I have a LG P350 which development has stopped but i want to keep it updated, i have my computer ready for building, also i have kernel sources, Cyanogenmod 11 and 10.1 sources too, (I don't know exactly if 10.1 sources could help) and i know that i need to apply patches to work on Armv6 but i don't know how to apply them to the source code, also i don't know if i would just need the pure source code to build or i need to do more modifications to it and finally, i don't know if the rom would work with 2.36 kernel which it's the most stable one for this device, i'm very new in this but i know that i can keep update my little phone, thank you all in advance for help.
DiegoConD said:
I have a LG P350 which development has stopped but i want to keep it updated, i have my computer ready for building, also i have kernel sources, Cyanogenmod 11 and 10.1 sources too, (I don't know exactly if 10.1 sources could help) and i know that i need to apply patches to work on Armv6 but i don't know how to apply them to the source code, also i don't know if i would just need the pure source code to build or i need to do more modifications to it and finally, i don't know if the rom would work with 2.36 kernel which it's the most stable one for this device, i'm very new in this but i know that i can keep update my little phone, thank you all in advance for help.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello, looking at your situation here is what I can conclude. First off you will need to change things for building on ARMv6 architecture, check this out for example. But your biggest problem will be that Android 4.0+ uses Linux kernel version 3.0+, and with the 2.36 kernel you have a lot of things will be broken and need fixing. That being said if your up for the challenge for it cause that's what were all about .
shimp208 said:
Hello, looking at your situation here is what I can conclude. First off you will need to change things for building on ARMv6 architecture, check this out for example. But your biggest problem will be that Android 4.0+ uses Linux kernel version 3.0+, and with the 2.36 kernel you have a lot of things will be broken and need fixing. That being said if your up for the challenge for it cause that's what were all about .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, i got this http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2144790 that is the most similar phone talking about hardware, it has 3.0 kernel working well so i thought i could port it, i found this http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15961306/porting-kernel-from-another-device so i think i would have less problems due hardware similarities (Look here http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=3516&idPhone2=3735 ) so, if i have cm11 pure sources, i add this kernel sources and some patches i would have it booting? Sorry for this very dumb question but, i didn't get at all about the armv6 part, how to apply patches, which i would need and all that, i really want to learn about this so thank you for this answer and the next ones :good:
DiegoConD said:
Well, i got this http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2144790 that is the most similar phone talking about hardware, it has 3.0 kernel working well so i thought i could port it, i found this http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15961306/porting-kernel-from-another-device so i think i would have less problems due hardware similarities (Look here http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=3516&idPhone2=3735 ) so, if i have cm11 pure sources, i add this kernel sources and some patches i would have it booting? Sorry for this very dumb question but, i didn't get at all about the armv6 part, how to apply patches, which i would need and all that, i really want to learn about this so thank you for this answer and the next ones :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The best way to start is use the ARMv6 branch of Cyanogenmod 11, replace the CM 10.1 in the previous linked build guide with cm-11.0 ("repo init -u git://github.com/androidarmv6/android.git -b cm-11.0"), and then to direct the build to use your kernel take a look at this guide on integrated kernel building with Cyanogenmod.
Related
Hey guys. So would anyone like to help me out in building an AOSP ROM for the LG Optimus S?
Currently, I have compiled the LG AOSP 2.2 kernel (zImage), and compiled the Android 2.2 AOSP system. Apparently now I need to get the LG vendor tree so I can compile that too into a working system? Can anyone help me out with that? This is my first time ever building a ROM from source code.
i hope someone will listen your help request
I hope so too... I hope so too.
I hope so too, would be nice to have another ROM option for the Optimus S. And this is a stepping stone to CyanogenMod on it
I'm also interested to create a fully working build of 2.2.2 AOSP Froyo.
But I'm new to the Android's world. I need that someone teach me how to build android from source. Also I need to know how to port the LG's drivers.....
I'm willing to help, but I can't program in any language. However, I know the basics, I can compile stuff, can do fairly well with the command line, I use Arch Linux as my main OS (so I can pretty much do compilations and stuff without a problem), etc.
