Barnes & Nobles released the Source Code of Nook Tablet.
Here the direct link:
DOWNLOAD [Thanks to Entropy512]
Inside the folders:
Android
Kernel (2.6.35)
u-boot
x-loader​
I loaded all on my GitHub repository.
Sweet!!!!!! The releasing of the source marks great things for devices!
it's a good news!
I load all on my github. Check first post
I grabbed the source because I would like to compile wpa_supplicant with some changes to allow adhoc. But wpa_supplicant is not there. Obviously it is used so don't they have to include it in their source release? I wonder what else is missing...
But this doesn't mean that the bootloader is unlocked/unlockable, does it?
yourbrokenoven said:
But this doesn't mean that the bootloader is unlocked/unlockable, does it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope
Sent from my BNTV250 using Tapatalk
Please forgive my ignorance/lack of knowledge, but with the sc can't we just customize the stock os with tweaks and make it more tablet-ish until some serious magic is worked with our locked/signed boot loader?
Yes. There have already been a bunch of customizations made. There is a custom launcher on the way. BUT these tyes of things will take more time to develop than porting something already written.
Sent from my BNTV250 using Tapatalk
Nook Color?
I wonder if this can be tried on the Nook Color, sure it will be laggy because of the different speeds, but it may be possible since they are both running the same software....
Jainyankee1993 said:
I wonder if this can be tried on the Nook Color, sure it will be laggy because of the different speeds, but it may be possible since they are both running the same software....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Barnes and Noble has already announced that 1.4 will be made available for the Encore. With CM7 and MIUI already on the Encore, 1.4 is not really a focus for NookDevs.
Sent from my BNTV250 using xda premium
zambien said:
Yes. There have already been a bunch of customizations made. There is a custom launcher on the way. BUT these tyes of things will take more time to develop than porting something already written.
Sent from my BNTV250 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What customisations? I've missed those I think
1.4.1 source is up
http://images.barnesandnoble.com/PResources/download/Nook/source-code/nook_tablet_1-4-1.tar.gz
btw.. I can't get this to compile. I don't even think it has rules for compilation. This says to me that they're not in compliance with GPL. Someone else try before we start asking them.
AdamOutler said:
btw.. I can't get this to compile. I don't even think it has rules for compilation. This says to me that they're not in compliance with GPL. Someone else try before we start asking them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, there is a lot of stuff missing from this "source code". Where are the wireless drivers? This "crap" is most certainly insufficient, but I'm sure their lawyers told them that it was going to be ok... after all, the copyright holders have to call them out on this... there's nothing _WE_ can do...
cfoesch said:
Yeah, there is a lot of stuff missing from this "source code". Where are the wireless drivers? This "crap" is most certainly insufficient, but I'm sure their lawyers told them that it was going to be ok... after all, the copyright holders have to call them out on this... there's nothing _WE_ can do...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's plenty we can do. We can notify the free software foundation. We can send them an email. We can also notify the copyright holders.
I posted the improper link. correct link is here: http://images.barnesandnoble.com/PResources/download/Nook/source-code/nook_tablet_1-4-1.tar.gz 1.4.1 source code.
I started an issue here: http://bookclubs.barnesandnoble.com...ligation-to-release-full-source/idi-p/1261771
Please show support in this thread and lets get Barnes and Nobel to provide the proper, full, compilable kernel sources which we require.
what is their email
i will spam the **** out of them
424aca said:
what is their email
i will spam the **** out of them
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That will not help. Please, do not do that.
Related
Hey guys, I was just posting up to ask whether or not anyone had looked into porting project voodoo over to the fascinate. I know supercurio posted up this porting information on his site http://project-voodoo.org/porting a few days ago but hadn't seen anything in here on it.
I am by no means a developer but more of a news/rumor man or else i would totally be working on this for everyone so i hope someone out there is capable and willing to give this a go as it seems to be a much more capable and stable solution to the lag fix experienced on other galaxy s variants and though we all may not necessarily need it... it'd be a cool option to try
It is being worked on. We need a full kernel built from source to get to this point, or try to splice voodoo into our recovery kernel that wad tweaked to work. Its gonna take some time but know it is being worked on. Kernel built from source is the first on the development list
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
fallingup said:
It is being worked on. We need a full kernel built from source to get to this point, or try to splice voodoo into our recovery kernel that wad tweaked to work. Its gonna take some time but know it is being worked on. Kernel built from source is the first on the development list
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol awesome, thank you.
thats literally all i was hoping to hear, i figured we were still a lil whiles away from getting a voodoo kernel but glad to hear it is on the list
thanks
Now that there is a kernel that actually compiles and works is this more of a reality? If it's already being worked on what's the status?
