ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/EeePAD/TF201
I think that the section for TF201 shouldn't be the same of the one for TF101. Else it will become a mess here.
gnufabio said:
I think that the section for TF201 shouldn't be the same of the one for TF101. Else it will become a mess here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree! Maybe somebody can make a new section for the TF201?
I agree, but it seemed to be the best place for it at the time.
And I think the point is being missed, for the HD2 and my Hero, lots of other device's Kernel's are imported/exported, and since its source, theirs often lots of improvements that can be made cross device when kernel source is available...
So hes putting it here encase any of the kernel developers want to take a crack at porting it over to the TF101 or using parts/pieces/whole/cannibalize it...
either way, the TF201 needs its own section, but I myself approve of this threads importance even in the TF101 section*...
EDIT:*mainly for those oh so eager Kernel dev's who havent had a kernel source release in almost 3 months now! GO GO GO, PORT PORT PORT, CANNIBALIZE!!!
Hold on, is that a kernel for Honeycomb or ICS? if it's for ICS it should be fairly trivial* to backport it to the TF101 for a working ICS on TF101, right?
*actual level of triviality may be relative
Yes TF201 needs its own thread
But i agree with hammerfist about the kernel when the LGp500 source came out we nicked it straight away to port to the GT540 so maybe some similar could be done with this?
Sent from my tf101 using xda premium 1.54Ghz
Danzano said:
Yes TF201 needs its own thread
But i agree with hammerfist about the kernel when the LGp500 source came out we nicked it straight away to port to the GT540 so maybe some similar could be done with this?
Sent from my tf101 using xda premium 1.54Ghz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LG P500 and LG GT540 both use the same MSM7227 CPU and shared a lot of hardware, These two have a lot less common of a base, different hardware, different CPU.
Note: in my search the biggest difference apart from one running donut, and one running froyo/gingerbread. is the LCD size
Hammerfest said:
And I think the point is being missed, for the HD2 and my Hero, lots of other device's Kernel's are imported/exported, and since its source, theirs often lots of improvements that can be made cross device when kernel source is available...
So hes putting it here encase any of the kernel developers want to take a crack at porting it over to the TF101 or using parts/pieces/whole/cannibalize it...
either way, the TF201 needs its own section, but I myself approve of this threads importance even in the TF101 section*...
EDIT:*mainly for those oh so eager Kernel dev's who havent had a kernel source release in almost 3 months now! GO GO GO, PORT PORT PORT, CANNIBALIZE!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even if we port it, what pros could we get? As soon as ICS is released by Asus we will get the sources of the 3.0 kernel
gnufabio said:
Even if we port it, what pros could we get? As soon as ICS is released by Asus we will get the sources of the 3.0 kernel
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and that should be by then end of the yuear.. says "asus".... and anyways we dont have a kernel dev right now...
Huh?
KingDavid63 said:
.... and anyways we dont have a kernel dev right now...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What? Really? Did Blades and Netarchy quit the biz?
outerdepth said:
What? Really? Did Blades and Netarchy quit the biz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AFAIK they took a breath from work, but I'm almost 99% sure Blades will come back with Clemsyn on his side
They have given us updates faster than any other Manufacturer AFAIK and give source with release I think instead of a few months latter.
ToyTank said:
They have given us updates faster than any other Manufacturer AFAIK and give source with release I think instead of a few months latter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
normally.. but there hasnt been a release in almost 3 months now...
@gnufabio: I know, but somehow I dont think they will release kernel source for TF101 ICS as fast (IE prior) like they have for the TF201... it seems they have REALLY started slacking off on the TF101 source release's (see comment above)... hense why I made mention...
I'm showing 10.19.2011 as the last official firmware release. I assume the last 5 weeks they have been making us some ICS no point wasting resources now for honeycomb since we are getting ICS.
http://support.asus.com/download.aspx?SLanguage=en&p=20&s=16&m=Eee%20Pad%20Transformer%20TF101&os=32
Why hasn't this thread been moved?