I still don't know much about Android at this time, and contributing to this "project" may be my way of getting to know things
Count be in.. i m good with C,C++ ,shell scripts .tell me wat to do..i m new to android
Building Android from source can be quite tricky when proprietary software must be compiled in. I'm compiling since 2 months on gingerbread and nothing but phone is working... no USB,no camera, no bluetooth ... its now simply a phone^^
But, if your are lucky with Froyo you need only the source from android 2.2.x and the one shipped by LG (I know there are some sources for Optimus One, but don't know about Optimus S). Put it all together and compile the code - while/after compiling you will see lot of errors, there must be fixed by yours.
Have a look at cyanogen CM6.1, there have many fixes built in. If you would like to build a brand new system from scratch by yourself, i'll wish you many luck and lots of time
andy572 said:
Building Android from source can be quite tricky when proprietary software must be compiled in. I'm compiling since 2 months on gingerbread and nothing but phone is working... no USB,no camera, no bluetooth ... its now simply a phone^^
But, if your are lucky with Froyo you need only the source from android 2.2.x and the one shipped by LG (I know there are some sources for Optimus One, but don't know about Optimus S). Put it all together and compile the code - while/after compiling you will see lot of errors, there must be fixed by yours.
Have a look at cyanogen CM6.1, there have many fixes built in. If you would like to build a brand new system from scratch by yourself, i'll wish you many luck and lots of time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So in your opinion it would be a lot easier to just build a CyanogenMod 6.1 ROM? Sounds like a plan. I read that I could just pull stuff from the Legend and use that as well? Could you help me with that stuff (pulling from the Legend source, that is)?
Legend stuff is less compatible then i thought. You can't use nothing from there.
As my work at 2.3 is now stopped (I haven't bugs related to working stuff, I have no idea what to do with 3d and gps and I too lazy to patch libcamera now) I hope to start work on CM6 next holiday's.
mik_os said:
Legend stuff is less compatible then i thought. You can't use nothing from there.
As my work at 2.3 is now stopped (I haven't bugs related to working stuff, I have no idea what to do with 3d and gps and I too lazy to patch libcamera now) I hope to start work on CM6 next holiday's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We'll work on it together then? I started a GitHub. github.com/mrinehart93
mrinehart93 said:
We'll work on it together then? I started a GitHub. github.com/mrinehart93
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I already got working GSM/Audio/WiFi/Bluetooth/USB/Sensors in 2.3 (port to 2.2 is easy) I will continue work in my repo https://github.com/mik9
Ypu can send your patches via "pull request" functionality.
mik_os said:
As I already got working GSM/Audio/WiFi/Bluetooth/USB/Sensors in 2.3 (port to 2.2 is easy) I will continue work in my repo https://github.com/mik9
Ypu can send your patches via "pull request" functionality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I won't have any time to work on CM tonight or probably the rest of this week, but as soon as I do I'll set up my Github.
I've been following the development of so-called ROMs for the Vibrant (and other SGS devices), but I have yet to see a single AOSP ROM. Even when Samsung released the original kernel sources for 2.1, there were no AOSP 2.1 ROMs. Why not? Is it because they don't know which BLOBs to pull for insertion or the proper vendor overlays?
Some developers have done great work with SGS kernels (especially supercurio and his Voodoo kernels ... eugene373's tend to always wipe the internal SD card unnecessarily ...). But, a kernel does not a ROM make ... therefore I ask, what is truly missing to build an AOSP ROM. I've gone through the sources, but I don't follow makefiles too well.
I know we have another month or so before Samsung is obligated to release their 2.2 kernel sources, but that should have no impact on 2.1 AOSP ROMs. Therefore, I ask "what is the hold up?" What is missing, and what might I contribute ...
Need 2.2 source code...
2.1 is a dead horse--why bother when 2.2/2.3 are out?
The reason to bother is to at least get AOSP running. Once its on 2.1, it'll be easier to get 2.2 AOSP running on it. But claiming 2.1 is a "dead horse" is the wrong path ... the real question still stands: after 9 months on the market their still are no AOSP ROMs.
MIUI
Now that vibrant 2.2 source is released ... we finally have a REAL AOSP port and my all time favorite from my old HD2 the MIUI.... so keep your heads up and wait for it to get finished.