Log onto irc for more information.
#samsung-fascinate
adrynalyne said:
Log onto irc for more information.
#samsung-fascinate
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tried that and there is no one in the room. What server are you guys using? I tried EFnet...
Protonus said:
Tried that and there is no one in the room. What server are you guys using? I tried EFnet...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think most of the action is in freenode, but I may be wrong.
sic4672 said:
I think most of the action is in freenode, but I may be wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct, freenode.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
adrynalyne said:
Correct, freenode.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Got it! Thanks guys!
The porting guide is not complete, but big strides have been made recently, though it may not come outside of inner circles for a real release until voodoo beta 5. #project-voodoo on freenode is a place to check out, though you may get a bad response if all you do is log on every day and ask "is it out yet?"
In lieu of all of these leaked ics roms from someone inside Samsung is this considered theft? And if we have this on our devices isn't there a chance we could potentially get in trouble if the right person were to find out?
With that said, xda does not support piracy because the software costs money and is given for free. The same goes with leaked roms that were stolen from samsung right? So xda mods, how can you support something like this and allow it on the forum? I'm neutral to this argument and would like your thoughts.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
The "leaked ROMs" are technically made up of open source material, so there is no theft issue. As for the person leaking them, they may be subject to disciplinary action by their employer, but there is no illegality for having said ROM on your phone. Most of these supposed "leaked ROMs" are actually leaked on purpose by the manufacturer as a way to get the flashing community to do their R&D for free. We are only too willing to help them in that.
haha yeah, samsung is just letting xda devs do some of the work!
akira02rex said:
In lieu of all of these leaked ics roms from someone inside Samsung is this considered theft? And if we have this on our devices isn't there a chance we could potentially get in trouble if the right person were to find out?
With that said, xda does not support piracy because the software costs money and is given for free. The same goes with leaked roms that were stolen from samsung right? So xda mods, how can you support something like this and allow it on the forum? I'm neutral to this argument and would like your thoughts.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not theft per say. These are roms (or software if you will) that is build from free source code provided by Google and is made FOR OUR PHONES. They have to build several roms to make sure all the bugs are out. They send out these "leaked" roms to testing to find all the hidden (or non-obvious) bugs so they can fix them before the rom is considered gold (or stable, official). You know as well as I do that once something hits the internet it spreads like wildfire, so thats how they get out in the masses.
Since there is no price on the roms and they are built from free source code, XDA is not responsible for anything in this regard.
The Apache license is a grey area in this regard. Similarly, the ICS leaks technically ARE GPL violations in that kernel source hasn't been included - however again it's a grey area since technically we're not supposed to have the binaries in the first place.
Also, I believe most leaks are not obtained by "theft", but by using an undocumented firmware update mode that lets the leaks be downloaded directly from Samsung's Kies update servers.
Red5 said:
Its not theft per say. These are roms (or software if you will) that is build from free source code provided by Google and is made FOR OUR PHONES. They have to build several roms to make sure all the bugs are out. They send out these "leaked" roms to testing to find all the hidden (or non-obvious) bugs so they can fix them before the rom is considered gold (or stable, official). You know as well as I do that once something hits the internet it spreads like wildfire, so thats how they get out in the masses.
Since there is no price on the roms and they are built from free source code, XDA is not responsible for anything in this regard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm it just seems like that argument wouldn't hold up in a court of law? Its being taken no matter how you slice it. It was built using source but where's the intent to distribute? If there's no intent (yet) then they aren't obligated to release it based on gpl.
Thoughts?
Sent from my SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1420996
Bam. Legal, official ROM. DONE.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
Entropy512 said:
The Apache license is a grey area in this regard. Similarly, the ICS leaks technically ARE GPL violations in that kernel source hasn't been included - however again it's a grey area since technically we're not supposed to have the binaries in the first place.
