Related
I'm not too familiar with the reasons and the technical stuff. Why isn't there a reliable AOSP ROM for the Rezound? What is it exactly that makes it difficult to develop one?
The ril hasn't been completely worked out for any AOSP roms
It has to do with the way Google has implemented support for CDMA devices. Google doesn't officially support CDMA devices in the Android framework they provide, so its up to device manufacturers (HTC) to create the necessary support and add it in. Right now, the developers who make ROMs are probably tearing apart the recent HTC leaks looking for the bits and pieces they need to put an AOSP ROM together.
It is the LTE that is the problem. Basically any CDMA device can get AOSP no problem but our device has a very complicated radio. It supports CDMA+LTE+EVDO+GSM so it is pretty much hacked together by HTC themselves.
I tell you one thing. The first developer who provides a near perfect working of ICS AOSP is going to get $15 from me.
con247 said:
It is the LTE that is the problem. Basically any CDMA device can get AOSP no problem but our device has a very complicated radio. It supports CDMA+LTE+EVDO+GSM so it is pretty much hacked together by HTC themselves.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not that I know anything about this subject, how did the Thunderbolt get it solved in the end?
the non-Sense development has been disappointing so far, no AOSP and no MIUI....I think the people talking about the ril have it right, if it was LTE that was the problem we'd have AOSP roms out that don't have working LTE like some other phones do
I Am Marino said:
Not that I know anything about this subject, how did the Thunderbolt get it solved in the end?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure but it was easier for the bolt cause s-off.
So is it right to assume that if we get full s-off then comes AOSP?
What exactly is s-off?
Cares said:
So is it right to assume that if we get full s-off then comes AOSP?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it's possible but can't really be proven since we literally have full access with the exception to the actual radios when flashing. devs can already view radios to iron out the issues. it's just tricky to solve a scattered puzzle
S-OFF has NOTHING I repeat NOTHING to do with AOSP. The TBOLT had more people working on it and the RIL isn't probably as complicated. They still don't have AOSP ICS working either.
Any developers actively working on this? What would it take for CM to start? Do they need the RIL figured out?
Cares said:
Any developers actively working on this? What would it take for CM to start? Do they need the RIL figured out?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is an active CM9 Alpha thread in the dev section with updates on where it is.
I just bought this phone the other day, after having an HTC Inspire for over a year. I really enjoyed the benefits of it being a sister phone of the Desire HD, such as really phenomenal ROM development.
I know that there aren't any sources released for this phone, but after using LordClockan's Ice Cold Sandwich, I just can't get used to this TouchWiz.
If anyone has started a project, I can help out with anything that I can.
If not, would anyone here like to try & help out?
My ROM building knowledge is non existent, but I'm dedicated to get this going.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
I sure hope so! I loved existz work on the Inspire!
one7dchevy said:
I sure hope so! I loved existz work on the Inspire!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Him, TwistedUmbrella, and LordClockan's teamwork is a testament to the wonderful community her at XDA!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
I hope it's comming!
Have you tried the ICS roms that we DO have? They're not AOKP; but they run the AOSP stock apps and they've been themed well enough to be pretty damn close -- all while maintaining full s-pen capability, which is something even the CM9 folks can't claim yet (they don't have button functionality)...
Need kernel source first!!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
paleh0rse said:
Have you tried the ICS roms that we DO have? They're not AOKP; but they run the AOSP stock apps and they've been themed well enough to be pretty damn close -- all while maintaining full s-pen capability, which is something even the CM9 folks can't claim yet (they don't have button functionality)...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hate to disagree but they arent even close (no offense to current devs, this isnt their fault).
S-pen functionality needs either the source from Samsung or a new driver has to be written from scratch, which isnt worth the time or effort considering that Samsung likely will soon be releasing source for ICS (usually a few weeks after the OS is officially released).And, if he rumors are true, ICS should be official soon (however, to be clear, I dont believe ICS is coming any time soon).
The reason these other roms have S-Pen support is, surprise surprise, they COPIED large sections of code from the stock leaked release, where, conveniently, everything ALREADY WORKS!!
Stock apps will almost always work on ANY rom with little to no modification required, regardless of whether they are from an AOSP rom.