Get a custom rom. There are so many good devs doing them don't waste your time on AOSP....... until they release the actual source code...... on April 22
sarim.ali said:
Now that vibrant 2.2 source is released ... we finally have a REAL AOSP port and my all time favorite from my old HD2 the MIUI.... so keep your heads up and wait for it to get finished.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except, the 2.2 source for the Vibrant has not been released. The SGH-T959D that shows Froyo sources on Samsung's site is for the Canadian Fascinate, not the US T-Mobile Vibrant. Samsung has yet to release the 2.2 sources.
oka1 said:
Get a custom rom. There are so many good devs doing them don't waste your time on AOSP....... until they release the actual source code...... on April 22
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except the so-called "custom ROMs" are just modifications on the stock theme, a replacement kernel and a change of some of the supplied applications.
There is nothing close to a full "custom ROM" such as CyanogenMod or MIUI because we don't have Samsung's sources. What is passing for a "custom ROM" for the Vibrant are just repackaged files. It is akin to the "ROM cooking" that took place for the WinMo phones, not a truly ground-up build from source that is possible with Android.
EDT/Devs4Android has the MIUI build. From Source.
TW has a 2.2.1 in testing.
EDT has a 2.2.1 Beta released.
TW has a 2.3 AOSP in testing. From Source.
EDT has 2.2 AOSP in testing. From Source.
What you want is out there for you.
Watch the forums and reply when a call for Alpha testers is posted.
Hopefully it won't be long before you see a full TW/EDT/Devs4Android collaboration!
I think what the original poster is trying to ask (and I have the same question) is why were there never any real 2.1 AOSP, cyanogen5 for the vibrant. The source for 2.1 has been around for many months. Were some other proprietary bits missing, was the released source code such a mess that it was unbuildable, something else? With those questions in mind, why will things be any different when the 2.2 source comes out?
mattb3 said:
I think what the original poster is trying to ask (and I have the same question) is why were there never any real 2.1 AOSP, cyanogen5 for the vibrant. The source for 2.1 has been around for many months. Were some other proprietary bits missing, was the released source code such a mess that it was unbuildable, something else? With those questions in mind, why will things be any different when the 2.2 source comes out?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, this is more towards what I was getting at. We do not have Samsung's kernel sources for 2.2. And, we do not have a Samsung provided vendor overlay.
When we receive these two pieces, then a true AOSP build will be possible. However, we do have the 2.1 kernel sources, so why wasn't a true AOSP build possible then? What was missing, and can we actually expect Samsung to release the overlay that's needed?
Actually, that's true. I know it was old but why didn't anyone build a 2.1 cyanogen or aosp rom? (Not to say its easy.)
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
A noob question, kindly can someone explain what is the vendor overlay stuff?
Many thanks!
Where have you been?
rpcameron said:
I've been following the development of so-called ROMs for the Vibrant (and other SGS devices), but I have yet to see a single AOSP ROM. Even when Samsung released the original kernel sources for 2.1, there were no AOSP 2.1 ROMs. Why not? Is it because they don't know which BLOBs to pull for insertion or the proper vendor overlays?
Some developers have done great work with SGS kernels (especially supercurio and his Voodoo kernels ... eugene373's tend to always wipe the internal SD card unnecessarily ...). But, a kernel does not a ROM make ... therefore I ask, what is truly missing to build an AOSP ROM. I've gone through the sources, but I don't follow makefiles too well.
I know we have another month or so before Samsung is obligated to release their 2.2 kernel sources, but that should have no impact on 2.1 AOSP ROMs. Therefore, I ask "what is the hold up?" What is missing, and what might I contribute ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude theres been a true AOSP ROM for the Vibrant since like december and thats CM 6.1
Im running it now
rpcameron said:
I've been following the development of so-called ROMs for the Vibrant (and other SGS devices), but I have yet to see a single AOSP ROM. Even when Samsung released the original kernel sources for 2.1, there were no AOSP 2.1 ROMs. Why not? Is it because they don't know which BLOBs to pull for insertion or the proper vendor overlays?
Some developers have done great work with SGS kernels (especially supercurio and his Voodoo kernels ... eugene373's tend to always wipe the internal SD card unnecessarily ...). But, a kernel does not a ROM make ... therefore I ask, what is truly missing to build an AOSP ROM. I've gone through the sources, but I don't follow makefiles too well.
