Related
@all the coders
The community has people with very good coding skills (we know them and they know them each-other), so why you(we) do not concentrate your(our) skills and work on one big open-source app. The synergetic (network) effects would make it possible to build and later host a stable and all included community-based-open-source-group-coded app!
We have so many pseudo-proprietary based tools:
ROM-Kitchen, Hermes ROM Koch, nbhextract, et cetera...
Is think the best would be, to set up something like an open-source-project. - we can host the codesnippets on a subversion or cvs directory or something else to manage the distributed progress.
The efforts would be much bigger and come much faster, that should be clear for everybody.
So please let me know and i will set up such a directory!
Maybe pof can set up a poll for this - so we can get a democracy-based decision!
AFAIK this would be the first joined forces XDA-Developers development and i think it is realy the time for it!
And what are you waiting for ? Start development of this one big open-source app by yourself right now. And others would join if they find it interesting.
Des said:
And what are you waiting for ? Start development of this one big open-source app by yourself right now. And others would join if they find it interesting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I created a svn-repository,
please PM me with your email-adress to send you the account information!
I've meant start development not creating svn res
Des said:
I've meant start development not creating svn res
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know but at first my programming skills are not as good as your skills are and at second why i should start a new app since we have a lot of lines already?
but as far as is see you won´t join, will you?
apokryphus said:
why i should start
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
why others should ?
but as far as is see you won´t join, will you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
join to what ?
Des said:
why others should ?
join to what ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Others started already, so they just have to put their code in there and others can modify it.
Join the svn...
BTW: You know what a svn is, don´t you?
apokryphus said:
they just have to put their code in there and others can modify it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is sourceforge for it. And there was cvs rep on xda-developers. If you going to host another - that's good. But how it relates to starting of development of "a stable and all included community-based-open-source-group-coded app" ?
Join the svn...
BTW: You know what a svn is, don´t you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
svn is in the first place code hosted there. No code == nothing to join.
Well, e.g. dutty could host his code in there, if he wants; olipro could host his code in there, if he wants; like all the others.
that would be good start.
Then merge the code and bring up new features... like guis (i would do that e.g.)
And yes, i can not host any code because i did not wrote something and i do not want to decompile the versions we have, because of ip, the developer should agree with it first.
besides this is just an idea, but reading your posts it seems this idea is not very welcome.
i wrote something like this to a mod here 2 weeks ago, did not got an answer, so at all i think it could really be a bad idea - however maybe some others will say somthing about it.
apokryphus said:
besides this is just an idea, but reading your posts it seems this idea is not very welcome.
i wrote something like this to a mod here 2 weeks ago, did not got an answer, so at all i think it could really be a bad idea - however maybe some others will say somthing about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I personally think it's a great idea! It's just too bad I'm not a developer; I wish I could help!
But yes, I believe that if everyone here worked together on a project, the results could be wonderful. I guess that doesn't mean much since I don't have the skills needed to contribute, but it still sounds ideal.
Des I Think Apokryphus Is Main Aim Is An Open Source ROM Kitchen.
With The Issue That ahok_hk Had With Olipro About Him Releasing A Ported Version Of His Software, I Think He Sees The Coders Working Against Each Other (Or At Least Being Rivals). And Wants Everyone To Play Nice To Create One Kitchen That Is Fast And Simple. Which Means That It Has To Be Open Source So Everyone Can Make Reccomendations On How To Update The Software.
Cheers
mousey_ said:
Des I Think Apokryphus Is Main Aim Is An Open Source ROM Kitchen.
With The Issue That ahok_hk Had With Olipro About Him Releasing A Ported Version Of His Software, I Think He Sees The Coders Working Against Each Other (Or At Least Being Rivals). And Wants Everyone To Play Nice To Create One Kitchen That Is Fast And Simple. Which Means That It Has To Be Open Source So Everyone Can Make Reccomendations On How To Update The Software.
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly, but not only for recommendation also for modifying the software, thats the main goal - joined people can add their own lines of code to provide the stability or usability for instance.
i hope i did not got you wrong, what means that i think you meant with update not modifying. but in case of that is the meaning i totaly agree with your opinion.
sorry but i am not a native speaker and sometimes i have got some problem with the meaning of the translations.
see quine, in word and object, chapter 2 about the indeterminacy of translation.
mousey_ said:
Des I Think Apokryphus Is Main Aim Is An Open Source ROM Kitchen.
With The Issue That ahok_hk Had With Olipro About Him Releasing A Ported Version Of His Software, I Think He Sees The Coders Working Against Each Other (Or At Least Being Rivals). And Wants Everyone To Play Nice To Create One Kitchen That Is Fast And Simple. Which Means That It Has To Be Open Source So Everyone Can Make Reccomendations On How To Update The Software.
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I must stress that everyone has their rights for their own intellectual property because the have created them using many many hours of effort. And I was not saying that I am not going to release the code. But just not right now coz it is still in beta and many fixes/function will be added. And there is not such "The Coders Working Against Each Other" in my mine at all. Coders should "respect" each other.
For the case of Olipro, he not only stole and released the code "without my prior agreement", but still releasing it after I suggested him to just put those code in his kitchen.
On the other hand, dutty is good. Why? because he also wanted to use the souce code of aChef, and he did ask me before he wants to put it in his kitchen.
BTW, originally I have successfully added many new functions to aChef that no one has done/thought before, but I see no point to release them or to continue my effort now.