Actually, that kernel source isn't ICS (ICS builds on 2.6.38, and this source is 2.6.36), but it has some new kernel configs, and an interesting flag too (it shows that the TF Prime will have 2048MB of RAM, my last info was that it's only 1024!)
fonix232 said:
Actually, that kernel source isn't ICS (ICS builds on 2.6.38, and this source is 2.6.36), but it has some new kernel configs, and an interesting flag too (it shows that the TF Prime will have 2048MB of RAM, my last info was that it's only 1024!)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well everything tells you that it has 1024...
Every website and even the official asus one...
ToyTank said:
I'm showing 10.19.2011 as the last official firmware release. I assume the last 5 weeks they have been making us some ICS no point wasting resources now for honeycomb since we are getting ICS.
http://support.asus.com/download.aspx?SLanguage=en&p=20&s=16&m=Eee Pad Transformer TF101&os=32
Why hasn't this thread been moved?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your looking at the FRIMWARE... aka the ROM itself... NOT the SOURCE code! AND to that fact, its like 2-3 version off from release already! So Firmware isnt even up-to-date!!!
Latest Source: 8-15-2011... like i said... months since kernel source release... maybe read whole thing next time? then answer?
And, probably hasnt been moved because its NOT ONLY for the TF201 but has merit and reason to exist in the TF101 section... Want an example? go to the HD2 section for android dev and count how many OTHER device's Kernel source release's there are there... NO REASON to move it given its possible use in the TF101
Closing as this isn't relevant to the TF 101
ASUS Source Code And User Manual for Transformer Prime
the official source code and user manual for the Transformer Prime are available at http://www.asus.com/Eee/Eee_Pad/Eee_Pad_Transformer_Prime_TF201/#download
Source code is version 8.8.3.23, as of 2011.11.24
Related
Just thought some might be interested in this (so sue me, i had to ask it):
http://nookdeveloper.zendesk.com/en...-updated-1-2-source-code?page=1#post_20056491
We will be publishing the updated source in the coming weeks. Thanks for your patience.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It will be interesting to see what their new source brings, and what we can use from it. Here is hoping that it is sooner rather than later...
EDIT: Well, i am happy to say it didn't take long.. have at it here: http://images.barnesandnoble.com/PResources/download/Nook/source-code/nookcolor-source-code.zip
Awesome news! The faster we can get dalingrin the updated kernel source the better!
Does complying with the gpl allow for a reasonable delay? Because once you get into grey areas like that, what's reasonable? 2 weeks? 3 months?
Obviously they have the source already, so I don't understand when companies release it some time afterwards.
Aye. I hate the "weeks" portion.. given that its out, i dont think its unfair to demand it now. As it is though, i think the GPL gives 60 days (??) for them to publish the code though, so it may be a while.
Not sure if I don't understand the complexities or everything all the devs here do, but what are the possibilities of the deeper-blue Honeycomb ROM being updated to use a modified version of the 2.2 Nook Color kernel instead of the current 2.1 Nook Color kernel? I assume this would help in getting some items like Flash video etc working properly in the Honeycomb ROM.
Or is the goal still to wait for whenever the 3.0 honeycomb full source is released? Just thinking out loud. Interested to see what others have to say.
ArmitageID said:
Not sure if I don't understand the complexities or everything all the devs here do, but what are the possibilities of the deeper-blue Honeycomb ROM being updated to use a modified version of the 2.2 Nook Color kernel instead of the current 2.1 Nook Color kernel? I assume this would help in getting some items like Flash video etc working properly in the Honeycomb ROM.
Or is the goal still to wait for whenever the 3.0 honeycomb full source is released? Just thinking out loud. Interested to see what others have to say.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There isn't much an updated kernel will do to help the Honeycomb SDK.