I know we have another month or so before Samsung is obligated to release their 2.2 kernel sources, but that should have no impact on 2.1 AOSP ROMs. Therefore, I ask "what is the hold up?" What is missing, and what might I contribute ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For probably the same reason that many phones with non AOSP firmware running 1.5/1.6 did not bother with AOSP 1.5/1.6 when they were released around the time 2.1 source hit. Why bother developing at all for what is essentially an "out of date" OS.
The only people it seems who actively continue to develop for existing (as opposed to new) firmware are manufacturers and carriers. This stupidity should be left to the manufacturers who still do this.
One of the larger snags way back then (sits in his rocking chair on the porch) was a lack of understanding of the phones proprietary aspects and how to work around them. But we have a fairly clear understanding of Samsung's boot process now, and RFS can now easily be turned into a distant memory.
I would wager a guess that the apathy towards 2.1 will not repeat itself once we have 2.2 source widely available and the low level similarities between 2.2 and 2.3 should have Gingerbread being more than the experiment it currently is. It's been barely more than a week since Eugene's little present manifested and there are already proper and stable kernels available.
Keep in mind that the devs we do have, have done a phenomenal job of cleaning up, speeding up, and drastically enhancing our existing 2.2 release. And perhaps to the point where many will not really care, though I know many would still like to see CyanogenMod6/7 properly on this phone.
Master&Slave™ said:
Dude theres been a true AOSP ROM for the Vibrant since like december and thats CM 6.1
Im running it now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um, that's not quite true. The CyanogenMod.com website lists 0 files available for download for either experimental or stable files. The CM6.1 you must be running is not a true CM build.
Also, CM is not AOSP, but rather AOSP with modifications.
phrozenflame said:
A noob question, kindly can someone explain what is the vendor overlay stuff?
Many thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The vendor overlay tells the AOSP build system which proprietary files are needed from the device that are not available in source form. This includes things like GPS and video drivers, baseband firmware for wireless radios, &c.
hi everybody !
a month age i decided to compile a new rom for my Galaxy S absolutely from AOSP source ( branch 2.2.1_r1 ) after some compile-time problem and many painful steps to resolve ,eventually the rom successfully built and can boot it up flawlessly on emulator.
i create a nandroid backup of current rom and installed the compiled one. but i am facing new problem :
1- the phone successfully boots but after short while screen began
flicking several time and the phone go in deep sleep and never wakeup
( power button or menu button does not do any thing )
2- touch screen works only for some second that I can unlock the
phone
3- there is no network available
4- I have downloaded samsung opesource package for GT-I9000. it
contains a folder named 'platform' but when i merge these files to
AOSP , the compile process stops and fails again. if there any one can
help me which files from samsung source should i merge and how ? if
you now the answer and dont have spare time then some internet link or
online document is really useful .i have no problem studding and
reading and searching . reaching to target is my only hope .
I am really disappointed why there is not a good and complete step2step tutorial to compile an AOSP rom for galaxy s (GT-I9000) !!
such docs is available for phones like dell streak , desire , dream , magic , .... . i really want to to active these aspect on XDA forum and with help of all you ( mods and masters ) try to create such tutorial that any one in world can use to refer . i think XDA is the only reference on net to collect and create such help and document. please help me and leave PM or comment to agree ot disagree and from where can i start ?!! thank in advanced .
edit :
there is a google groups post that i send my question in Android-platform . if you prefer please join this group and active that post to ask any question related to 'galaxy s compile from source ' .
post located at http://groups.google.com/group/android-platform/browse_thread/thread/da5d6f18f3bd3c9b
Hi!
I just want to vent my anger
Has anybody noticed that there are a minimum of four "parties" that work on an android kernel tree?
First there is the android open source project.
Then there is the CodeArora project.
There is also a kernel tree at Cyanogenmod.
And last but not least we have the "manufacturer" kernel tree.
AOSP has got a common tree and an individual tree for each architecture- just like Cyanogenmod.
CodeAurora has got multiple(!) trees for a single architecture.
The manufacturer seems to use some of CodeAurora's trees in the majority of cases.
Ah- I forgot the "original" linux kernel tree
This way we never get the most efficient and most stable kernel.