Anyway every one has their own thoughts about intellectual proterty. And I am not going to discuss here anymore. Good luck and Good bye to all.
it's a port... it's not your code, you didn't license your code, and you did not say anywhere that anyone was forbidden from creating a derivative work, I made it to benefit the community, if you want to let ego get in the way, that's your problem buddy, not mine.
while I reconize the merrits of open source, I think people should respect (an appreciate) the hard work that people have done. The people in this forum have made some wonderful software, provided it to us free of charge. If they want to put their hard work out there in an open source form, that's great, if not, that's also great - it should be their choice with no pressure.) I've not even seen anybody complain about their software being incorperated into other programs - they've just asked that you respect their IP which in my opinion is perfectly fair.
If you'd like something put into opensource, write a nice letter suggesting it with no pressure, and then leave it to the developer. If they want to they will, if not, simply thank them for their hard work an appreciate the product they've provided for you. If you push people who don't want to release it for whatever their reason, you'll alienate them and they'll cease development which would be a detrament to everybody!
<steps down off soapbox>Sorry for my pointless ramblings - please, continue ignoring me!
ahlok_hk said:
BTW, originally I have successfully added many new functions to aChef that no one has done/thought before, but I see no point to release them or to continue my effort now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
*cough* VAPOURWARE *cough*
we all appreciate your effort including me... but if diddums wants to throw a tantrum the feel free
Not sure if we've had this response so far but I wanted to share it.
______
Dear Dave,
Thank you for your continuous interest on our product.
In particular, we''d like to recommend to use toolchain 2009q3 version. Our development team recommend this version.
(arm-2009q3-67-arm-none-linux-gnueabi-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.bz2)
Please send full details of your build error log.
Thank you.
Sincerely yours,
Oh, where to begin..
I believe that's the toolchain they recommend in their "instructions".. Regardless, we figured that out rather quickly.
The problem here is that what they released to us was not their production source code. It was some early development version of it, with a number of issues, the most prominent being it didn't even compile as provided.
The fact that we had to patch sound/soc/codecs/wm8994.c so that the phone wouldn't drop audio 5-10 seconds into every phone call is pretty much concrete proof that what we were given was development code, not production code.
I'm going to pass on the exact same message back, we'll see what happens.
Probably nothing.
at this point it's fairly pointless. we have been hastling them for almost a month now, and they've done nothing. despite all the issues with the code, our dev team has gotten their provided kernel source to boot and run with no issues, hence the overclocking kernels available. even if they did release the actual source now it's basically worthless. unless it's for a higher kernel version we can use for a froyo rom.
sonofskywalker3 said:
at this point it's fairly pointless. we have been hastling them for almost a month now, and they've done nothing. despite all the issues with the code, our dev team has gotten their provided kernel source to boot and run with no issues, hence the overclocking kernels available. even if they did release the actual source now it's basically worthless. unless it's for a higher kernel version we can use for a froyo rom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not whether I its pointless or not, they need to be held accountable for uploading bad source which I believe is against the gpl. Funny how their build sh is configured for 2010 and they recommend 2009q3...
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
I agree, but is sending them a million emails that they mostly ignore really "holding them accountable"? I think not.
So ignoring them is the answer?
I think not.
Feedback is the most civil thing at this point. If its ignored, I'm sure more stern action can be taken, if the community as a whole decides to.
DISCLAIMER:
This is totally academic, and I only pose the question as that of mere curiosity.
In no way do I mean to accuse any developer here or elsewhere of intentionally or otherwise installing malicious software in our ROMs. Not trying to start a flame war or anything.
What is the possibility that a rogue ROM creator would or could install malicious content on one of our devices? What kind of things would we look for to indicate that our device may be compromised? Perhaps packet sniffing for the extra paranoid.
I am the type that, when I see something that doesn't look normal, I question it. That said, I am a very experience Linux, *BSD, and Solaris administrator; but my experience with Android is just blooming. So I might not know where to look in the Android filesystem, or know which processes may be irregular.
I did some Googling but haven't found anything to indicate this has happened before (thank God). Are there self-checks in Android to prevent this from happening? Call me paranoid, but I just like to know what's going on.
Do the "anti-virus" softwares in the App market actually help with this?
Again just curious. I heard about some apps on the Market that Google had to remotely erase. And I believe I am correct in understanding that Google isn't as restrictive with its applications as Apple.
Any takes on this?
Antivirus and Task killers all that are garbage and slow your phone down. You won't have to worry about that happening on this site.
It depends if he/she is an asshole...
The first "viruses" for android were because people were downloading paid apps on the internet, from some site in china, that had viri put into those apps that people were downloading.
Just dont get on the bad side of a dev.
adrynalyne said:
Just dont get on the bad side of a dev.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL! I'll make sure not to do that!
I know that task-killers are BS. I figured the anti-virus was a gimmick, too. As far as for self-replicating viruses on the phones I doubt that will occur.
I'm more worried about malware in the form of a sleeper-trojan that calls home with my personal phone information, or gets added to some jack-asses botnet for DDoSing.
That was a worry of mine when I first came to this site, but the dev's I download from I find quit professional. I have since just started to dig into roms trying to port them to the tb, and compare the contents and begin to see what is normally packed in the zip. I have never found a dev on this site attempt to introduce malware. I have seen some intro warz but the site immediately banned them. The site has banned devs for not giving credit were credit is due, and opening multiple accounts in a way to circumvent the system.
This site is great for all, and they do their best to keep everyone honest.