I don't see any schedules mentioned in the GPL http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html.
bigbob23 said:
I don't see any schedules mentioned in the GPL http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They will do whatever they want until someone sues. What if we lost?
bigbob23 said:
I don't see any schedules mentioned in the GPL http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I may have been wrong (and will happily say its not the first time); but i did do some reading and found this: http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/User:ashawley/Making_copyleft_work_with_implied_compliance
Not sure if it is totally relevant though..
Source Code
I got this:
Dear Brandon Bennett,
Thank you for your inquiry.
Barnes and Noble will post the updated source code in the near future.
There is still no specific date yet. The link will be posted under terms
of service on the website.
Please accept our sincere apologies for any inconvenience this may have
caused and we look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Ella
Customer Service Representative - Digital Support
Barnes & Noble
http://www.bn.com/
Visit our NOOK Support site for the latest updates and downloads at:
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/nook/support/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hopefully the source will help dalingrin, verygreen and fattire cut through the current mysteries with the .32 development kernel for CM7.
Seems like a lot of progress was made without B&N's help (smart developers), but even if only a few optimized drivers can be poached that is better than nothing.
nemith said:
I got this:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the info. The nook dev board had another update:
Well, if history is a guide, we released source of 1.0 about 2-3 weeks after launch...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As i replied, the anxious part of me does not understand any delay really, other than trying to keep the source code away from us "hackers" for as long as possible. The code is obviously in use, so why not release it?
Ah well..
There are probably lawyers hemming and hawing over them releasing it. They probably are trying to ensure that they haven't violated some other patent/copyright in their code which they actually might get sued over.
chadamir said:
There are probably lawyers hemming and hawing over them releasing it. They probably are trying to ensure that they haven't violated some other patent/copyright in their code which they actually might get sued over.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perhaps, but the code is already shipping - its not to say an update can't get pushed out, but just because we can't see the source, doesn't mean current violations are excused.
As it is, the linux kernel is GPL; they can't not release it. So again, i am still frustrated at the hold up...
Probably just the usual corporate speed. They don't like to publish anything before they have to, if only for liability and exposure. Probably the last thing on the rollout list, too.
poofyhairguy said:
Hopefully the source will help dalingrin, verygreen and fattire cut through the current mysteries with the .32 development kernel for CM7.
Seems like a lot of progress was made without B&N's help (smart developers), but even if only a few optimized drivers can be poached that is better than nothing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We are actually very close to having a good .32 kernel already. Some of us have been using .32 full time I think. Verygreen did most of the work on the port. He scrapped my .32 work and started over.
We only need a few updated drivers from them and we'll be good. So I expect a prompt release once we have B&N source.
dalingrin said:
We are actually very close to having a good .32 kernel already. Some of us have been using .32 full time I think. Verygreen did most of the work on the port. He scrapped my .32 work and started over.
We only need a few updated drivers from them and we'll be good. So I expect a prompt release once we have B&N source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rock on good sir.. That sounds most exciting indeed!
Perhaps a silly question, but to the end user- what will the difference be between the current and .32 kernel? Faster/better/stronger/able to make cappuccinos?
dalingrin said:
We are actually very close to having a good .32 kernel already. Some of us have been using .32 full time I think. Verygreen did most of the work on the port. He scrapped my .32 work and started over.
We only need a few updated drivers from them and we'll be good. So I expect a prompt release once we have B&N source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was actually using it for a while. Just needed more clock/governor steppings and the weird "broken SD" and battery fixed, as you already know. It is flying though.
Edit: forgot about sound
Nburnes said:
I was actually using it for a while. Just needed more clock/governor steppings and the weird "broken SD" and battery fixed, as you already know. It is flying though.
Edit: forgot about sound
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The clock/governor issue is because only the performance governor is compiled into the kernel right now. The broken SD warning is mostly fixed and I believe the same for the battery.
Would it be possible to create a ice cream sandwich rom for the Viewsonic G tablet?
I dont think they have released source code, let alone a phone with the OS yet...