Just my two cents
you're right, but not only the kernel is used. LG takes code from codeaurora project - have seen this in code from the frameworks base tree^^
but on the other side: better they use community code as own code that didn't works perfect
WTF? LG really takes his sources from CodeAurora?!?!?
Well since code aurora is dedicated to qualcomm SoCs if i were a kernel developer i wud start with that tree..one question though does codeaurora contain gb kernel (.35) source for our msm7227 ??? u guys checked it out ???even if they theres a lot of other hardware that are going to need proprietary drivers i guess... THird world peripherals make porting tougher.. its just my take correct me if i m wrong
sarfaraz1989 said:
Well since code aurora is dedicated to qualcomm SoCs if i were a kernel developer i wud start with that tree..one question though does codeaurora contain gb kernel (.35) source for our msm7227 ??? u guys checked it out ???even if they theres a lot of other hardware that are going to need proprietary drivers i guess... THird world peripherals make porting tougher.. its just my take correct me if i m wrong
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
my kernel patches are taken from the codeaurora .35 source, but i can't adopt the complete kernel. there is a "must understand" and "must have many time" to do that
andy572 said:
my kernel patches are taken from the codeaurora .35 source, but i can't adopt the complete kernel. there is a "must understand" and "must have many time" to do that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is exactly the problem!
I cannot really judge which patch from which tree is good- because I have not the time to read through Qualcomm's manuals (if they are public at all) and the kernel source.
If they would concentrate on one tree everything would be fine (ok- if you look at the "chaos commits" in the git repositories you become sick )
@caveman u working on a P500 kernel ??? how is porting so friggin easy for HTC devices..Do they have open source driver /generic hardware or what i mean a few of em even got a honeycomb partial port forget 2.3 ....
sarfaraz1989 said:
@caveman u working on a P500 kernel ??? how is porting so friggin easy for HTC devices..Do they have open source driver /generic hardware or what i mean a few of em even got a honeycomb partial port forget 2.3 ....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LG have some specific (old) hardware - they are using qualcomm hardware, but it's to old for newer kernel sources. the other problem is low cost hardware like the display - ms6000 is never used today, new devices are using samsung displays.
look at the wlan/smd chip - bcm4325 is never supported, bcm4329 is newer and is in kernel .38 too ... do you know, what i mean?
old hardware drivers are rare in kernels - never used drivers gets removed from tree, so there is no chance to bring it back.
ofcourse that's why it's called EVOLUTION
so it looks like u were right about getting a new phone
ciolnadu said:
ofcourse that's why it's called EVOLUTION
so it looks like u were right about getting a new phone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes, it's marketing strategy and its ok - but why should i buy me a new device, when my is doing a good job?
andy572 said:
but why should i buy me a new device, when my is doing a good job?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 agreed 100% with andy.
andy572 said:
LG have some specific (old) hardware - they are using qualcomm hardware, but it's to old for newer kernel sources. the other problem is low cost hardware like the display - ms6000 is never used today, new devices are using samsung displays.
look at the wlan/smd chip - bcm4325 is never supported, bcm4329 is newer and is in kernel .38 too ... do you know, what i mean?
old hardware drivers are rare in kernels - never used drivers gets removed from tree, so there is no chance to bring it back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you mean the drivers sources were in the old kernel and are removed in the new one? If so, I mean we have the old sources, why is it so difficult to port them to the new kernel sources? I am not a kernel developer so probably I am missing something
rivett said:
Do you mean the drivers sources were in the old kernel and are removed in the new one? If so, I mean we have the old sources, why is it so difficult to port them to the new kernel sources? I am not a kernel developer so probably I am missing something
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
code isn't moved but deleted.
Has anybody found out the CodeAurora git commit on which LG's V10r is based on?
Hello,
So far, I have:
A working Android build environment (Ubuntu 11.10 x64).
Managed to build, install and boot AOSP on my Nexus S. (I have downloaded but not attempted to build CM7 yet.)
Created a Github account.
Samsung's open source files for my target device, the Galaxy Gio GT-S5660M.
I've read some documentation and forum posts about Github, but I remain unsure as to what I should do to fork in a way that:
I'll be able to keep on syncing the remainder of the code.
My new device directories and modifications could be brought back (pulled?) to the main CM7 code base.
Will avoid needless frustrating re-downloads of the source code.