The current roms are heavily based on the leaked ICS rom with only small tweaks universal between nearly all roms, things like themes, lockscreens, sounds, animations, etc. are all pretty simple if you know what you are doing (something admittedly, I have not personally built a rom but Im very familiar with the process).
When Cyanogen (or possibly AOKP, Im not familiar with their roms and how they are developed) is released, we will begin to see true rom development begin to happen. Until there is source code from Samsung, we will continue to see roms with Touchwiz all over them.
To show you how easy this is, here is a link to have a bot build a rom for you for any of the Galaxy 1 or 2 phones.
http://romkitchen.org/
Click your phone choice (Galaxy 1 or 2 currently, the Note is NOT supported yet).
Click Generator in the upper right hand corner.
Use the six tabs across the top of the page to choose your Modem, Kernel, Theme, stock apps, etc.
Of course, this only gives you a base to work with, from there, its pretty easy to swap in or out what you want.
Think about it like this, I can give you a copy of Windows already pre-configured for your PC and them or customize it just by changing some registry entries and including the data files (wallpapers for example). The included drivers would be pre-built meaning that 'I' didnt actually write them, nor did I change much in Windows, all I did was provide the files containing the data and changed a few settings to link to the files.
Dsmforlife92 said:
Need kernel source first!!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not entirely true. I know some ICS roms that have been hacked to death to get at least partial functionality.
I'm thankful that some devs have taken their time to do what they have done, but what I am looking for hasn't been done.
AOKP is like AOSP, but more tweaks are added.
[edit] As for myself, I could care less about S Pen support. I haven't even used it, nor do I think I ever will. I got this phone for the monster sized screen.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
littlewierdo said:
I hate to disagree but they arent even close (no offense to current devs, this isnt their fault).
S-pen functionality needs either the source from Samsung or a new driver has to be written from scratch, which isnt worth the time or effort considering that Samsung likely will soon be releasing source for ICS (usually a few weeks after the OS is officially released).And, if he rumors are true, ICS should be official soon (however, to be clear, I dont believe ICS is coming any time soon).
The reason these other roms have S-Pen support is, surprise surprise, they COPIED large sections of code from the stock leaked release, where, conveniently, everything ALREADY WORKS!!
Stock apps will almost always work on ANY rom with little to no modification required, regardless of whether they are from an AOSP rom.
The current roms are heavily based on the leaked ICS rom with only small tweaks universal between nearly all roms, things like themes, lockscreens, sounds, animations, etc. are all pretty simple if you know what you are doing (something admittedly, I have not personally built a rom but Im very familiar with the process).
When Cyanogen (or possibly AOKP, Im not familiar with their roms and how they are developed) is released, we will begin to see true rom development begin to happen. Until there is source code from Samsung, we will continue to see roms with Touchwiz all over them.
To show you how easy this is, here is a link to have a bot build a rom for you for any of the Galaxy 1 or 2 phones.
http://romkitchen.org/
Click your phone choice (Galaxy 1 or 2 currently, the Note is NOT supported yet).
Click Generator in the upper right hand corner.
Use the six tabs across the top of the page to choose your Modem, Kernel, Theme, stock apps, etc.
Of course, this only gives you a base to work with, from there, its pretty easy to swap in or out what you want.
Think about it like this, I can give you a copy of Windows already pre-configured for your PC and them or customize it just by changing some registry entries and including the data files (wallpapers for example). The included drivers would be pre-built meaning that 'I' didnt actually write them, nor did I change much in Windows, all I did was provide the files containing the data and changed a few settings to link to the files.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I appreciate the explanation, but you're not telling me anything I don't already know. I was just saying that our current roms have been themed/tweaked well enough to look like AOSP, so they're not that bad; and, you don't really have to deal with touchwiz annoyances anymore if you don't want to -- trebuchet, apex, and nova all work well.
CM9 or AOKP they're not, but they're exceptional given the single source-less leak we have right now... and they certainly blow away stock touchwiz GB! lol
littlewierdo said:
I hate to disagree but they arent even close (no offense to current devs, this isnt their fault).