I've been here and ppcgeeks for nearly 3 and 1/2 years, both with winmo and android, and I have never had an issue. It seems that these sites really do the best they can to catch things before they happen. Personally, I can't say enough about our devs. They're great, and they do a good bit of work for people who are honestly not thankful enough to them. I personally don't think you will ever have an issue, as I haven't. And I download tons of stuff from here and other places.
I think everyone is missing the OP's point. OP isn't asking if it's happning now or whether it's happening here.
Instead, the question concerns whether or not it's physicsally possible for malicious code to get executed after installing a custom ROM and/or kernel, assuming the developer of that ROM or Kernel was inclined to put some in there. Assuming it *is* possible, which I certainly believe it is, what if anything can be done by an experienced *NIX adminsitrator to be aware of it?
Is your only option to 'trust' the developer of the ROM or Kernel, or are there things we can do with a runnning android system to know how well the live code is behaving?
I've always been curious of this myself. I am no advanced Linux administrator (yet), just an aspiring IT student. I would think the best people to ask would be the developers themselves, though.
funkybside said:
I think everyone is missing the OP's point. OP isn't asking if it's happning now or whether it's happening here.
Instead, the question concerns whether or not it's physicsally possible for malicious code to get executed after installing a custom ROM and/or kernel, assuming the developer of that ROM or Kernel was inclined to put some in there. Assuming it *is* possible, which I certainly believe it is, what if anything can be done by an experienced *NIX adminsitrator to be aware of it?
Is your only option to 'trust' the developer of the ROM or Kernel, or are there things we can do with a runnning android system to know how well the live code is behaving?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No one is missing the point, the op asked if it can happen in roms/kernels/etc. Roms/kernels/etc for the phone are distributed here, therefore he is asking if it can happen here or anywhere that devs create these things for our phones.
BTW an experienced Linux admin should already know how to check for these things
Actually I believe it has happened at least twice. Once by accident, and once there may have been malicious code put into a rom that was set as bate for code thieves.
The first one was stupid, an update agent was left in the rom, and an update got pushed that loaded the phone browser to a certain site (it was not a bad site either). This effected a VERY minor few, as you had to have a certain version of a rom, and have rebooted over a very specific point in time.
The latter I will not go into as I do not know the specifics, or the validity of any of what happened.
g00s3y said:
No one is missing the point, the op asked if it can happen in roms/kernels/etc. Roms/kernels/etc for the phone are distributed here, therefore he is asking if it can happen here or anywhere that devs create these things for our phones.
BTW an experienced Linux admin should already know how to check for these things
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry if my post offended you and no disrespect intended, but I think you are mistaken. The question of whether or not something "can happen" is fundamentally different from the question of whether or not anyone is actually doing it. Also, saying that any "experienced Linux admin should already know how to check for these things" is in poor taste; it's a personal attack that adds no value to the discussion. The idea here is to address the OPs question as a purely acedemic thought experiment; there is no implict reference to the morality of the developers here...
Perhaps we should ask the same question in a differnet way:
If net-sec researcher working at SANS wanted to test expolitation vectors against their own personal HTC Thunderbolt. Is it physically possible for them to build a custom ROM and/or Kernel such that this custom module includes malicious code that executes automatically after installed on the device?
I'd be highly surprised if anyone claims the answer is no. If the kernel itself is custom, anything the hardware can do is fair game...
Concerning the question of how to know if anything is happening, since we're talking about the firmware itself, it would be difficult to do anything in userspace with confidence. To be really sure, you'd likely need to sniff traffic (both mobile and wifi) as well as physically monitor the hardware's debug output (and perhaps even the circuit traces themselves). With a comprimized kernel, you can't trust anything running throuh the operating system's APIs.
It's very doubtful that any reputable developer on XDA would do this. Impossible? No. But XDA is the kind of place where something like this would be discovered very quickly and spread like wildfire.
Now, some unknown developer, on a random website? While I havent come across this yet, I'd say: More likely.
The question isn't concerning the likelihood of it occuring on XDA or elsewhere, it's specifcally about whether or not it is technically possible to do it.
I think we can infrer from everyone who is answering the unrelated question, i.e. Is it happening on XDA or anywhere else?, that yes, it is possible to insert malicious code into a ROM or kernel.
funkybside said:
The question isn't concerning the likelihood of it occuring on XDA or elsewhere, it's specifcally about whether or not it is technically possible to do it.
I think we can infrer from everyone who is answering the unrelated question, i.e. Is it happening on XDA or anywhere else?, that yes, it is possible to insert malicious code into a ROM or kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are right. As long as there is superuser access, then basically anyone with su can pretty much to anything to your phone.
At least that's my take on it.
I'm new to android in general and XDA in particular, so please forgive my ignroance (and yes I will try searching), but this makes me wonder: Do the established developers of custom ROMs and Kernels release their source code? I'd imagine the same terms of the GPL that require HTC to release their source would also require anyone building custom Kernels to do the same. Is this also true for ROMs?
I am an experienced *NIX administrator, and that's what makes me so paranoid. This kernel source isn't coming from a CVS tree that is being scrutinized by hundreds of developers, at least not to my knowledge.
I know how code can be injected into a kernel, into a module, pretty much anywhere. Should I run a diff on the kernel source tree to see what was changed? Could do that, but that may be time consuming. I've seen innocuous kernel modules altered to allow a gateway for elevating to UID 0 (and in fact, more often in Linux than in others.)