Also, I believe most leaks are not obtained by "theft", but by using an undocumented firmware update mode that lets the leaks be downloaded directly from Samsung's Kies update servers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
akira02rex said:
Hmm it just seems like that argument wouldn't hold up in a court of law? Its being taken no matter how you slice it. It was built using source but where's the intent to distribute? If there's no intent (yet) then they aren't obligated to release it based on gpl.
Thoughts?
Sent from my SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As Entropy said, its a grey area. I guess technically it is a violation of GPL due to source not being released with the leak, but then the leak isnt being documented as gold or official, so since its still in its "testing" phase, it dosent count (which is why all leaked roms are required to say that they are leaked testing roms, not official and to flash at your own risk... official dropped roms will say official). Now if somebody took a leaked build with no source and distributed it as gold or official, then yes that would not hold up and would be in direct violation and could be held accountable.
autonomous-inc said:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1420996
Bam. Legal, official ROM. DONE.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, not official, still a leak. The poster should not have used "Official" to describe a leak that happened to have a signed kernel.
Red5 said:
As Entropy said, its a grey area. I guess technically it is a violation of GPL due to source not being released with the leak, but then the leak isnt being documented as gold or official, so since its still in its "testing" phase, it dosent count (which is why all leaked roms are required to say that they are leaked testing roms, not official and to flash at your own risk... official dropped roms will say official). Now if somebody took a leaked build with no source and distributed it as gold or official, then yes that would not hold up and would be in direct violation and could be held accountable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Declaring that something is a test version does not permit you to withhold source code.
The main thing is that if you read the license, if you give the binary to someone, you are supposed to provide source. If you received a binary from someone with a written offer for source, you must pass on that written offer.
The problem is that Samsung is "providing" test versions to their testers - some people on XDA have just managed how to intercept this method of providing builds by polling Samsung's update servers, but NOT the method for intercepting the source or the source offer.
Entropy512 said:
No, not official, still a leak. The poster should not have used "Official" to describe a leak that happened to have a signed kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Buzzkill.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
Entropy512 said:
No, not official, still a leak. The poster should not have used "Official" to describe a leak that happened to have a signed kernel.
Declaring that something is a test version does not permit you to withhold source code.
The main thing is that if you read the license, if you give the binary to someone, you are supposed to provide source. If you received a binary from someone with a written offer for source, you must pass on that written offer.
The problem is that Samsung is "providing" test versions to their testers - some people on XDA have just managed how to intercept this method of providing builds by polling Samsung's update servers, but NOT the method for intercepting the source or the source offer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I should have been more clear. I didnt mean that it permitted anyone to have without source code... but merely that Samsung does not have to provide it yet since it isnt official. By Samsung giving out a test build to test for bugs, they do not have to give out source code yet (mainly why they kept testing in house so its blanketed under the same company because the company does in fact have the source code from Google) until they release it outside the company.
And yes, just because some members intercept the leaked test builds, they were not handed to by Samsung which is why they do not have the source code in the first place. People here distribute it to other members but it is not attached here on XDA, they upload it to a share site and simply post the links here at XDA.
I work for the FBI and it is illegal. This is a bust and you're all under arrest. Post your addresses so we can come and arrest you. kthxbai
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Red5 said:
I should have been more clear. I didnt mean that it permitted anyone to have without source code... but merely that Samsung does not have to provide it yet since it isnt official. By Samsung giving out a test build to test for bugs, they do not have to give out source code yet (mainly why they kept testing in house so its blanketed under the same company because the company does in fact have the source code from Google) until they release it outside the company.
And yes, just because some members intercept the leaked test builds, they were not handed to by Samsung which is why they do not have the source code in the first place. People here distribute it to other members but it is not attached here on XDA, they upload it to a share site and simply post the links here at XDA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup - that's basically it. The people whom Samsung is actually "providing" these builds to most likely have source code access.
We don't have source because they didn't really "provide" us the leak.
How u do dat
wonner said:
I work for the FBI and it is illegal. This is a bust and you're all under arrest. Post your addresses so we can come and arrest you. kthxbai
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
I agree what a wasteful buzz kill post
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
rboone18 said:
I agree what a wasteful buzz kill post
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody asked you.