Quickly, I'll hold them off while you go hide!
yashmack said:
I dont think they have released source code, let alone a phone with the OS yet...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
try again.. Galaxy Nexus will have ics
They said tonight that the sdk will be released today
Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk
Aaaaaaaand the SDK is out.
http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-4.0.html
Thus this is a valid question which I was going to ask myself
Its not a valid question yet. Once the source is released I hope we can see a stable ics room that's better than the hacked together honeycomb we have
Sent from my Cyanogen Thunderbolt.
drx69 said:
try again.. Galaxy Nexus will have ics
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know this but the phone has only been announced, it hasnt been released into the wild yet, no one has one in their hands yet
well, except maybe a few reviewers here and there
pretty sure it wont hit shelves or stores for a few more weeks
---------- Post added at 03:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:29 AM ----------
muerteman said:
Its not a valid question yet. Once the source is released I hope we can see a stable ics room that's better than the hacked together honeycomb we have
Sent from my Cyanogen Thunderbolt.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im not too sure if that will happen, from what im reading the devices that will support ICS are going to be gingerbread devices
If there isnt a gingerbread ROM/kernel it probably wont support ICS
at best it will be as stable as the most stable gingerbread ROM... so not too bad
Im wondering if it will work with the honeycomb kernel the devs are creating from scratch
Theoretically the tablet has the specs to run ICS but its a matter of Google making the source code open source. If it was anything like HC I think we're gonna be out of luck.
My understanding is that Google never intended to make Honeycomb open source in the hopes of avoiding people attempting to put HC on their phones. ICS should be open source, and Google has already stated several times from what i have seen that they intend to make the codes public. I don't see why we wouldn't have a decent ICS rom out in the next month or two.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
At the very least we should probably see a CyanogenMod version, since its an officially adopted Tablet. I'm looking forward to it.
I doubt it. We don't have an official honeycomb rom so I don't see ics being supported at all on gtab... I truly believe development for our gtab is officially dead.
jedibbq said:
I doubt it. We don't have an official honeycomb rom so I don't see ics being supported at all on gtab... I truly believe development for our gtab is officially dead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, considering that HC was never officially released as open source, I don't know why you would expect a full-featured ROM when the best that anyone could do was essentially a modified bootleg of an existing tablet's firmware. There a TON of G-Tablets out there thanks to the Woot sales, so I think it would be silly to assume that just because development has hit a lull for the last few months that it is totally dead. Give it a few months, and I bet we will see a good ICS ROM made available for our G-Tablets.
I highly doubt that the g-tablet is dead. I myself and one of my friends imported one of these just to get our hands on it.
It will only be dead if people believe that we don't want firmware for it. There is plenty people out there that are looking forward to newer firmare, we just quietly wait patiently for the master coders to do their excellent work.
TBH, I can't thank everyone here enough for the hours they put in to their hobbies. Greatly appreciated.
Google has officially stated that they WILL be releasing the source to Ice Cream Sandwich, so it's VERY likely that there eventually be multiple ICS ROMs (including Cyanogenmod) for the G Tablet.
It's out
I just read that Google has released the source code....
ICS Code-Open Source
will we be seeing an ICS Rom for our Viewsonic G-tab now that the source code was released??
rmejia25 said:
will we be seeing an ICS Rom for our Viewsonic G-tab now that the source code was released??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This tablet is on life support. ROM development is a small fraction of what it used to be a year ago. Updates are scarce. Be grateful for the value we got out of it over the past year.
The time to move on is fast approaching... and my eye is on the Asus Transformer Prime.
doug3673 said:
This tablet is on life support. ROM development is a small fraction of what it used to be a year ago. Updates are scarce. Be grateful for the value we got out of it over the past year.
The time to move on is fast approaching... and my eye is on the Asus Transformer Prime.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Part of that is to blame on no Honeycomb source, why would devs waste time reverse engineering when they could wait for ICS? Someone will make an ICS ROM, the lull has been to blame on their actually being NOTHING to do on this device with no Honeycomb source.