Thanks in advance,
Darkshado
After some further reading, I'm beginning to grasp some git basics...
I've forked two CM7 repos so far, added them as remotes in the appropriate installations. (Instead of forking and cloning, since I already had repo sync'ed the whole CM7 source. My commits show up on Github like they should, and I should be able to merge in commits to the origin remotes.)
I'm not going to do any pull requests until I've managed to build and boot.
By the way, yesterday I attempted to build AOSP with a bunch of files overwritten by the Samsung sources (that's how they tell you to do it!!) and this failed, as I expected.
Goodbye,
Darkshado
Update: I'm currently trying to port CM7 to the Gio 5660M. Still attempting a first successful build as I'm writing these lines.
My main issue so far has to do with the camera. I get the following error message:
make: *** No rule to make target « out/target/product/gio5660M/obj/lib/libcamera.so », needed by « out/target/product/gio5660M/obj/SHARED_LIBRARIES/libcameraservice_intermediates/LINKED/libcameraservice.so ». Stop.
After toggling off the camera by using the stub, I hit the same error further into the build with this:
make: *** No rule to make target « vendor/samsung/gio5660M/proprietary/wifi/ath6k/AR6003/hw2.0/athtcmd_ram.bin », needed by « out/target/product/gio5660M/system/wifi/ath6k/AR6003/hw2.0/athtcmd_ram.bin ». Stop.
I know this has to do with makefiles, but that's about it...
Thanks in advance for any help,
Darkshado
hi i'm interested too.
hi I found your github because I also interested poriting cyanogemod to galaxy gio korea(SHW-M290K). the device hardware is different from s5660. so I need some modification.
and your libcamera problem is that there is some reason that the make system can't find libcamera.so, so they cannot compile libcamera service. it should be in ./vendor/samsung/gio/proprietary according to your extract-files.sh .
have one cuorisity. I searched gio android device make file. and none of them are relreased source code. how did you make them?
I found this information. it may help you.
http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/TI-Android-GingerBread-2.3.4-DevKit-2.1_PortingGuides
I'll have to update my Github, hadn't been in a rush due to lack of progress, but now my problem lies with libaudio instead.
I got the Samsung sources for the 5660M on their open source website, although I mostly worked with the CM7 ports for similar devices like Tass and Cooper as well as a Gio source provided by Phiexz but it didn't build either.
Thanks for the link, I'll check it out.
proprietary does not help
do you have any progress since last time?
well, I admit that proprietary files does not help.
does your s5660m hardware identical to s5660v?
becasuse galaxy gio in Korea(shw-m290k,shw-m290s) does different hardware.
well in this case, like me, you need to hack into not only android pdk, but also android kenel.
I have seen that phiexz has released kernel with latest cyanogenmod kenel in his github and I am modifing it to shw-m290k. there are some hardware differences i have to apply to.
I suggest you to compare phiexz's kernel and samsung original kernel from samsung opensource homepage.
My problem right now is that I don't have that much spare time to put into this, and that I'm very much learning as I go, so progress is not always that quick. Also, I'd like to get my Touchwiz based ROM updated and working properly before trying to build AOSP or CM again.
Another thing I want to try is building the kernel (probably based on Phiexz's) that will support ext4, and compare performance of the Touchwiz ROM on ext4 versus RFS.
As far as we can tell, GT-S5660 (Europe/Asia) GT-S5660M, L and V are identical except for the radio firmware. People with the 5660M initially encountered issues after flashing 5660 ROMs because they also contained the AMSS image.
my cyanogen kernel is based on samsung open source kernel
because cm-kernel on cyanogenmod github dont support our device, if we wnt use that kernel we must add some hardware pofile & board for galaxy gio
so alternative is make samsung's open source kernel compatible with cyanogenmod
Wouldn't it be much better from a code maintainability standpoint to make the CM kernel work on the Gio? (Also if you ever hope to get official CM team support, that's a given.)
The way I understand repo and git, you could create a github repo for your device and board configs and add those to your repo manifest so the whole CM7 source and your modifications all sync properly.