Who are you even responding too? What a wasteful post.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
OK guys this has gone on long enough. To respond to the OP. OEM have long allowed early builds to be leaked to XDA for bugging hunting and troubleshooting. Should do a little research before you start a thread like this.
Thread closed.
zelendel said:
OK guys this has gone on long enough. To respond to the OP. OEM have long allowed early builds to be leaked to XDA for bugging hunting and troubleshooting. Should do a little research before you start a thread like this.
Thread closed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Buzzkill...
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
Red5 said:
Buzzkill...
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup
Hi there,
Im trying to compile an AOSP build. My device (toshiba Thrive) has Honeycomb and there is no source for it, hence there is no public GIT with a device tree or source of any kind rather than the kernel source.
Question is, how can I add my device to the lunch menu if I don't have any files to put in there? Also, if I compile for a different device, i.e. Xoom since it had Tegra2 support built in, what are the chances of porting that just by swapping bins, libs, etc files, and so on?
I'm guessing that the kernel is compiled during the process based on those proprietary files..... correct?
Bump
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
Sorry, forgot to quote you in case you felt the need to edit your post
Ok, let's all take a visit to chill-town. If you don't like the thread, just ignore it. This isn't a snark contest, and no one wins a cupie doll.
And to the OP, it's best not to bump your own thread. Just be patient.
Peace.
Farmer Ted said:
And to the OP, it's best not to bump your own thread. Just be patient.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For that I am sorry. Please close this thread.
Sorry mate to post in a closed thread but i did it just to let you know that i've deleted some replies that are not in THE SPIRIT OF XDA.
Farmer Ted said:
Ok, let's all take a visit to chill-town. If you don't like the thread, just ignore it. This isn't a snark contest, and no one wins a cupie doll.
And to the OP, it's best not to bump your own thread. Just be patient.
Peace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does anyone have a step by step guide to setup a kernel development environment for the HTC Flyer.
I am new to this and I cannot get the environment setup correctly
Please someone help or does anyone have an image of there dev machine
Sent from my HTC Flyer P510e using XDA Premium HD app
Anyone??
Sent from my HTC Flyer P510e using XDA Premium HD app
Start searching. If you can't find the info yourself, then you probably aren't going to do much good as a kernel "dev". Also read up on GPL, they are getting stricter about it around here and as such there are rules as to what you can post ROM/kernel wise. I would avoid any kitchens, and do it all from scratch. I'll give you two links though.
Toolchain: https://github.com/DooMLoRD/android_prebuilt_toolchains
Source: http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
That and a Ubuntu machine are all you need to get going. Just as a warning, takinga image of somebody's dev machine, and then pulling Leedroid's or Doomlord's source code and compiling is not building your own kernel. Start from scratch, google, search, learn and it's going to take a bit. I'd start with adding some extra CPU governor's if I were you, it's the easiest.
Oh and I'd wait more then two hours next time before bumping my own post, also google is a amazing thing. Did you try it.
http://forums.androidcentral.com/ht...how-build-your-own-kernel-package-source.html
Some very nice and helpfull thoughts there.
First steps r always hard. With proper help they can get much easyer. U prolly wouldnt be walking if u wouldnt recive a help from your parents.
Ioiwillioi asked for help. He said he is new in kernel developing. He said he is having some problems with seting up. I am sure he is mature enought he knows for web search.
Not all ppl like to build their knewladge base up from scratch with no help... After all we all benefit on other ppl knewladge and take shortcuts... If u dont feel same then burn all books, cut off internet and do all from scratch.
Google search has some disadvantages as well not onlly Google knows it all syndrome...
Now if u can help him with going faster in proces please do.
Help or stfu?
Fake edit: IoiWilliI that bump... u siriuslly could do it faster lol
ninja edit:
IoiWillloI is Sensles HC rom developer. I seen first post at his early atempts:
"With all due respect, but adding an APK, swapping some files etc., is not an useful contribution for the community. If you really want to add something, work on ICS instead We need more developers on that case, and it would be more useful than 10 HoneyComb ROMs"
Today some belive his rom is best HC rom for Flyer. Gl IoiWillioI with growing in kernel developing skilz.
