Android Boot Process? - Android Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting

I'm not a software engineer, I'm a retired hardware engineer that's messed around with enough software and OS's to be dangerous (mostly to myself), but I make no claim to really understand any modern OS.
I've always set the boundary of how much detail I want to deal with at the Windows Taskmanager level which in the case of Android is the Running Process/Cached Background level. I require a basic understanding of all the processes and services that are ostensibly operating on my behalf on any and all devices I supposedly own.
I don't begrudge companies like Microsoft, Google, Samsung and others doing their business, in fact I encourage them to do so, however, I do object to their forcing me to run processes and services that are far more beneficial to them than they are to me. But luckily I don't have to. I have my own launcher, keyboard and set of apps and tools that I can load on pretty much any generic android device and it will pretty much do what I want.
The prime offender in my opinion is Google Play Services. It runs 17 services on my devices most of which my only understanding is a couple words in Running Services but I'm pretty sure are not something I want. In general I keep Google Play Services uninstalled (--user 0) except for when I install or update something from the Play Store after which it's promptly uninstalled. Any app or portion thereof which is non-functional without Play Services installed is either ignored or uninstalled. I've also uninstalled (--user 0) over 240 pieces of Samsung bloatware.
With the above I mind I've been using a handful of Android tablets (Meize, Tabuta, Cwowdefu, Onn and others) which all had their idiosyncrasies but all behaved similarly. Specifically they all seemed to go through a minimal boot process leaving a handful of previously active apps in the cached background all of which went away once I selected a 0 Background Process Limit in Developer Options.
Anyway these were all pretty cheap tablets and I needed to get a top line phone to get the best screen, battery and multitasking support so I recently bought a Samsung Galaxy Fold3, Flip3, Tab A7 lite and Tab 8 to try out and they boot up differently than the close to a dozen tablets I've tried. First off the Samsung devices seem to cycle ALL installed (including system) apps (even disabled apps) through Running Processes to the Cached Background and left them there ignoring the Kill Background Processes and Limit Background Processes settings in Developer Options. Note there have always been a few apps like Nova7 that prefer to operate in the Cached Background but previous to getting the Samsung's, Nova7 and sometimes Android Core Apps were the only ones. The Samsung's literally had hundreds of apps in the Cached Background before I uninstalled over 240 of them off the Fold3. Now at least it pretty much only cycles through apps I've installed and will begrudgingly delete them all but only after I set a 0 background cache limit and manually delete each one except for Nova7 and sometimes Android Core Apps.
Can anyone help me understand what's going on here?

I read your post with care, but I admit that I don't understand what you are asking.

TL;DR Why Samsung runs too much bloat in background?

ze7zez said:
I read your post with care, but I admit that I don't understand what you are asking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your response. Ultimately I'm asking for someone that understands the sequence of actions that Android goes through each time a device boots up to explain the process to me.
I understand this is a somewhat abstract, open ended and difficult question.
I basically described two methods of booting. The first method is as described above used by the Meize, Tabuta, Cwowdefu and Onn tablets where the boot process only cycles through a handful of system apps (Settings, Keyboard, Launcher, Android Core Apps, etc.) during bootup and then obeys the "Don't Keep Activities" and "Background Process Limit" Developer Options settings.
The 2nd boot method I described was how all 4 Samsung devices I mentioned worked where the boot process seemed to cycle through pretty much every app installed on the device and then the "Don't Keep Activities" and "Background Process Limit" Developer Options settings are pretty much ignored.
These two boot sequences are not consistent. Can each device vendor just do whatever they want and if so is there anything I can do about it? Would rooting the Samsung devices help?

alecxs said:
TL;DR Why Samsung runs too much bloat in background?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because they can.
In Samsung's defense bloat is very subjective. One person's bloatware is another person's favorite and most useful function. But with that said in general all 4 Samsung devices had 4 or 5 times more of what I consider bloat than any other vendors with which I have experience.

alecxs said:
TL;DR Why Samsung runs too much bloat in background?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I followed the *** read before you post *** link and that is exactly what I'm trying to do which is to understand the why behind the way things work so that eventually I can figure it out myself.

Mumblefratz said:
I followed the *** read before you post *** link and that is exactly what I'm trying to do which is to understand the why behind the way things work so that eventually I can figure it out myself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Things like the bootloader and kernel are loaded, which are required to because otherwise the system cannot even be booted.

there is much stuff but basically you are interested in OS? what comes after linux kernel and init?
Service Manager -> Zygote -> System Server?