Now if those Nvidia drivers end up being a pain, it might be another story.
Sent from my T-mobile G2 using Tapatalk
Nospin said:
Part of that is to blame on no Honeycomb source, why would devs waste time reverse engineering when they could wait for ICS? Someone will make an ICS ROM, the lull has been to blame on their actually being NOTHING to do on this device with no Honeycomb source.
Now if those Nvidia drivers end up being a pain, it might be another story.
Sent from my T-mobile G2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can blame the lack of source code, I think I'll stick with blaming Viewsonic for not pushing at all to get drivers or any type of updates to us on this device. Without Viewsonic or Nvidia providing drivers we're going to be in for a rough ride.
Hey Xda members
I have been thinking, Porting of ICS for our LG-p500's is not going to happen the best we can probably get is 2.3.7 with the 4.0 gui and a nice new kernel to support it. However I have been hearing that certain development teams are working on porting ICS. Is this true? How far do you guys think they will get? Hopefully within the next three months we shall see our first beta roms running 4.0 I really hope so as the new layout of 4.0 is better than 2.0-2.3.7. However they will run into issues such as giving support for the ARMv6 processor and fine tuning it so it will be able to run on half a gigabyte of ram... Which will likely limit the system very much so. I believe the minimum requirements for 4.0 are of the following:
1ghz processor
1gb of ram
these minimum requirements are double those of the p500's specs.
As I find out more I shall post links to developers teams threads which are working on ICS ports.
Also if anyone needs any help with their device leave a message as I can help with anything.
No, there are no minimum requirements for ICS. it's just that currently it's not possible to port ICS (no 3D(hw acceleration), so it's useless) because LG and Qualcomm haven't release new sources for ICS.
Back in time, when ICS sources were released and Andy started with his port, i told him that there would be no big big progress until some specific parts of source corresponding not only to armv6 but qualcomm chip itself (or lg stuff/sources) be released but he insisted he could manage to fix all by himself, now im sitting back with my bowl of pop corns
That beign said, im not here to disrespect or to demerite his hard work, and good lord that he has a team now to support him, as he realized when he was working alone on GBS phonenix it was a very difficult/ time consuming job and finally left that project...
Finally and hopefully, we have very good devs working in devices similar to O1 and they surely will find out a way to make ICS work, (if andy doesnt manage fix this those problems first........)
terratrix said:
No, there are no minimum requirements for ICS. it's just that currently it's not possible to port ICS (no 3D(hw acceleration), so it's useless) because LG and Qualcomm haven't release new sources for ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
also i doubt LG and Qualcom will release new sources for ICS
gymfreak7855 said:
also i doubt LG and Qualcom will release new sources for ICS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no one has said we get sources for this old hardware. we can only hope, the hope
dies last
TakamineSubasa said:
Back in time, when ICS sources were released and Andy started with his port, i told him that there would be no big big progress until some specific parts of source corresponding not only to armv6 but qualcomm chip itself (or lg stuff/sources) be released but he insisted he could manage to fix all by himself, now im sitting back with my bowl of pop corns
That beign said, im not here to disrespect or to demerite his hard work, and good lord that he has a team now to support him, as he realized when he was working alone on GBS phonenix it was a very difficult/ time consuming job and finally left that project...
Finally and hopefully, we have very good devs working in devices similar to O1 and they surely will find out a way to make ICS work, (if andy doesnt manage fix this those problems first........)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just going to say Andy did open source no port
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda premium
SWEATTAIMI said:
Just going to say Andy did open source no port
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cool
Obviusly he Can do a Porting 0.0
HawkeyeWPR said:
Obviusly he Can do a Porting 0.0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its easier to build from source and a port is made also Andy can port but he don't want to
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda premium
SWEATTAIMI said:
Its easier to build from source and a port is made also Andy can port but he don't want to
Sent from my LG-P500 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, making a build from source is a lot easier than a port from another device, it also tends to be more stable as well.