You seriously think my post is unhelpful? If so I'm more then happy to delete it buddy.
thewadegeek said:
You seriously think my post is unhelpful? If so I'm more then happy to delete it buddy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I appreciate the help wadegeek however you could be a little bit more supportive, so far i have stuck to ROM stuff and even if i do say so myself i have done quite a good job, and i though rather than google it i thought i would ask in the forum that was designed for the device, (in case of any device specific requirements etc) i mean thats just logical thinking :O
I dont think jprednik meant any offense
Also thank you for all of the positive comments and feedback jprednik,
EDIT: Its my post i'll bump when i want to
Sent from my HTC Flyer P510e using XDA Premium HD app
ioiwillioi said:
I appreciate the help wadegeek however you could be a little bit more supportive, so far i have stuck to ROM stuff and even if i do say so myself i have done quite a good job, and i though rather than google it i thought i would ask in the forum that was designed for the device, (in case of any device specific requirements etc) i mean thats just logical thinking :O
I dont think jprednik meant any offense
Also thank you for all of the positive comments and feedback jprednik,
EDIT: Its my post i'll bump when i want to
Sent from my HTC Flyer P510e using XDA Premium HD app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am being supportive, I'm just saying if you take some to look it up on your own you'll get to the exact sameplace. Also I believe spamming is against the forum rules, which was why I mentioned the post bumping. It wasn't really needed.
Sent from my SCH-R760 using Tapatalk 2
thewadegeek said:
I am being supportive,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No you're not. You're being the opposite of supportive.
Its not a step by step, but this thread on the Nook Color 3.0 for ICS Kernel development has some insights into what it takes.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1677219&highlight=kernel
Ok, THIS supportive enough?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1748297
And I answered all his questions. Being supportive does not equal babying him(or her...I think your a him).
helpfull
thx and yes i believe thats helpfull and suportive.
thewadegeek said:
Ok, THIS supportive enough?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1748297
And I answered all his questions. Being supportive does not equal babying him(or her...I think your a him).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. Thanks.
thewadegeek said:
Start searching. If you can't find the info yourself, then you probably aren't going to do much good as a kernel "dev". Also read up on GPL, they are getting stricter about it around here and as such there are rules as to what you can post ROM/kernel wise. I would avoid any kitchens, and do it all from scratch. I'll give you two links though.
Toolchain: https://github.com/DooMLoRD/android_prebuilt_toolchains
Source: http://www.htcdev.com/devcenter/downloads
That and a Ubuntu machine are all you need to get going. Just as a warning, takinga image of somebody's dev machine, and then pulling Leedroid's or Doomlord's source code and compiling is not building your own kernel. Start from scratch, google, search, learn and it's going to take a bit. I'd start with adding some extra CPU governor's if I were you, it's the easiest.
Oh and I'd wait more then two hours next time before bumping my own post, also google is a amazing thing. Did you try it.
http://forums.androidcentral.com/ht...how-build-your-own-kernel-package-source.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right another question ,
Once i have the Zimage what do i have to do with it, i know about building it into a boot.img but when i flash my kernel the cpu values etc don't appear to change :/ is it something i need to specify in the .config prior to building or is it something i do in the process of zimage to boot.img ?
That would all be in the config file. Are you using LeeDroid's CPU frequency tables? And if you started your source from scratch, did you add anything to Kconfig? I would really need to take a look at your source, do you have a Github? Or can you post exactly what you changed?
thewadegeek said:
That would all be in the config file. Are you using LeeDroid's CPU frequency tables? And if you started your source from scratch, did you add anything to Kconfig? I would really need to take a look at your source, do you have a Github? Or can you post exactly what you changed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't change the kconfig :/ I can commit it to github later is that any good??
So the kernel compiles fine but there are no options to got about 1495 when trying to OC
Sent from my HTC Flyer P510e using XDA Premium HD app
Yep get it into a github and I'll take a look to see if I can help. You will need to make some changes to the different configs though. And out of curiosity, which kernel did you pull your .config from? Or did you use a default from arch/arm/configs?
thewadegeek said:
Yep get it into a github and I'll take a look to see if I can help. You will need to make some changes to the different configs though. And out of curiosity, which kernel did you pull your .config from? Or did you use a default from arch/arm/configs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stock HC config and will get it to got hub asap
Sent from my HTC Flyer P510e using XDA Premium HD app
Ok, I won't be able to take a serious look until this evening though.