Minionguyjpro said:
Things like the bootloader and kernel are loaded, which are required to because otherwise the system cannot even be booted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK. But what happens after that? What decides which apps get loaded as active as listed in Running Services in Developer Options? Is there any way for me change which apps get started or to stop apps from being started in the first place? Again, would rooting the phone give me any additional control on which apps are started and which aren't?

Mumblefratz said:
OK. But what happens after that? What decides which apps get loaded as active as listed in Running Services in Developer Options? Is there any way for me change which apps get started or to stop apps from being started in the first place? Again, would rooting the phone give me any additional control on which apps are started and which aren't?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Multiple things, although I not know all the things. You could try what @alecxs said.

alecxs said:
there is much stuff but basically you are interested in OS? what comes after linux kernel and init?
Service Manager -> Zygote -> System Server?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're not kidding when you say "there is much stuff".
I'm interested in what decides which processes and services are started as listed under Running Services in Developer Options and which aren't.

Will look into google sources later, that is always the best documentation. here is just a quick overview for now.
Note: I am a layman in this.
https://elinux.org/Android_Zygote_Startup

alecxs said:
Will look into google sources later, that is always the best documentation. here is just a quick overview for now.
Note: I am a layman in this.
https://elinux.org/Android_Zygote_Startup
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the link that's all very helpful information.
I thought I was the layman in this but if you're a layman than on a relative scale I'm a clueless noob.
I have nowhere near the level of understanding I would need to start messing around with the Android Boot Process but I find that every time I boot up an Android I go through a process of setting a number of Developer Options settings, stopping a few processes and services listed under Running Services and even sometimes clearing an apps cache and data storage to stop it from misbehaving.
I'm guessing I could accomplish what I want with an init.rc type script that kills a few unwanted processes, maybe start a process I want, set a couple Developer Options settings, and, maybe clear an apps data storage. I assume doing something like this would require root but I'm not sure that even then I'll be able to do what I want.
I'm pretty close to feeling confident enough to attempt rooting my 2nd best phone (the Flip3). If I brick it, oh well. But before I make the attempt I'd like to have some assurance that I'll be somehow able to do the things I described in the paragraph above.

of course, messing with OS would require root. however, on US/Canada devices bootloader unlocking is not allowed.
you can run startup script with such app (no root) or automate tasks with Macrodroid, Tasker, Automate etc. (no root)
init.d scripts support - Apps on Google Play
We allow init.d scripts for non rooted users or kernels that don't support
play.google.com
you can debloat by just disabling packages. however, be prepared for factory reset is the only way to undo in case you accidentally disabled essential packages (no root)
How to uninstall carrier/OEM bloatware without root access
If you want to get rid of carrier/OEM apps from your phone, here's how you can uninstall bloatware from your device without root access!
www.xda-developers.com
any open source GUI adb tool for macos can disable/delete bloatware?
list apps and delete/disable each of them by issuing command is boring. anyone knows any open source lightweight gui tool to do so? thanks
forum.xda-developers.com
regarding boot, read the comments in SystemServer.java

alecxs said:
of course, messing with OS would require root. however, on US/Canada devices bootloader unlocking is not allowed.
you can run startup script with such app (no root) or automate tasks with Macrodroid, Tasker, Automate etc. (no root)
init.d scripts support - Apps on Google Play
We allow init.d scripts for non rooted users or kernels that don't support
play.google.com
you can debloat by just disabling packages. however, be prepared for factory reset is the only way to undo in case you accidentally disabled essential packages (no root)
How to uninstall carrier/OEM bloatware without root access
If you want to get rid of carrier/OEM apps from your phone, here's how you can uninstall bloatware from your device without root access!
www.xda-developers.com
any open source GUI adb tool for macos can disable/delete bloatware?
list apps and delete/disable each of them by issuing command is boring. anyone knows any open source lightweight gui tool to do so? thanks
forum.xda-developers.com
regarding boot, read the comments in SystemServer.java
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That sounds very good. We just need to wait for Mumble...