It's basically the same except that a configuration from a lower-end device (The G1 for example) will make it much simpler to build than making a custom device tree from scratch. Again, we need code we don't have, so we can only raise a war against LG or Qualcomm.
What does this mean for the Gtab?
I have been wondering if there might be something recent to make this tablet more relevant as a daily-use device.
I realize that a "pre-Alpha" build from an all-but-defunct tablet other than the G-tab may not be the greatest card we were dealt, but I would like to just ask anyone if this means we might be able to run a ~fully working ICS build sooner rather than later?
Opinions?
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the gtab and the Adam both use the Ventana platform of the Tegra 2, which would mean that it would be possible to use the drivers and workarounds they use on this device.
Maybe?
Edit- Or was it Harmony?
Nospin said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the gtab and the Adam both use the Ventana platform of the Tegra 2, which would mean that it would be possible to use the drivers and workarounds they use on this device.
Maybe?
Edit- Or was it Harmony?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am quite sure its harmony
This release is huge for the gtab. Right now, I am editing RaYmAn's kernel to get 2.6.39 to boot on the gtablet. As soon as thats done, we will have to edit the g tablet device tree and compile from source. Once that is done, we too will have a gtab ics build that functions amazing.
fosser2 said:
This release is huge for the gtab. Right now, I am editing RaYmAn's kernel to get 2.6.39 to boot on the gtablet. As soon as thats done, we will have to edit the g tablet device tree and compile from source. Once that is done, we too will have a gtab ics build that functions amazing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This excites me greatly
fosser2 said:
This release is huge for the gtab. Right now, I am editing RaYmAn's kernel to get 2.6.39 to boot on the gtablet. As soon as thats done, we will have to edit the g tablet device tree and compile from source. Once that is done, we too will have a gtab ics build that functions amazing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for replying.
That is EXACTLY what I'd hoped to hear.
You, sir, just made my morning/day/week.
Hooray!
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
I am considering buying the SGS2 very soon. I am going to root it but here is my question. If I wait to get pushed the ATT update to 4.0 ICS do I have to flash back to stock just to root it? I want to wait for the stock push of 4.0 and just wipe off the bloatware and not have to worry about custom ROMs etc. Thanks for the help.
Currently running captivate with cognition 4.5.3 froyo.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Re: Root sgs2 after ATT update to ICS
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
You should be able to root after the update. But we don't know yet for sure.
Way too early to tell. You aren't going to see an official AT&T ICS OTA update for many months - if the Captivate is any indicator, not for at least a year.
Just wait for a Rom to be made , im sure one will be as soon as the sources are avail... I stopped doing the Ota upgrades when i realized its easier to just change the Rom.... So root... imo
Entropy512 said:
Way too early to tell. You aren't going to see an official AT&T ICS OTA update for many months - if the Captivate is any indicator, not for at least a year.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm hoping ATT/Samsung push it sooner because it's still one of ATT's highest end phones.
Of course, this is just wishful thinking.
Sent from my A500 using xda premium
Reading this thread, suddenly triggering me asking this question, I don't know why I haven't asked before: is there any ongoing development for ICS ROM?
I assume most of the custom ROMs surface in here are Gingerbread based OS.
votinh said:
Reading this thread, suddenly triggering me asking this question, I don't know why I haven't asked before: is there any ongoing development for ICS ROM?
I assume most of the custom ROMs surface in here are Gingerbread based OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No source for ics yet so there is no development. Look in general forum there is a sticky talking about it. There is also Cm9 but it's not fully working yet on our device.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using XDA App
eep2378 said:
No source for ics yet so there is no development. Look in general forum there is a sticky talking about it. There is also Cm9 but it's not fully working yet on our device.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is development
Sent from my SGH-I777 using XDA App
eep2378 said:
No source for ics yet so there is no development. Look in general forum there is a sticky talking about it. There is also Cm9 but it's not fully working yet on our device.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google did release ICS source codes about a month ago, I'm sure you know that.