I've forked the CM7 manifest files off github, added my gio files and removed all those extra devices I didn't need, so my repo syncs are much faster too. (The idea comes from http://slightlymorethanworthless.blogspot.com/2011/05/remove-unwanted-devices-from.html)
hey a quick question...
just starting out here..
i'm on win7 32 bit, going to run ubuntu on virtualbox.
shud i choose ubuntu 32 bit or 64?
sorry for OT.
doesn't really matter
roofrider said:
hey a quick question...
just starting out here..
i'm on win7 32 bit, going to run ubuntu on virtualbox.
shud u choose ubuntu 32 bit or 64?
sorry for OT.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
doesn't really matter. but compiling process needs much cpu power. so 64x would be better.
Well, im not a dev or a user of gt5660m, but good luck to you, hope u can finally port it
Sent from the GUN in my pants
darkshado, if you have same problem untill now.
http://strazzere.com/blog/?p=220
look this page. and check out koush's proprietary page. especially for samsung cooper(galaxy ace). because many of kernel procedure are same for gio.
https://github.com/coolya/android_device_samsung_cooper.git
https://github.com/koush/proprietary_vendor_samsung
i've upload galaxy gio source + proprietary files for galaxy gio
please see & help to fix some problem
github.com/phiexz
Darkshado said:
Hello,
So far, I have:
A working Android build environment (Ubuntu 11.10 x64).
Managed to build, install and boot AOSP on my Nexus S. (I have downloaded but not attempted to build CM7 yet.)
Created a Github account.
Samsung's open source files for my target device, the Galaxy Gio GT-S5660M.
I've read some documentation and forum posts about Github, but I remain unsure as to what I should do to fork in a way that:
I'll be able to keep on syncing the remainder of the code.
My new device directories and modifications could be brought back (pulled?) to the main CM7 code base.
Will avoid needless frustrating re-downloads of the source code.
Thanks in advance,
Darkshado
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really the best kernel for your phone is here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1991020
BLN enabled, optimized&stable kernel, jelly bean look
Whoa! Zombie thread!
Dude: the ROM you linked was published over a year after my original post in this thread. I'm pretty sure there was NO CM7 build available for the Gio back then. That's what I was trying to work on, but got beat to the punch by Maclaw and a couple others. (Hard-bricking my Gio and having a sluggish laptop to build on didn't help.)
Besides, I got rid of my Gio a long time ago. I enjoy my Note 2 and keep my Nexus S as backup.
After seeing that the Galaxy Nexus is so far running kernel 3.0.1, I was wondering if it is possible to update current kernels on existing devices to a 3.x kernel. I have a little experience in at least successfully upgrading Debian to 3.1 kernel, but compiling for android is a bit different it seems.
On my G2x, which is running 2.6.32.45, I attempted to compile a 3.1 kernel, and it refused to boot into CM7. I followed the CM kernel compilation guide, but to no avail. Would this most likely be due just to error on my part during compilation or configuration, or do I need to wait for LG to make their own 3.x kernel based ROM to derive the proper drivers?
Is it even possible at all to "upgrade" to a higher kernel version if the phone manufacturer has not done so themselves already? Thanks for any input!
Yes, you will have to wait until LG releases their version. No, its not possible to upgrade to a higher kernel version if the phone manufacturer has not done so themselves (you could try to compile one based on a higher version but that would have to be from some other manufacturer and most likely it will not work). To answer your title question, yes, it most likely will be done in higher versions of android.
Theonew said:
Yes, you will have to wait until LG releases their version. No, its not possible to upgrade to a higher kernel version if the phone manufacturer has not done so themselves (you could try to compile one based on a higher version but that would have to be from some other manufacturer and most likely it will not work). To answer your title question, yes, it most likely will be done in higher versions of android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for replying so quickly and concisely!
That is a bit disappointing, but realistic I suppose. In the 3.1 kernel changelog there were a ton of Tegra based changes/fixes, so I figured I'd try it out on the Tegra based G2X. What is it that the newer kernels are missing that severely hinders upgrades on android as oppose to desktop (x86?) platforms?
In more realistic terms, the most likely way of being able to jump up to a higher kernel would be say, using the 3.0.1 kernel from the Galaxy Nexus dump as the source and use a current 2.6.32 config with it? I might try it out if it's a little more likely!
hobbla said:
Thank you for replying so quickly and concisely!