I think it's what he already did in past.

alecxs said:
there is much stuff but basically you are interested in OS? what comes after linux kernel and init?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With today's 32/64 Android it's more like:
Code:
PBL (primary boot loader in ROM)
└── xbl (secondary boot loader)
└── abl (Android boot loader)
└── kernel
└── init (PID 1)
├── /system/bin/app_process64 (zygote64)
│ ├── system_server
│ └── most user applications
├── /system/bin/app_process (zygote)
│ └── only user applications with user libs that are only supplied in armeabi-v7a
├── adbd
└── other init services
I think that the Pixel 7 doesn't run the 32 bit zygote by default.

yes, that is also explained here. but it's too early. I wouldn't call it Android Boot process.
[INFO] BOOT PROCESS: ANDROID vs. LINUX
NOTE: I'm not a developer or Android expert. All information provided here is copied from different internet sources and is to the best of my knowledge. I'll not be responsible for any harm to you or your device resulting from this. 1. PC BOOT...
forum.xda-developers.com
Reverse Engineering Android Boot Process - Need Help
Tl;dr = I have studied the boot process. I understand the Qualcomm SOC boot process PBL > SBL/XBL > And so on. I am trying to get a disassembly of the SBL. I dumped the EMMC and can view all its partitions. Now I am stuck at the 80 bytes header...
forum.xda-developers.com

alecxs said:
yes, that is also explained here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh, yeah, there's tons of stuff going on.
And that's not even touching the Baseband Processor (modem, radio) or TrustZone.
I was amazed at how much stuff is going on in xbl.
See: https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/...tloader-packing-signing.4473815/post-88159647
My diagram above is more like "dominoes falling" than details.

More to the point for Android users, it's important to make clear (if they don't know it already) that the Android "subsystem" is just a minor feature on top of Linux.
If you're rooted the command stop something can be used to stop any init service, like adbd, vold.
With just plain stop it will stop the zygote(s), which will kill all Android related stuff.
init (and everything else started by it) will happily continue running.
Code:
# ps -e | grep zygote
root 918 1 5434548 89856 poll_schedule_timeout 7d517830c8 S zygote64
root 919 1 1745416 76032 poll_schedule_timeout f079e6e0 S zygote
# stop
# ps -e | grep zygote
# start
Poke3:/ # ps -e | grep zygote
root 6814 1 5434548 92888 poll_schedule_timeout 7d9005f0c8 S zygote64
root 6815 1 1440552 42828 poll_schedule_timeout f41e46e0 S zygote

Related

[Q] Samsung ODE (On Device Encryption)

Has anybody already found out how the On Device Encryption can be activated on this device?
Do you have to add an Exchange server or Afaria ([com.Android.Afaria, which says "this version of the client does not support the Samsung Galaxy S2 AES." at the moment)?
I found some clues in having a Encrypt.apk in /system/app, which uses the permissions "com.sec.android.permission.ENCRYPT" and "android.permission.sec.MDM_SECURITY" and publishes an intent filter for "com.sec.android.app.encrypt.action.ENCRYPT".
There also is a clue in init.rc:
" # SEC_DMCRYPT efs or cache or lfs partition required
exec apply_sec_devenc_init"
Any luck with this? I'm very interested in getting on-device encryption up and running (with-out the need for any server bound tools from MS) and have a Galaxy S II on it's way (should arrive Wed/Thur.
I plan on digging around once I get it, but so far searchers here, Samsung, and through Google have not turned up anything. Only this thread and a lot of marketing junk.
I'm quite interested in this too. From what I've read from Samsung, it seems to be enabled automatically.
Gonna have a deeper look on how it's implemented, but there's really only 2 ways they could do it, at the filesystem level (eg. encrypting per cluster) or at a flash level (eg. encrypting per block).
From what i've heard,,setting up an exchange server will do this automatically,,,m not sure,never tried..
Old thread, don't shoot at me, got new news for old thread
First off, yeah, it's a feature only used when an Exchange policy enforces "device must be enrypted".
Samsung obviously didn't plan on making this feature "publically" accessible by the average user.
I hope they will keep Android 4.0's device encryption feature, as since 3.x it's an official part of Android, just not in 2.3.x or even below - so Sammy really added somthing usually not available here, like the USB OTG/host.
Anyways, I'm at ~85% of having Device Encryption "under my controll", i.e. enabling it without an Exchange account that enforces said policy
(click for larger view)
There will be a few quirks:
must disable the "On Boot Completed" autostart of Encrypt.apk using some app managing app
Will NOT work with most (if not all) custom kernels! If your kernel of choice uses CWM there's a 100% chance it will NOT work. The whole thing (even the "unlock" on boot) depends on the stock recovery being present.
Additional commands (usually symlinks to busybox) in /sbin will also get you stuck in a bootloop
Since /data isn't available unless "unlocked", some things like the language setting will snap back to the default of the ROM you're using.
Only "Password" unlock will be usable when using device encryption as you need to enter it on boot, very early when the OS starts booting up, no pattern unlock or the likes are supported for that.
Apart from that, the SGS2 really becomms a kind of a high-security fortress when using the encryption.
I now need to figure out a few last smaller details and make an idiot-pove app to enable it.
The app is what now will take the most of time XD

