bring JB to that device and/or build a fully working JB rom for it.
Was doing some poking around myself today and noticed that LGP769BK(Optimus L9)_Android_JB_P769v20d.zip
was up on the LG open source page. Was able to DL it and upload to dev-host if they pull it down later but its listed there for now.
Don't know if I'm late to the game or not but I didn't find anything during my real brief search that it had been noticed yet
link removed because XDA hates me