I'm pretty confident that the folks here on XDA aren't doing anything malicious: the following of these ROMs are too popular and very fluid, and I would expect something malicious to be found quickly.
Again this is just purely academic.
nerozehl said:
I am an experienced *NIX administrator, and that's what makes me so paranoid. This kernel source isn't coming from a CVS tree that is being scrutinized by hundreds of developers, at least not to my knowledge.
I know how code can be injected into a kernel, into a module, pretty much anywhere. Should I run a diff on the kernel source tree to see what was changed? Could do that, but that may be time consuming. I've seen innocuous kernel modules altered to allow a gateway for elevating to UID 0 (and in fact, more often in Linux than in others.)
I'm pretty confident that the folks here on XDA aren't doing anything malicious: the following of these ROMs are too popular and very fluid, and I would expect something malicious to be found quickly.
Again this is just purely academic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed that the liklihood of stuff here being questionable is low, but the simple fact that there is a non-zero risk certainly makes me think a little bit. You summed it up well and the examples are spot on - this is why I immediately wonderd if developers here are publishing the source code on their customized versions. Ignoring the GPL angle, its just good to know it's out there if it is, and by the same token, also good to know if it's not out there.
I have another question to add. I love miui, and to my understanding miui is made by Chinese developers and it is not open source, it is just translated and ported to our devices. If it is not open source, is there anyway to know for sure?
I am a little bit wary of the security, although I love the rom. I trust all of the credible devs on xda, however I don't know anything about the Chinese devs developing miui. Would the devs porting miui be able to see the malware if it isn't open source
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
It is definitely possible. I read a paper a while back that I've been referencing in my own research where some researchers compiled some kernel modules to do malicious tasks in the background without knowledge of the user, mind you this was on an open source linux based phone system similar to android. Basically compiled in root kits, which replacing your kernel/rom w/ a community developed system would result in possibilities of this occurring. The primary solution to preventing these things from ending up on your phone as well as keeping the Trojans and other malware on the android market come down to the same thing knowing your publisher and being careful what permissions you allow. Like stick to kernels/roms from reputable developers on XDA, and make sure your "movie player" doesn't have access to your SMS system and you'll be fine
Mind you my own research currently is in detection of malware/malicous code & anomalous behavior. As well as hopefully prevention techniques eventually.
or does anyone else feel like we dont have enough aosp love? I mean we have miui, cm7, had decks(went ghostbusters on us) and empiire(heard he got grounded for molesting his hard drive.) I understand theirs still kinks to be worked out but everything is Sense. Just wanted to see who else felt this way. PLEASE DONT COME IN AND START A PARAGRAPH WAR, I read enough in high school.
Temari x Shikamaru
Evervolv exists.
il Duce said:
Evervolv exists.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Link please. Ive been hunting it.
Temari x Shikamaru
Talked to shift on twitter yesterday, he said CM7 is being worked on. I honestly think what it is that people are happy with their phones just the way they are, so it brings less crowd. While it is smaller than the original Evo, there is still a pretty big following. Plus, this is just a US phone, so when comparing the Sensation with us is like apple and oranges. We just got mike and androidrevolution! Which is great.
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
PatrickHuey said:
Talked to shift on twitter yesterday, he said CM7 is being worked on. I honestly think what it is that people are happy with their phones just the way they are, so it brings less crowd. While it is smaller than the original Evo, there is still a pretty big following. Plus, this is just a US phone, so when comparing the Sensation with us is like apple and oranges. We just got mike and androidrevolution! Which is great.
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not just US. Theres gsm models for overseas.
Temari x Shikamaru
The problem is, most AOSP ROM's(99.99%) are based off CM kernel source, so with no update to CM, there's no update to other AOSP ROM's. Many devs might want to wait until a few more bugs are worked out of CM before they start kanging. Once we get an RC1 or a stable CM release, you may see more AOSP love.
Can the gsm users get some aosp love? Any roms?
Sent from my Evo 3D GSM...bring on the AOSP!!!
housry23 said:
The problem is, most AOSP ROM's(99.99%) are based off CM kernel source, so with no update to CM, there's no update to other AOSP ROM's. Many devs might want to wait until a few more bugs are worked out of CM before they start kanging. Once we get an RC1 or a stable CM release, you may see more AOSP love.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This man is right. Most AOSP is done by Cyanogenmod devs and kanged from there. I can guarantee you when they come out with a CM7 RC, there will magically be other AOSP roms.
housry23 said:
The problem is, most AOSP ROM's(99.99%) are based off CM kernel source, so with no update to CM, there's no update to other AOSP ROM's. Many devs might want to wait until a few more bugs are worked out of CM before they start kanging. Once we get an RC1 or a stable CM release, you may see more AOSP love.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your right. I forgot about that.
Temari x Shikamaru
housry23 said:
The problem is, most AOSP ROM's(99.99%) are based off CM kernel source, so with no update to CM, there's no update to other AOSP ROM's. Many devs might want to wait until a few more bugs are worked out of CM before they start kanging. Once we get an RC1 or a stable CM release, you may see more AOSP love.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have complained about this over and over, and will continue to complain in multiple threads until more people see the point I make and support that. Using someone else's kernel and/or ROM as a base for their "new" ROM isn't all bad all the time. It is analogous to game development on a PC using another developer's graphics/game engine (only with permission and proper credit of course!!). It saves time, and in some cases help that particular engine to advance, but it slows down new technological advancement in the industry as a whole.