S-pen functionality needs either the source from Samsung or a new driver has to be written from scratch, which isnt worth the time or effort considering that Samsung likely will soon be releasing source for ICS (usually a few weeks after the OS is officially released).And, if he rumors are true, ICS should be official soon (however, to be clear, I dont believe ICS is coming any time soon).
The reason these other roms have S-Pen support is, surprise surprise, they COPIED large sections of code from the stock leaked release, where, conveniently, everything ALREADY WORKS!!
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pen apparently works in the CM9 build for the international note. Haven't looked at the source myself yet, but it is probably just the standard wacom driver.
zonyl said:
Pen apparently works in the CM9 build for the international note. Haven't looked at the source myself yet, but it is probably just the standard wacom driver.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AFAIK, they haven't gotten the button to work yet, but it's promising.
Its going to take a lot kf time and effort and prob a group effort to get aosp or aokp roms for our phone. I believe the reason skyrocket and 989 have it is because they have had a lot of devs working together for long time on it. I can get a booted aosp rom hut no sound no camera no data. So theres a lot of work needed to be done
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Quick question, is there anything that stops us from using roms on ATT, TMobile etc branded devices? I realize we would have to edit the APN to have data services. But is there anything else that would cause a problem?
It seems like the radio code would be different because we want the cdma radio
Sent from my SCH-I605 using xda premium
It would take some framework and library hacking due to the radio differences, but from what I've found so far, most changes are very easy to port from one device to another, with only a few things different between them.
imnuts said:
It would take some framework and library hacking due to the radio differences, but from what I've found so far, most changes are very easy to port from one device to another, with only a few things different between them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very interesting. Curious, would it be theoretically possible then to have a situation like this:
XXXXX Note II Rom
Verizon Radio and Framework Files
TMobile Radio and Framework Files
Sprint Radio and Framework Files
Consider these to be download links within rom threads. If this was possible, the dev community for this phone would be off the charts.
*Madmoose* said:
Very interesting. Curious, would it be theoretically possible then to have a situation like this:
XXXXX Note II Rom
Verizon Radio and Framework Files
TMobile Radio and Framework Files
Sprint Radio and Framework Files
Consider these to be download links within rom threads. If this was possible, the dev community for this phone would be off the charts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The issue would be that some of what is required is a file that sees various edits in some ROMs. It usually isn't modified too heavily. It would also require a lot of coordination and testing. Not impossible, but difficult for a group of completely unrelated people to do successfully.
Didn't Adam say in his YouTube video that if you ever flash another rom other than a Verizon ROM that you're not be able to come back to Verizon? What did he mean by that?
Yes yes, you may think that I'm crazy for attempting to compile AOSP, but in fact im just obsessed with getting AOSP to work (on my previous device I spent a full year on it without success), thanks to the experience I know much more know about the environment.
I've done several pure aosp builds so far, and they result in a ~280mb system folder, which is kinda the size of aosp I guess (atleast for xxhdpi)
But they end with errors of course, anyways. I used the devices specs with updated overlays,and added dependencies (such as hardware) to the environment.
But since the aosp environment is very mean to new devices its once again a real struggle. as expected, but I like the challenge.
Anyways, Im currently trying out this hybrid-ish environment. which contains the items listed above but with several elements of the AOKP environment added (only the essential ones for compatibility).
Compiling goes so far so good. hope I will get a working build. (don't expect this to happen tho)
Oh and since samsung is releasing the S4 Google Edition (AOSP) soon it must be possible. (the google edition is the qualcomm varian afaik)
More info soon!
I'm going to drop this here for now until I have time to mess with it more.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/android-building/_F67iLDcVzQ
Note: This leads me back to my previous question as to how we are supposed to build with this.
At face value it seems we're only getting fairly close to what we were with other OSRC releases.
Going to look at more later tonight.
Skilled devs can get pure aosp to work properly. It was done for sprints gs3 without using CM code.
Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 2
You don't necessarily need proprietary binaries to be released to build AOSP, although it does make it much easier. Sometimes you have to resort to trial and error and debug tools.
drewX2 said:
You don't necessarily need proprietary binaries to be released to build AOSP, although it does make it much easier. Sometimes you have to resort to trial and error and debug tools.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I disagree completely. Without the prop' libraries and drivers that the OEM has built to manage the board you can most certainly expect the related hardware to fail or be only partially functional at best. Some other 3rd party generic driver would still be required if this example were true. In the good old AOSP days (maguro for example) had roughly a dozen proprietary files required for the device tree to build. With more and more OEMs making different hardware configs and spin-off APIs trying to lock down a lead in the game it has inflated that number greatly. In this instance, for example, S4 requires roughly 165 proprietary files in the vendor/ and device/ tree. Furthermore, with many of those stacks being required to pass for a successful boot complete (audio for example) there is little chance for even semi-functional usage without the required libraries and drivers.
broodplank1337 said:
(edit)...I'm crazy for attempting to compile AOSP...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We're compiling pure AOSP already for this board. I'm not sure what your repo structure looks like but if you are based off a CM or AOKP base clone then you got some work cut out for you. The CM tree compiles completely different than AOSP. All EaglesBlood builds are compiled from our same main branch, which consists entirely of only pure AOSP + our own EB coding. There is no CM codeblock nor anything else polluting (no pun). Since CM and others have some custom hybrid APIs and such you may run into issues that are difficult to resolve or even identify. If you aren't the one committing those patches then it is difficult to know at a glance of what has been heavily CM-ified vs closer to native code; or unless you're very in-tune with CM, gerrit and GIT.
We'll be releasing AOSP 4.2.2 as soon as we get the kernel config where we want it to be. Stay tuned. http://www.eaglesblood.com
oOo B0XeR oOo said:
I disagree completely. Without the prop' libraries and drivers that the OEM has built to manage the board you can most certainly expect the related hardware to fail or be only partially functional at best. Some other 3rd party generic driver would still be required if this example were true. In the good old AOSP days (maguro for example) had roughly a dozen proprietary files required for the device tree to build. With more and more OEMs making different hardware configs and spin-off APIs trying to lock down a lead in the game it has inflated that number greatly. In this instance, for example, S4 requires roughly 165 proprietary files in the vendor/ and device/ tree. Furthermore, with many of those stacks being required to pass for a successful boot complete (audio for example) there is little chance for even semi-functional usage without the required libraries and drivers.
I think you misunderstood what I said. First of all, I am speaking from *experience*. I have ported AOSP to devices without RELEASED proprietary binaries and I have handled every step in porting; from display, audio, to calling, wifi, bt, etc. Released means the manufacturer provides a nice little package for you. I had to in many cases, figure out which libs from a stock rom were needed. Additionally, you can utilize libs from completely different devices as a temporary patch. I am very comfortable with kernel development and the android framework. If you were too, you would know what I am saying is true. Here is one tip, nearly every board is like another (within the same class; eg. MSM8960, APQ8064) with only slight variations (e.g. modem). Once you understand that, it becomes easier.
We're compiling pure AOSP already for this board. I'm not sure what your repo structure looks like but if you are based off a CM or AOKP base clone then you got some work cut out for you. The CM tree compiles completely different than AOSP. All EaglesBlood builds are compiled from our same main branch, which consists entirely of only pure AOSP + our own EB coding. There is no CM codeblock nor anything else polluting (no pun). Since CM and others have some custom hybrid APIs and such you may run into issues that are difficult to resolve or even identify. If you aren't the one committing those patches then it is difficult to know at a glance of what has been heavily CM-ified vs closer to native code; or unless you're very in-tune with CM, gerrit and GIT.
We'll be releasing AOSP 4.2.2 as soon as we get the kernel config where we want it to be. Stay tuned. http://www.eaglesblood.com
I agree with you on some points about CM code, however, you're group has been porting devices that were working or nearly working with base android code. Talk about an easy route. I can see you haven't had to do any hard work yet. Going from 4.1 -> 4.2 on a non google AOSP supported device or a device that has no CM build available for it is a whole different story. How do I know? I've done it. I was the first to build CM for HTC DNA and both CM/AOSP for Oppo Find 5. Next time before you "completely disagree," make sure you know what you're talking about.