Alright, so only CM dev. team currently working on this then.
Thanks
votinh said:
Google did release ICS source codes about a month ago, I'm sure you know that.
Alright, so only CM dev. team currently working on this then.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's base platform source for Nexus devices with not a single bit of source for anything specific to the I9100 or I777.
You really need to educate yourself on what source has and has not been released, and what that source means and is used for, before posting crap like this.
Basically, I could spend a few hundred hours trying to port the 2.6.35.x drivers for Samsung-specific items to a vanilla Linux 3.0 kernel - only to have a halfassed buggy release ready after Samsung releases official ICS with kernel source for the I9100, which can be ported to the I777 in a matter of a few hours of work.
The CM dev team is not working on ICS for the I777 either - to get anything even working on the I9100 they had to resort to something they almost NEVER do, which is an initramfs repack of a binary kernel. Getting an I9100 binary kernel to work properly on an I777 is simply not possible - you can repack the initramfs all you want, the audio routing code will be different and so will the touchkey mapping code.
The only ICS development that will occur on the I777 prior to I9100 kernel source getting released (or an I777-specific leak showing up) is some basic reverse engineering efforts (mainly focused in audio routing), since the library swap Hellraiser uses can't be done with ICS (depends on audio blobs extracted from an I777 device.)
Entropy512 said:
That's base platform source for Nexus devices with not a single bit of source for anything specific to the I9100 or I777.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did i ever mention about Nexus devices which running ICS, ehhh?
You really need to educate yourself on what source has and has not been released, and what that source means and is used for, before posting crap like this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wowww!!!
Just posted once sentence and being tagged with "crap like this"? LOL
By reading my English, do you understand that I just said Google has released ICS source codes? Did you see I am saying Google has released ICS source codes for I9100 or this specific i777, huh? Did you read and understand or just premature assumption?
Or you are telling me that you never know Google has release ICS source code?
Basically, I could spend a few hundred hours trying to port the 2.6.35.x drivers for Samsung-specific items to a vanilla Linux 3.0 kernel - only to have a halfassed buggy release ready after Samsung releases official ICS with kernel source for the I9100, which can be ported to the I777 in a matter of a few hours of work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you the one who create Entropy512 DD kernel? If yes, every minute you spent is well appreciated, left alone a few hundred of hours.
If so, yes, you seem to be very smart in Android field but in life, learn to grow up and act nicely, politely to others. Get some love, kiddo.
The CM dev team is not working on ICS for the I777 either - to get anything even working on the I9100 they had to resort to something they almost NEVER do, which is an initramfs repack of a binary kernel. Getting an I9100 binary kernel to work properly on an I777 is simply not possible - you can repack the initramfs all you want, the audio routing code will be different and so will the touchkey mapping code.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, I don't know who is working on what so I asked. One of the poster mentioned about CM, so I just repeat it.
If they currently do it, great.
If they currently do not do it, it's ok.
I am just asking, 'cuz in B&N NOOKcolor forum, a lot of XDA dev. is WORKING on ICS ROM from ICS source code that released a while a go.
I thought XDA dev. in this room will also do the same.
The only ICS development that will occur on the I777 prior to I9100 kernel source getting released (or an I777-specific leak showing up) is some basic reverse engineering efforts (mainly focused in audio routing), since the library swap Hellraiser uses can't be done with ICS (depends on audio blobs extracted from an I777 device.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good too know.
I've learnt something.
Thanks
votinh said:
Did i ever mention about Nexus devices which running ICS, ehhh?
Wowww!!!
Just posted once sentence and being tagged with "crap like this"? LOL
By reading my English, do you understand that I just said Google has released ICS source codes? Did you see I am saying Google has released ICS source codes for I9100 or this specific i777, huh? Did you read and understand or just premature assumption?