This post I think is going to be quite helpful in my attempt to swing a bat at this dev stuff... thanks for the info folks
if crpalmer's kernel is based of elkay's which is based on dsb9938's and it pulls some source from a few others how do we keep them all straight? is crpalmer's based on the newest revisions of both other kernels? we need a comparison chart containing all the features of each kernel highlighting the differences and similarities of each.
by the wording in crpalmer's thread, assuming it's based on all the recent submits, then it would be the most recent update especially considering it uses linux 3.4.31 when the others use lower versions. (unless there is an even newer one i havn't read yet)
KyJelly69 said:
if crpalmer's kernel is based of elkay's which is based on dsb9938's and it pulls some source from a few others how do we keep them all straight? is crpalmer's based on the newest revisions of both other kernels? we need a comparison chart containing all the features of each kernel highlighting the differences and similarities of each.
by the wording in crpalmer's thread, assuming it's based on all the recent submits, then it would be the most recent update especially considering it uses linux 3.4.31 when the others use lower versions. (unless there is an even newer one i havn't read yet)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So make a chart then.
beaups said:
So make a chart then.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you clearly deserve a ribbon for most helpful.
If I knew what the differences were, or even how to find all of them, i would. but i sure as hell wouldn't share it with you.
KyJelly69 said:
you clearly deserve a ribbon for most helpful.
If I knew what the differences were, or even how to find all of them, i would. but i sure as hell wouldn't share it with you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's github links for each kernel in the their respective threads. I don't need a chart.
Now that's funny.
Then why are being a trolling ass? This topic obviously has nothing to do with you. This is the HELP section. If you want to be a jerk go do it in the dev section.
Now you get a gold star and your little buddy too.
Sent from my HTC6435LVW using xda app-developers app
KyJelly69 said:
Then why are being a trolling ass? This topic obviously has nothing to do with you. This is the HELP section. If you want to be a jerk go do it in the dev section.
Now you get a gold star and your little buddy too.
Sent from my HTC6435LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody is being a jerk.
How can you come in here and say we "need" a chart? That would be a great way for you to contribute...
Instead, you pop off to the people who gave you the ability to run said custom kernels in the first place.
Nice.
beaups said:
Nobody is being a jerk.
How can you come in here and say we "need" a chart? That would be a great way for you to contribute...
Instead, you pop off to the people who gave you the ability to run said custom kernels in the first place.
Nice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You sure as hell aren't being very helpful in the help section. All you are doing is being a self-righteous ***** becuase you think i owe you something. That's what donatons are for. If you can't help the people that are asking for it in the help section then shut up and move on.
Saying "we need one" is just another way of asking if there is one. so, for clarity, is there a list of features comparing kernels? Maybe if I get a second between raising a family and curing cancer I'll teach myself github but as of now I don't know how. That's why I posted in the help section. At least I followed the rules and didn't ask in the dev section. Get over yourself.
Sent from my HTC6435LVW using xda app-developers app
beaups said:
So make a chart then.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly I was thinking the same thing. Take to bull by the horns OP. Not trying to be an a$$ but we would all have to dig through the information only the developers would really know what the differences are. Do it man!
You just assume I have the time and technical ability to do so. And, I didn't ask anybody to make one, only that we need/is there one.
Sent from my HTC6435LVW using xda app-developers app
FYI, I wrote a high level summary of the differences in my kernel thread.
crpalmer said:
FYI, I wrote a high level summary of the differences in my kernel thread.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for pointing that out, I had to read through several pages to find it. But I was thinking more of a chart showing who's kernel has which parts from other's kernels. In the end it will probably never happen so at least thank you for that.
Sent from my HTC6435LVW using xda app-developers app
If you're going to post to the forums please keep it respectful with each other.
As others have mentioned everyone should have a link to their github or respective sources in their OPs. Just go there and spend a few minutes browsing their recent activity tabs to see what all they've changed. But, if for some reason they're not providing their source please report the thread for violating GPL.
Thread Closed.