Developers need to start honing their skills, start attempting to bring a ROM to the public that they built from the ground up, that includes a kernel build from the ground up too. Doing this eliminates such a large collection of ROMs that are all essentially the same, and because of the open source nature of Android it brings new technological advances to the public faster. It also raises the bar, the standard. The public will begin to expect more out of Android, and this in turn creates more motivation for a newer, better Android.
I think some developers have lost sight of the purpose and nature of open source information and products. Instead of hijacking someone's source code, and using it as a base for a new ROM with a new name, and small amount of new features, development should be done that conforms to the original intent and purpose of open source. Work together with a developer that has created a ROM [from the ground up] that is most similar to the product you want to create. Improve the ROM as a team, make bug fixes and enhancement to the existing ROM. That is what open source was meant to do. This will prevent a forum list of 32 half assed roms, and replace it with 10 really good yet unique roms.
If you can't find an existing ROM, a Dev team that has different ideas of what make a ROM good, or there is no ROM that exists that is similar enough to your vision of the product then, and only then should you develop something new.
I realize my views aren't going to match up with everyone else, but I am sure a happy medium could be found that produces a situation better than what we have now. Thanks for letting me rant, and for reading my thoughts!
Sad Panda said:
I have complained about this over and over, and will continue to complain in multiple threads until more people see the point I make and support that. Using someone else's kernel and/or ROM as a base for their "new" ROM isn't all bad all the time. It is analogous to game development on a PC using another developer's graphics/game engine (only with permission and proper credit of course!!). It saves time, and in some cases help that particular engine to advance, but it slows down new technological advancement in the industry as a whole.
Developers need to start honing their skills, start attempting to bring a ROM to the public that they built from the ground up, that includes a kernel build from the ground up too. Doing this eliminates such a large collection of ROMs that are all essentially the same, and because of the open source nature of Android it brings new technological advances to the public faster. It also raises the bar, the standard. The public will begin to expect more out of Android, and this in turn creates more motivation for a newer, better Android.
I think some developers have lost sight of the purpose and nature of open source information and products. Instead of hijacking someone's source code, and using it as a base for a new ROM with a new name, and small amount of new features, development should be done that conforms to the original intent and purpose of open source. Work together with a developer that has created a ROM [from the ground up] that is most similar to the product you want to create. Improve the ROM as a team, make bug fixes and enhancement to the existing ROM. That is what open source was meant to do. This will prevent a forum list of 32 half assed roms, and replace it with 10 really good yet unique roms.
If you can't find an existing ROM, a Dev team that has different ideas of what make a ROM good, or there is no ROM that exists that is similar enough to your vision of the product then, and only then should you develop something new.
I realize my views aren't going to match up with everyone else, but I am sure a happy medium could be found that produces a situation better than what we have now. Thanks for letting me rant, and for reading my thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn. Such a long read. It was good though.
Temari x Shikamaru
knowledge561 said:
Damn. Such a long read. It was good though.
Temari x Shikamaru
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sorry, I originally had hoped for a much shorter post. I always try to get the thoughts in my head out "on paper" in the shortest, most efficient and least complex manner. This is my vision of a more free, "open source" world though. I think the freedom of information could be applied to many facets of society that would create a better future for all of us, and still preserve the competition that drives a more peaceful, better, cheaper, faster world. Sorry again!
Sad Panda said:
I have complained about this over and over, and will continue to complain in multiple threads until more people see the point I make and support that. Using someone else's kernel and/or ROM as a base for their "new" ROM isn't all bad all the time. It is analogous to game development on a PC using another developer's graphics/game engine (only with permission and proper credit of course!!). It saves time, and in some cases help that particular engine to advance, but it slows down new technological advancement in the industry as a whole.
Developers need to start honing their skills, start attempting to bring a ROM to the public that they built from the ground up, that includes a kernel build from the ground up too. Doing this eliminates such a large collection of ROMs that are all essentially the same, and because of the open source nature of Android it brings new technological advances to the public faster. It also raises the bar, the standard. The public will begin to expect more out of Android, and this in turn creates more motivation for a newer, better Android.
I think some developers have lost sight of the purpose and nature of open source information and products. Instead of hijacking someone's source code, and using it as a base for a new ROM with a new name, and small amount of new features, development should be done that conforms to the original intent and purpose of open source. Work together with a developer that has created a ROM [from the ground up] that is most similar to the product you want to create. Improve the ROM as a team, make bug fixes and enhancement to the existing ROM. That is what open source was meant to do. This will prevent a forum list of 32 half assed roms, and replace it with 10 really good yet unique roms.
If you can't find an existing ROM, a Dev team that has different ideas of what make a ROM good, or there is no ROM that exists that is similar enough to your vision of the product then, and only then should you develop something new.
I realize my views aren't going to match up with everyone else, but I am sure a happy medium could be found that produces a situation better than what we have now. Thanks for letting me rant, and for reading my thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is that people don't always give credit where credit is due, which is one of the reasons some people don't like sharing stuff. I mean, let's say I made this awesome mod and let everybody use it. Then some kitchen dev comes along, kangs the **** out of it, doesn't mention me in his rom, and slaps a gigantic DONATE button at the bottom of his signature. It's frustrating.
Now I'm all about open source. I won't use a rom that doesn't post the source. That's the exact reason I won't use MIUI.