Or you are telling me that you never know Google has release ICS source code?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Another poster said we were waiting for source.
You replied to him saying Google posted source over a month ago. Thus implying that you thought that Nexus platform source would actually be sufficient on its own to get our device running ICS - it isn't, it's nowhere close.
I'm sick and tired of repeated "WHERE'S ICS? GOOGLE POSTED SOURCE OVER A MONTH AGO!" posts.
Entropy512 said:
Another poster said we were waiting for source.
You replied to him saying Google posted source over a month ago. Thus implying that you thought that Nexus platform source would actually be sufficient on its own to get our device running ICS - it isn't, it's nowhere close.
I'm sick and tired of repeated "WHERE'S ICS? GOOGLE POSTED SOURCE OVER A MONTH AGO!" posts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Another poster" I assume you meant "eep2378, one that posted right above my "crappy post"?
Firstly, if eep not getting itchy, why you?
Secondly, I don't know what he meant about ICS for Nexus, and even if he meant that, he didn't spell out so I thought he meant the general ICS source code. In his next sentence, he actually mentioned about CM team working on it, even not fully function, w/o waiting for this specific phone ICS source code, so I thought he meant they, CM team are using the general source code, just like XDA dev. in B&N NOOKcolor room.
Thirdly, and if eep irritated about my post, I apologize him.
Now back to you, let's square and clear up all confuse, hardness.
You're a talented kid, good, keep it up. If you know something, teach us, I'm sure a lot of others will learn from you and quietly appreciate.
Be socialize with people around you, in real life or in cyber.
To the ICS related questions, if you don't want to answer, DO NOT answer, there's no one forces you to do so. There is no point to irritate about it.
votinh said:
"Another poster" I assume you meant "eep2378, one that posted right above my "crappy post"?
Firstly, if eep not getting itchy, why you?
Secondly, I don't know what he meant about ICS for Nexus, and even if he meant that, he didn't spell out so I thought he meant the general ICS source code. In his next sentence, he actually mentioned about CM team working on it, even not fully function, w/o waiting for this specific phone ICS source code, so I thought he meant they, CM team are using the general source code, just like XDA dev. in B&N NOOKcolor room.
Thirdly, and if eep irritated about my post, I apologize him.
Now back to you, let's square and clear up all confuse, hardness.
You're a talented kid, good, keep it up. If you know something, teach us, I'm sure a lot of others will learn from you and quietly appreciate.
Be socialize with people around you, in real life or in cyber.
To the ICS related questions, if you don't want to answer, DO NOT answer, there's no one forces you to do so. There is no point to irritate about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok let me try to clear up some confusion:
1) Nexus source code has nothing to do with I9100 or I777
2) I didn't mention anything about ICS for Nexus because(see #1) and this is the I777 forum NOT Nexus(another reason why I didn't mention it)
3)I mentioned CM9 because(RIGHT NOW) its the only thing that even approaches getting ICS on I9100 forget the I777. And Even Codeworkx(OP for CM9 aka Dev) is WAITING for ICS SOURCE to drop FOR THE I9100.
Only then, as Entropy said, are we able to get it working on the I777
4)I'm not "itchy" or irritated in the least and there is no need for an apology. Having said that I am fairly tired of reading posts about ICS source code being dropped/when are we getting ICS?/ Can ICS run on my I777?, etc.
Finally, ICS source code dropped FOR THE GALAXY NEXUS!! What does that mean for us?? SEE #1!!
@Entropy, I responded to you in another thread(in Q&A) Porting Bezke ICS KP8(yeah I know another one lol) regarding comments you made on Captivate and I9000 kernels being similar but I9100 and I777 not sharing the same similarities.
I'm sure you never went back to that thread, but didn't want bother you via pm
---------- Post added at 04:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:44 PM ----------
Nick281051 said:
There is development
Sent from my SGH-I777 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For the I777? Where?
I don't want to sound ignorant, but Samsung always releases the kernel source along with the ROM?