[Q] what does rooting actually do ?

hi. i can't believe i'm the first person to ask this but i've searched as best i can through these forums, and on google, and cannot find a definitive answer. there are lots of pages giving high level descriptions of rooting a phone like "gives admin access", "allows access to the root filesystem", etc. but, when you root a phone, what actually happens ? does it simply make the "su" binary available so that apps can call it to access the root user ? eg. i've got a samsung galaxy s2, if i install an insecure kernel, then add su to /system/xbin, and then reinstall a stock kernel, is that technically a rooted phone ? this is actually what i did on my phone, although i installed superuser and busybox from the market after adding su. i am aware that there are various threads in the sgs2 forums on how to root, i'm just using my phone as an example, i'm just trying to understand generically what is meant when someone says a phone has been rooted. cheers.
Full control over your system
Ability to alter system files. You can replace many parts of the "Android Core" with this including:
Themes
Core apps (maps, calendar, clock etc)
Recovery image
Bootloader
Toolbox (linux binary that lets you execute simple linux commands like "ls") can be replaced with Busybox (slightly better option)
Boot images
Add linux binaries
Run special apps that need more control over the system
SuperUser (lets you approve or deny the use of root access to any program)
Task Manager For Root (Lets you kill apps that you otherwise could not kill)
Tether apps (like the one found at [android-wifi-tether.googlecode.com])
<there are more but I cannot think of any right now>
Backup your system
You can make a folder on your sdcard and backup all of your .apk files to your sdcard (helps if an author decides to "upgrade" you to a version that requires you to pay to use the version you just had)
Relocate your (browser/maps/market) cache to your /sdcard
Relocate your installed applications to your /sdcard
Reboot your phone from the terminal app easily (su <enter> reboot <enter>)
Copied and pasted from google... it is your friend.
thanks for the response however, i'm trying to understand what actually changes on the phone when you root it, rather than simply the benefits of rooting a phone.
Carrot Cruncher said:
thanks for the response however, i'm trying to understand what actually changes on the phone when you root it, rather than simply the benefits of rooting a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unrooted phone is like logging on as user in a computer. By rooting you have "administrative" rights, just like using sudo command in Ubuntu. Some binaries which are important in gaining administrative rights are installed in the phone.
sent from my nokia 3210
If you come from Windows, you're familiar with the Administrator account. A user that can do everything on the system, as opposed to other users than only have limited privileges. In Linux, that account is called "root". That's all there is to it. It's a user that can do everything on the system.
@Panos_dm: Actually, it's *not* like using sudo. Sudo gives elevated privileges to your existing user account, whereas "root" is a whole separate account.
Nope, sudo actually switches users
i'm a linux user and have been a linux admin in the past so understand the difference between su and sudo. sorry to sound pedantic but i'm still not clear on exactly what happens when you root a phone, i.e. what exactly happens during the rooting process ?
It opens your phone to a whole new array of possibilities.
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using xda premium
Carrot Cruncher said:
but i'm still not clear on exactly what happens when you root a phone, i.e. what exactly happens during the rooting process ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In a gist? The "su" binary and the Superuser.apk app get installed. Sometimes doing so requires exploiting a vulnerability via a trigger. Rageagainstthecage is a common trigger. I once had a link that explained what exactly rageagainstthecage does, but I don't have it anymore.
If you really want to know all the details, here's the script I used to root my Defy: http://pastebin.com/G3m9v4FQ
Hmm, I see the script contains a link to the explanation of what rageagainstthecage does. Cool.
many thanks for confirming my understanding of the process.

[Q] Android RAM-terms and explanation?