SolsticeZero said:
The problem is that people don't always give credit where credit is due, which is one of the reasons some people don't like sharing stuff. I mean, let's say I made this awesome mod and let everybody use it. Then some kitchen dev comes along, kangs the **** out of it, doesn't mention me in his rom, and slaps a gigantic DONATE button at the bottom of his signature. It's frustrating.
Now I'm all about open source. I won't use a rom that doesn't post the source. That's the exact reason I won't use MIUI.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I fully understand your frustration. I am a software engineer too so I know what you are going through. I have not yet begun developing for Android, but will. There is a little bit of a problem here that could easily be solved, and the community has a responsibility to protect the intellectual property rights that you and every other developer like you is entitled to. In fact it is a right that is protected by the integrity of the constitution of the united states, and many other countries and law enforcement around the world. This is a failure that not just developers, mods, and admins have, but a responsibility and failure that every user at xda shares no matter who they are.
First off; not to offend any MIUI developers that may be watching, but if you are developing for Android you need to be using a license that is open, and your source needs to be open too. This is especially true if you are using xda as a distribution medium, but sadly while xda has said they encourage, and want every development to be open source they are not forcing the matter. This is a failure I think. It also makes MIUI look suspicious too, as there isn't a way to verify if their source is uniquely theirs'. I personally believe xda should not allow software that is not open source to be distributed. If google didn't keep the open source principle when they acquired Android roms like MIUI would NOT exist! It is highly unethical to take the base ROM from google because it is open source, and then close the source. That is wrong wrong wrong! It is also illegal! You can not redistribute the Android OS even if you have made changes and then close the source and not maintain the software license google has on place.
Second; I believe as a user of xda it is your duty to maintain the integrity of the principles of xda, and Android. Don't support closed source works, voice your disgust so that xda sees the will of its users, that the over whelming majority wants things to remain open source. Tattle your ass off if someone has broke the copyright law and used someone's work without permission and credit.
It is important to keep both xda and Android running on the same principles it started with. Don't let this keep happening guys! This is very serious, a lot of developers are breaking the law doing what they are doing!
Sad Panda said:
I have complained about this over and over, and will continue to complain in multiple threads until more people see the point I make and support that. Using someone else's kernel and/or ROM as a base for their "new" ROM isn't all bad all the time. It is analogous to game development on a PC using another developer's graphics/game engine (only with permission and proper credit of course!!). It saves time, and in some cases help that particular engine to advance, but it slows down new technological advancement in the industry as a whole.
Developers need to start honing their skills, start attempting to bring a ROM to the public that they built from the ground up, that includes a kernel build from the ground up too. Doing this eliminates such a large collection of ROMs that are all essentially the same, and because of the open source nature of Android it brings new technological advances to the public faster. It also raises the bar, the standard. The public will begin to expect more out of Android, and this in turn creates more motivation for a newer, better Android.
I think some developers have lost sight of the purpose and nature of open source information and products. Instead of hijacking someone's source code, and using it as a base for a new ROM with a new name, and small amount of new features, development should be done that conforms to the original intent and purpose of open source. Work together with a developer that has created a ROM [from the ground up] that is most similar to the product you want to create. Improve the ROM as a team, make bug fixes and enhancement to the existing ROM. That is what open source was meant to do. This will prevent a forum list of 32 half assed roms, and replace it with 10 really good yet unique roms.
If you can't find an existing ROM, a Dev team that has different ideas of what make a ROM good, or there is no ROM that exists that is similar enough to your vision of the product then, and only then should you develop something new.
I realize my views aren't going to match up with everyone else, but I am sure a happy medium could be found that produces a situation better than what we have now. Thanks for letting me rant, and for reading my thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or learn to code yourself and create roms from the ground up. Most devs do what they do for themselves first, and allow us to ride on their coattails. Not a bad ride if your like me and have no coding skills. Otherwise, I doubt your plea is going to convince a dev to do anything more or less then they do now, unless it interest them personally.
I do agree with you though. I'm coming from Android on the Touch Pro 2 where a small group of devs are building EVERYTHING from scratch. From the modems to the light sensor. It's a huge job done out of love for the hardware, for fun, and a passion for coding.
knowledge561 said:
Link please. Ive been hunting it.
Temari x Shikamaru
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
he links only via twitter posts and in his IRC, send him a tweet. iirc still in beta, but he does some nice ROMs
Serren said:
Or learn to code yourself and create roms from the ground up. Most devs do what they do for themselves first, and allow us to ride on their coattails. Not a bad ride if your like me and have no coding skills. Otherwise, I doubt your plea is going to convince a dev to do anything more or less then they do now, unless it interest them personally.
I do agree with you though. I'm coming from Android on the Touch Pro 2 where a small group of devs are building EVERYTHING from scratch. From the modems to the light sensor. It's a huge job done out of love for the hardware, for fun, and a passion for coding.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your comment and support. I don't disagree with you. If you steal a loaf of bread to feed yourself, is it any less of a crime than to steal a loaf of bread to feed you and your family and friends? Or is it the same or worse?
I think either way it isn't ethical. People need to think less about themselves I think. I must reiterate and clarify so I am not misunderstood. I don't think it is inherently bad to be using a ROM as your base, but it is wrong to then close the source of a previously open piece of work and/or not maintain the original license, and give credit in every spot it should be given in. That would include its distribution, the license, the source code itself, and any where else that you put your own version, app info, and copyright notice. Am I wrong?