Lastly, although I agree with you on some points about CM code, you should give them credit because your stuff is probably based on their stuff more then you lead others to believe; like nearly every other "dev group" out there. And by no means, am I some CM lover (I've had my quarrels with them), but you should give respect and credit to those who make what you do possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See Above.
drewX2 said:
I think you misunderstood what I said. First of all, I am speaking from *experience*. I have ported AOSP to devices without RELEASED proprietary binaries...
...How do I know? I've done it. I was the first to build CM for HTC DNA and both CM/AOSP for Oppo Find 5. Next time before you "completely disagree," make sure you know what you're talking about.
[/QUOTE
Great, hi-five to you, but before making bold assumptions...
http://www.xda-developers.com/android/aosp-jellybean-build-for-the-t-mobile-g2x/
drewX2 said:
...(CM) you should give them credit because your stuff is probably based on their stuff more then you lead others to believe; like nearly every other "dev group" out there. And by no means, am I some CM lover (I've had my quarrels with them),....
See Above.
[/QUOTE
I never suggested anything about CM, they are top-notch. I said we dont use their base code like "every other dev". Sorry you have had quarrels; and there is nothing "probably based off them" as I just told you our repo is straight AOSP & EB.
Likewise you should "know what you're talking about", prior to making assumptions and speculations.
^read above
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im currently working on this as well...anyone have anymore success? Im currently fighting my way through compile errors...but I would love to be able to atleast get a bootable pure aosp from source...ill keep at it...but if anyone has gotten it yet please help speed up my process and enlighten me on what you did to compile a working aosp
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
I guess we all are I'm working on one too. Lots of research on correcting errors
Cm10.2 anyone??
Sent from my GT-I9505G using Tapatalk 2
deleted
Wrong post
I did it successfully with help of some external repos
forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2397511
Good Morning to you all!
Sorry if this has already been posted but I couldn't find much of anything on this topic. Does a "Google Edition" Rom exist for the EVO 4G LTE? I know we have the AOSP and AOKP roms but this is something I've wanted to ask for a while. I love the pure Google experience and I just have to wait about a year until i can upgrade to a new phone like a Nexus.
Thank you again for taking the the time to read this and for all the awesome work all you Developers put in for making this awesome phone even better.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
No. But the AOSP ROMs we have work fine. What's wrong with flashing one of them? They are essentially the same thing, except, well, better .
Captain_Throwback said:
No. But the AOSP ROMs we have work fine. What's wrong with flashing one of them? They are essentially the same thing, except, well, better .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm with you on that one. Not sure why anyone with knowledge of rooting (who doesn't mind a voided warranty) would want to buy a GE phone.
______________________________
HTC Evo 4G LTE
I don't have any problem with any AOSP Rom other than signal and connectivity issues. But its really just curiosity for me and I'm a big fan of Google so the idea of having a Google Editon EVO sounds cool to me.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
Well it won't happen.
And aosp is just as much Google as a GE would be.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda premium
Imagine having a GE ROM that had added functionality and customizations. Then, go download one of our CM/AOKP/DU ROMs. - imagination realized.
Or, put another way, take one of our AOSP ROMs, strip away functionality and customization, and you have a GE ROM.
Is that what you're looking for?
Not trying to sound smart ass, totally sincere.
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
scottspa74 said:
Imagine having a GE ROM that had added functionality and customizations. Then, go download one of our CM/AOKP/DU ROMs. - imagination realized.
Or, put another way, take one of our AOSP ROMs, strip away functionality and customization, and you have a GE ROM.
Is that what you're looking for?
Not trying to sound smart ass, totally sincere.
Sent from my EVO using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you think would be a good solid AOSP Rom to either behave like a GE Rom or better I've only tried the CM Rom and the Xlyon Rom back and forth and couldn't get the feel I was looking for.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
ZamoraDC said:
What do you think would be a good solid AOSP Rom to either behave like a GE Rom or better I've only tried the CM Rom and the Xlyon Rom back and forth and couldn't get the feel I was looking for.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You could always try Evervolv. That's probably the closest to AOSP, that is, with the least customization.