That is a bit disappointing, but realistic I suppose. In the 3.1 kernel changelog there were a ton of Tegra based changes/fixes, so I figured I'd try it out on the Tegra based G2X. What is it that the newer kernels are missing that severely hinders upgrades on android as oppose to desktop (x86?) platforms?
In more realistic terms, the most likely way of being able to jump up to a higher kernel would be say, using the 3.0.1 kernel from the Galaxy Nexus dump as the source and use a current 2.6.32 config with it? I might try it out if it's a little more likely!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The newer kernels aren't missing anything. In fact, they have many more features, optimizations, and fixes which do not allow them to work on earlier versions of android.
More likely yes, but still, it most likely will not work (since these earlier version of android won't support all what higher kernels and android versions support).
hobbla said:
After seeing that the Galaxy Nexus is so far running kernel 3.0.1, I was wondering if it is possible to update current kernels on existing devices to a 3.x kernel. I have a little experience in at least successfully upgrading Debian to 3.1 kernel, but compiling for android is a bit different it seems.
On my G2x, which is running 2.6.32.45, I attempted to compile a 3.1 kernel, and it refused to boot into CM7. I followed the CM kernel compilation guide, but to no avail. Would this most likely be due just to error on my part during compilation or configuration, or do I need to wait for LG to make their own 3.x kernel based ROM to derive the proper drivers?
Is it even possible at all to "upgrade" to a higher kernel version if the phone manufacturer has not done so themselves already? Thanks for any input!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just ported this 3.1 kernel last night. I took the Linaro 3.1 Linux kernel, and integrated ashmem, pmem, binder, and lowmemorykiller.
http :// i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj141/landcruiserfjz80/kernel/2011-11-09_09-39-08_429.jpg
forcedinductionz said:
Just ported this 3.1 kernel last night. I took the Linaro 3.1 Linux kernel, and integrated ashmem, pmem, binder, and lowmemorykiller.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Care to upload it?
Theonew said:
Care to upload it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's for an OMAP3 platform. If you are looking to port a Tegra 2 BSP to a 3.1 kernel i'd be willing to help get it going.
forcedinductionz said:
It's for an OMAP3 platform. If you are looking to port a Tegra 2 BSP to a 3.1 kernel i'd be willing to help get it going.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be great! I've never considered Linaro before. From reading up on it, it seems to be an optimized kernel for ARM (and other mobile CPUs)? You might have to make a tutorial on how to customize your own kernel
hobbla said:
That would be great! I've never considered Linaro before. From reading up on it, it seems to be an optimized kernel for ARM (and other mobile CPUs)? You might have to make a tutorial on how to customize your own kernel
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm about to deliver some Android changes to this tree. If you are serious about supporting Tegra2 please point me to your current kernel's source code. I'll begin porting the BSP and drivers.
https :// github.com/EmbeddedAndroid/linaro-android-3.1
forcedinductionz said:
I'm about to deliver some Android changes to this tree. If you are serious about supporting Tegra2 please point me to your current kernel's source code. I'll begin porting the BSP and drivers.
https :// github.com/EmbeddedAndroid/linaro-android-3.1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This looks great! Would you be including the Tegra 2 BSP and drivers into the embedded kernel? I (and any other Tegra device owners) really appreciate the help!
Here's the source for the device I have; LG G2X (P999) with a Tegra 250 (sorry about mediafire, LG doesn't allow hotlinking):
http :// www.mediafire.com/?9zt7suw7nivbr7o
If we wanted this to work on a Cyanogenmod based kernel, I guess you'd have to look at the Cyanogen Git. Here's the the P999 cyanogen git:
https :// github.com/CyanogenMod/android_device_lge_p999
You can look at getting set up with it easily here, I believe:
http :// wiki.cyanogenmod.com/wiki/Building_Kernel_from_source
Thank you for helping! If there's anything else I can help with, or resources you could post that would allow me to help you better that'd be great.
I am pulling down the sources now. It's been a busy week getting ICS up and running but now I have some time to play. I'll keep you posted on my progress.
How it's goin'?
forcedinductionz said:
I am pulling down the sources now. It's been a busy week getting ICS up and running but now I have some time to play. I'll keep you posted on my progress.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds great! Again, if there's anything we can assist you with just let us know. Or, outlining the steps you're taking could allow us to help in the future
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App
Is everything OK?