Sad Panda said:
I fully understand your frustration. I am a software engineer too so I know what you are going through. I have not yet begun developing for Android, but will. There is a little bit of a problem here that could easily be solved, and the community has a responsibility to protect the intellectual property rights that you and every other developer like you is entitled to. In fact it is a right that is protected by the integrity of the constitution of the united states, and many other countries and law enforcement around the world. This is a failure that not just developers, mods, and admins have, but a responsibility and failure that every user at xda shares no matter who they are.
First off; not to offend any MIUI developers that may be watching, but if you are developing for Android you need to be using a license that is open, and your source needs to be open too. This is especially true if you are using xda as a distribution medium, but sadly while xda has said they encourage, and want every development to be open source they are not forcing the matter. This is a failure I think. It also makes MIUI look suspicious too, as there isn't a way to verify if their source is uniquely theirs'. I personally believe xda should not allow software that is not open source to be distributed. If google didn't keep the open source principle when they acquired Android roms like MIUI would NOT exist! It is highly unethical to take the base ROM from google because it is open source, and then close the source. That is wrong wrong wrong! It is also illegal! You can not redistribute the Android OS even if you have made changes and then close the source and not maintain the software license google has on place.
Second; I believe as a user of xda it is your duty to maintain the integrity of the principles of xda, and Android. Don't support closed source works, voice your disgust so that xda sees the will of its users, that the over whelming majority wants things to remain open source. Tattle your ass off if someone has broke the copyright law and used someone's work without permission and credit.
It is important to keep both xda and Android running on the same principles it started with. Don't let this keep happening guys! This is very serious, a lot of developers are breaking the law doing what they are doing!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let me preface this by saying that I agree with you..
However android is meant to be open source, the license that they use (Apache) does not require it.. The reason they chose the Apache license was to give people the freedom to choose (their words). So technically people like miui don't have to post source for anything other than kernel (which is GPL).
This link has some good info on it.
http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html
But even CM doesn't have to provide source, which in recent history they haven't while starting builds.. We can't demand source, when the licensing doesn't demand, but that doesn't mean we still can't prove direct kang. The reason I have android over anything else is the freedom it gives and the open nature of it.
Edit: and you should always credit someone if you are using their work, and also have their permission. I was referring to general source from android itself, not from each other.
_______________________
No d3rp left behind - ranger61878
The problem is, nobody wants to start a ROM from the ground up, and the people that do are already involved into team projects (CM/MIUI). It takes a long time to create a ROM from the ground up that utilizes all of a phone's hardware properly. Look how long it took CM to get 4G onto the EVO 4G, and that was a team of highly skilled individuals practically reverse engineering code to do it.
Now imagine all of the copy and paste kitchen users here trying to accomplish that. It just won't happen lol.
That's why we have pretty much the same thing in different colors. It kind of sucks, but hey, HTC did the majority of the work, and if something already works good enough, the average person will be fine with and use that.
Yeah, it does slow down the evolution and innovation of Android as a whole, but you have to put some of the blame on OEMs for pushing out 45 different phones a year. Nobody is going to be encouraged to create something from the ground up for a phone that will be replaced and obsolete by the time they're finished.
The G1 is the prime example of a great phone that got tons of developer support, tons of new things, and tons of unique ROMs. But that was the beginning, and I doubt that's ever going to happen again.
HTC all but pushed this EVO 3D out, and forgot about it. They've released a good 19 phones since then at the rate they're going, most of us will have moved on to the next one in a few months. Sad but true.
That is why I have stuck with and will probably continue to use a Stock ROM, modified to my liking and stripped. There isn't much else you can hope for. 3D has failed to really take off like HTC and the rest of us wanted. There is no motivation for any of the teams out there to focus on reverse engineering their ROMs to use 3D. MIUI to this day hasn't bothered with WiMAX and with good reason. Sprint all about blatantly announced its slow death in favor of LTE. It would have been a waste of time for the MIUI team to implement it. Kudos to Team Win and CM for gracing us with it on the EVO 4G. But, hindsight has probably made people mad that all of their time and energy went into something that's getting canned.
Alot of good points freeza. These are paragraphs I like to read.
Temari x Shikamaru
Wear 24 DevelopmentContributors: @JaredTamana, @davwheat
Current Status: ActiveCurrent Kernel Status: Building, NFC driver working but still potentially WIPSystem ROM Status: Still WIP. Current task: collecting/compiling files, modifying .jarsTHIS ROM IS NOT YET AVAILABLE TO DOWNLOAD AS AN END-USER ROM
This project has a few goals:
- Bringing NFC/Google Pay support to Wear24 [Feasible, main goal]
- Bringing system updates to the Wear24, ie System H [Probably doable, second goal]
- Adding/fixing functionality in the Wear24 (such as new radio bands, no cloud icon, etc) [Maybe possible but needs more research, low on the list)
- Other projects are being considered for the Wear24, but no news on them at this time.