Captain_Throwback said:
No. But the AOSP ROMs we have work fine. What's wrong with flashing one of them? They are essentially the same thing, except, well, better .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not true. Not trying to insult any devs in any way, but AOSP roms for anything other than a Nexus are hacked together using core binaries from other devices when necessary. There is never such a thing as a bug free AOSP Rom, except for a Google device and/or Google edition.
The Google edition roms on the other hand, were compiled by HTC for a device that they know in and out. Unfortunately, this is one of those times when "the vendor knows best", simply because of sheer resources and hardware documentation.
It would be possible to port the GE roms if you guys ported the GPE kernel and used that to port the rom, like Zarboz and newtoroot did for the DNA.
CNexus said:
Not true. Not trying to insult any devs in any way, but AOSP roms for anything other than a Nexus are hacked together using core binaries from other devices when necessary. There is never such a thing as a bug free AOSP Rom, except for a Google device and/or Google edition.
The Google edition roms on the other hand, were compiled by HTC for a device that they know in and out. Unfortunately, this is one of those times when "the vendor knows best", simply because of sheer resources and hardware documentation.
It would be possible to port the GE roms if you guys ported the GPE kernel and used that to port the rom, like Zarboz and newtoroot did for the DNA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How difficult is this to do?
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
ZamoraDC said:
How difficult is this to do?
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't say.
For the DNA it was extremely simple (but zarboz is a boss so he would've gotten it anyway) since the two devices are almost identical (One and DNA).
But the fact that you guys have a 3.4.x official HTC kernel should help.
hacked together using core binaries from other devices when necessary.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You would be surprised at what shortcuts OEMs take too.
Just because they have the resources doesn't necessarily mean it's cost effective, or that their software engineers have the time, to redo everything from scratch for each device. It's usually much easier to make it for one and then adapt that copy for use on other devices. I actually found this site thanks to htc's sloppy implementation of hdmi on the original evo. According to them it was impossible to fix until Toastcfh and Netarchy did just that and rewrote their kernel from scratch (iirc).
If you think about it, this site probably wouldn't even exist if OEMs made good software. They often do have access to proprietary drivers and documentation, but most of that is slowly getting open sourced anyway.
That type of reasoning is a fallacy because more often then not OEMs are just too plain cheap to do things properly. They just need to hit their deadlines. So your only real options are to either buy a nexus device, or invest a little time in helping fix any issues that you may find.
Someone please correct me if I'm thinking of the wrong device, but I believe it was the htc TyTN2 where htc didn't even bother to include a fully functional display driver because they didn't want to pay the license for it.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=359534
CNexus said:
Not true. Not trying to insult any devs in any way, but AOSP roms for anything other than a Nexus are hacked together using core binaries from other devices when necessary. There is never such a thing as a bug free AOSP Rom, except for a Google device and/or Google edition.
The Google edition roms on the other hand, were compiled by HTC for a device that they know in and out. Unfortunately, this is one of those times when "the vendor knows best", simply because of sheer resources and hardware documentation.
It would be possible to port the GE roms if you guys ported the GPE kernel and used that to port the rom, like Zarboz and newtoroot did for the DNA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you ever used one of the IRC builds of cm10 or cm10.1? They're more stable and are more feature rich than the stock ROM that shipped with this device or any of the updates that they were gracious enough to let sense users download over the air. The 3.0 kernel was seriously stable, but the 3.4 kernel is (nearly as) stable _and_ leaves more RAM for your silly animation effects and whatever. It's based on the reference kernel for the chip set, if I'm not making an arse of myself. So pick a build. I know 1/16 was an awesome cm10, and like I said in another topic I had 191 hours uptime on the 7/23 cm10.1 before I rebooted to rule out the ROM when I was having data issues(it was the network) </rant>
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
xHausx said:
You would be surprised at what shortcuts OEMs take too.
Just because they have the resources doesn't necessarily mean it's cost effective, or that their software engineers have the time, to redo everything from scratch for each device. It's usually much easier to make it for one and then adapt that copy for use on other devices. I actually found this site thanks to htc's sloppy implementation of hdmi on the original evo. According to them it was impossible to fix until Toastcfh and Netarchy did just that and rewrote their kernel from scratch (iirc).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not saying they are perfect and neither am I taking sides. But the fact of the matter is that AOSP is ported using binaries made for other devices and other hacks and so is nearly impossible to make it 100% compared to vanilla nexus roms. Issues are inevitable. And those same exact shortcuts you stated apply to and are no exception with AOSP ports like CM or evervolv. They also commonize (not a word, I know) as much as possible. They group devices like all the d2 and all the jflte, or even by processor like s4_common, etc under one common branch to make it easier for themselves to maintain.