Links
Social
Wear24Dev Blog, periodic updates on this project: http://wear24dev.blogspot.com
Wear24 NFC Discord, open chat so users can see us develop in real-time! Also, tech support. https://discord.gg/8XyTeUC
Development
Wear24-NFC-Kernel GitHub, this is our source for building the kernel. Instructions for building it yourself are in the README. https://github.com/davwheat/Wear24-NFC-Kernel
Travis-CI Build Logs for Kernel: https://travis-ci.org/davwheat/Wear24-NFC-Kernel
Wear24-NFC-ROM GitHub, will soon contain the files needed to make an image/zip, depending on how we decide to distribute. https://github.com/davwheat/Wear24-NFC-ROM
JaredTamana's GDrive dorado folder, may contain files you need: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1h6gz-oLMPZ90nwt7BLhWVgHii1DRCW5c
davwheat's GDrive dorado folder, may contain files you need: https://drive.google.com/drive/fold...droid-msm-dorado-3.18-nougat-mr1-wear-release
tetra release for enabling NFC: https://forum.xda-developers.com/sm...ony-smartwatch-3-nfc-support-package-t3219713
NXP Setup Guidelines: https://github.com/NXPNFCProject/NF...r/AN11762-Android_NXP_NFC_Setup_Guideline.pdf
Special Thanks
janjan: Dev guidance
@bensdeals: Donor, help
@yochanmarquos, u/lerxi: Development help.
-- RESERVED -- Because you never know
Someone should have a TWRP backup handy with the images you are looking for. Correct me if I'm wrong, but all the images you require are inside a TWRP backup image.
Anyone remember that Sony SW3 port thread? I'm not sure what happened to the project, but dev seems quiet and the device tree repos are gone. Was hoping to use those as a resource and it wasn't crawled by archive.org. Wonder if external forces got involved, which makes me a bit worried. If anyone has a clone of that repo, it might be really useful.
Please. I beg you to make this happen. Thanks for even trying
I'm definitely interested in this. If I knew I could get Google Pay working on this device, I would definitely buy one. I'll happily throw a few dollars your way too, if you can release something that works.
Hoping I found it
JaredTamana said:
Anyone remember that Sony SW3 port thread? I'm not sure what happened to the project, but dev seems quiet and the device tree repos are gone. Was hoping to use those as a resource and it wasn't crawled by archive.org. Wonder if external forces got involved, which makes me a bit worried. If anyone has a clone of that repo, it might be really useful.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is this what you're looking for? (Sorry, I'm not allowed to post url yet so just remove space before .com)
github .com/FlorentRevest/android_device_sony_tetra
My Wear24 just came in from eBay . It's a really good looking device. I might be able to help you test at some stage. Also willing to donate ducats if you get far enough. Good Luck :good:
I got my wear24 a few months ago, and was slightly disappointed to find out about the lack of root, customization, etc. I'm still not a huge fan of opening it up, but I'm up for helping any other way I can!
YTSec said:
I got my wear24 a few months ago, and was slightly disappointed to find out about the lack of root, customization, etc. I'm still not a huge fan of opening it up, but I'm up for helping any other way I can!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I appreciate the thought, but doing anything in the vein of system modification will require opening the watch. Luckily, the pinout is right under the back cover, so chances of damaging the watch are minimal. If you change your mind, let me know.
** NEWS **
Semi-daily updates will be going on this Blogger Page so I don't clog up the thread
http://wear24dev.blogspot.com
Hi, can i flash this rom to zte quartz 2017?
Hi, can i flash this rom to zte quartz 2017?
Eshal said:
Hi, can i flash this rom to zte quartz 2017?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Eshal, this ROM hasn't even been built yet. I cannot guarantee compatibility with your device because I'm not building for your device. You can try flashing whatever you like, but I'm not liable for your device.
This ROM is still in its first steps and I quite literally have nothing to release yet. I've just finished bringing backups over to my PC.
JaredTamana said:
I appreciate the thought, but doing anything in the vein of system modification will require opening the watch. Luckily, the pinout is right under the back cover, so chances of damaging the watch are minimal. If you change your mind, let me know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I took a look, it's not as bad as I thought. Its probably worth unlocking the bootloader anyway! I'll let you know tomorrow if I do.
YTSec said:
I took a look, it's not as bad as I thought. Its probably worth unlocking the bootloader anyway! I'll let you know tomorrow if I do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Glad to hear it! Make sure to read the main thread as to tips on how to do it. Use lots of heat, and don't forget the Y000 (0.6) screwdriver.
Kernel builds are now passing, and I've begun debugging the boot process. More info on the Blogspot
Sorry for the late reply, I'm just waiting on a toolkit that works on it, then I'll start ripping it apart to help out! Also, I got that new UI which is great.
How goes the testing? I've noticed that there haven't been any new posts on the blog or on this thread. Hope everything is well
@JaredTamana Have you seen this? BLOCKS announces Project OpenWatch: an Android Oreo-based OS for smartwatches in collaboration with CarbonROM and LineageOS
Here's their GitHub.
VlitalityX said:
How goes the testing? I've noticed that there haven't been any new posts on the blog or on this thread. Hope everything is well
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hiya! Sorry for the lack of updates. I've hit a wall with that Binder error. All documentation online seems to be about x86 machines and ranges from IO errors to SELinux errors. I've already tried compiling without SELinux in a few different ways to no avail. I've tried contacting development channels on IRC, but no one seems to have the answers I need (most times I don't even get a reply...)
I'm still brainstorming. I took a look at the kmsg from the stock build and there's a LOT being sent to logs there that isn't from my kernel. I'm not sure where to go next, and I don't want to go knocking on the door of every single developer that might know the answer. The problem is the Binder errors are so vague about what's causing the failed transaction that I can't even start to understand what's wrong.
yochananmarqos said:
@JaredTamana Have you seen this? BLOCKS announces Project OpenWatch: an Android Oreo-based OS for smartwatches in collaboration with CarbonROM and LineageOS
Here's their GitHub.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! I do remember seeing this. Problem is, if I can't even build a stock kernel, nothing else can be done. I need the device booting first before I can move to system changes.