I know I'm not gonna win here because of several things, namely being that I'm taking the "wrong" stance from the majority's point of view. But I just felt adding my 0.02 would help with the OP's original question.
xHausx said:
Someone please correct me if I'm thinking of the wrong device, but I believe it was the htc TyTN2 where htc didn't even bother to include a fully functional display driver because they didn't want to pay the license for it.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=359534
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ha! That was my first smartphone! I first signed up on xda (under a different name) when that phone launched (I got it as the att tilt) so that I could run manila and then android on it! That display driver issue was so frustrating. Sorry for ot, but I haven't thought about that in ages.
CNexus said:
Not saying they are perfect and neither am I taking sides. But the fact of the matter is that AOSP is ported using binaries made for other devices and other hacks and so is nearly impossible to make it 100% compared to vanilla nexus roms. Issues are inevitable. And those same exact shortcuts you stated apply to and are no exception with AOSP ports like CM or evervolv. They also commonize (not a word, I know) as much as possible. They group devices like all the d2 and all the jflte, or even by processor like s4_common, etc under one common branch to make it easier for themselves to maintain.
I know I'm not gonna win here because of several things, namely being that I'm taking the "wrong" stance from the majority's point of view. But I just felt adding my 0.02 would help with the OP's original question.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not accurate to say the binaries are made for other devices when the devices are all basically the same. The MSM8960, for example, has it's own binaries, but the same chip is used in a range of devices from the Evo LTE, Blackberry Z10, One X (LTE), One XL, Windows Phone 8X, LG Mach, Moto Droid Razr M, Droid Razr, Razr Max, Atrix HD, Incredible HD, Xperia GX TL SX & V, Galaxy S III... the list goes on
The binaries all of those devices use were developed for the Qualcomm devkit I've linked below.
When you're working with a sense ROM versus an AOSP ROM there are many differences in not only appearance but the framework as well, but once you start getting down to the kernel level the hardware is all basically the same. Where we have the advantage over OEMs is that most companies know it's counterproductive and a waste of money to go after enthusiasts who borrow their binaries from one device to use on something else. If an OEM did that they would be sued in a heartbeat.
https://developer.qualcomm.com/mobile-development/development-devices/snapdragon-s4-msm8960-mdps
edit: probably actually this instead, but same difference: http://shop.intrinsyc.com/products/dragonboard-members-only
To digress back to the OP's original question though, the google edition One is basically just the one with AOSP on it. If you can find a pure AOSP ROM it'll be the exact same thing.
Thanks for the info I'm really thinking of seeing if i can try and make my own ROM and plus I've always wanted to do so hopefully it all goes well. I just don't wanna brick my phone in the process hahaha. Do you guys think trying to build off of the HTC One GE rom and convert it over to the EVO or use an EVO based AOSP ROM? Thanks again for all the help.
Sent from my Evo 4G LTE using xda app-developers app
ZamoraDC said:
Thanks for the info I'm really thinking of seeing if i can try and make my own ROM and plus I've always wanted to do so hopefully it all goes well. I just don't wanna brick my phone in the process hahaha. Do you guys think trying to build off of the HTC One GE rom and convert it over to the EVO or use an EVO based AOSP ROM? Thanks again for all the help.
Sent from my Evo 4G LTE using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why don't you just build AOSP? You can use the CM kernel and pull the relevant vendor files from an existing AOSP ROM (or find an up-to-date github with them).
That way you don't have to worry about having the extra customizations, but you'll still have a kernel built from Qualcomm source along with the ROM.
asop aokp cm
I have tried a lot of ROMs and I find these devs do a much better job than stock ROMs yes you have some bugs in some but the always work them out cudos to the devs I'm just glad they still support my device and having gabe up on it