Hi I wanted to see what you guys make of these apps. Does anyone know where I could get a reference guide specifically pertaining to such apps.
Even the "Performance control" feature found in most AOPK Custom Rom's have these weird terms.
Any help would be great.
Here's a picture for reference...sorta
WestxtseW said:
Hi I wanted to see what you guys make of these apps. Does anyone know where I could get a reference guide specifically pertaining to such apps.
Even the "Performance control" feature found in most AOPK Custom Rom's have these weird terms.
Any help would be great.
Here's a picture for reference...sorta
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
init.d -- a system that allows for running services at boot that are not run by the init.rc scripts
swap -- virtual memory. unlike ram, swap is stored on disk/flash storage, and as a result is slower but larger.
dirty -- memory that may need to be written to disk/flash. consider it used.
soft reboot -- a reboot that only restarts high-level system functions (essentially, the android part of android rather than the linux part)
couldn't tell you about the other options in android tweaker. see if it has a help file or similar.
hope it helps!
--ultraviolet
ultravioletnanokitty said:
init.d -- a system that allows for running services at boot that are not run by the init.rc scripts
swap -- virtual memory. unlike ram, swap is stored on disk/flash storage, and as a result is slower but larger.
dirty -- memory that may need to be written to disk/flash. consider it used.
soft reboot -- a reboot that only restarts high-level system functions (essentially, the android part of android rather than the linux part)
couldn't tell you about the other options in android tweaker. see if it has a help file or similar.
hope it helps!
--ultraviolet
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! :good: that's pretty much what I'm looking for; leads that help me get my mind around it a bit more
iglo a109 problem
se.. all of those aren`t checked, when i tried to connect, in the photo, they are like that because it was i made a mistake when i created the print screen, so... i don't see how that's the problem, when i connect my phone and then after 2 sec it disconnects itself and starts charging

SU for Android on ChromeOS

This is a cross-post from a reddit thread I started, but this is probably a more appropriate location for it.
I have been trying to modify files in the system folder for the Android container on the Asus Flip so I can install SuperSu, but have run into some problems.
The system folder is contained in a squashfs image on the chromebook at /opt/google/containers/android/system.raw.img. Mounted squashfs images appear to not support read-write access. I have been able to unsquash the image, add the SuperSU apk to the /system/priv-app folder and su to the /system/xbin folder, and remake the image. This boots, but SuperSU force closes as soon as it starts.
To make tinkering easier, I've tried building a writable image using dd and mkfs. I placed it in a location that has rw access and modified the /etc/init/android-ureadahead.conf script which mounts it to enable rw access. Unfortunately though it won't boot. The boot logs for the android container show a litany of SELinux errors for different things that it could not set context, operation not permitted. I can post the exact log if necessary. Some googling led me to find that the SELinux security context attributes weren't being replicated in my image, so I tried mounting with context and fscontext options equal to the contexts from the original image, but I get the same problem.
If anyone has any ideas I'd be especially grateful.
lionclaw said:
This is a cross-post from a reddit thread I started, but this is probably a more appropriate location for it.
I have been trying to modify files in the system folder for the Android container on the Asus Flip so I can install SuperSu, but have run into some problems.
The system folder is contained in a squashfs image on the chromebook at /opt/google/containers/android/system.raw.img. Mounted squashfs images appear to not support read-write access. I have been able to unsquash the image, add the SuperSU apk to the /system/priv-app folder and su to the /system/xbin folder, and remake the image. This boots, but SuperSU force closes as soon as it starts.
To make tinkering easier, I've tried building a writable image using dd and mkfs. I placed it in a location that has rw access and modified the /etc/init/android-ureadahead.conf script which mounts it to enable rw access. Unfortunately though it won't boot. The boot logs for the android container show a litany of SELinux errors for different things that it could not set context, operation not permitted. I can post the exact log if necessary. Some googling led me to find that the SELinux security context attributes weren't being replicated in my image, so I tried mounting with context and fscontext options equal to the contexts from the original image, but I get the same problem.
If anyone has any ideas I'd be especially grateful.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wayyyy out of my area of expertise, but here's my (completely novice) best guess.
>All Chromebooks are write-protected with a screw on the motherboard
>Putting a Chromebook in developer mode allows for some tinkering ie things like chroots, and on the asus flip, the ability to install apks from unknown sources.
>Unscrewing the write-protect screw allows for the ability to completely install a new operating system or dual boot setup.
>Maybe you need to do that before you're able to accomplish root access?
My other idea would be to try and figure out a way of doing a systemless root?
Also, total aside but since this is the only thread I've found on XDA about this device, I think chroots are theoretically possible now without the need to be in developer mode via Android apps (even without root on Android). Download the GIMP port from the Play Store to see what I'm talking about. Playing around with that for a few minutes really made me wish that it didn't use emulated mouse/keyboard in it's implementation. Also, it appears that apt-get is broken, but regardless it might interest someone out there looking for a project.
back from the dead, any progress on this?
I have been able to successfully root the Android image on my Asus Flip.
I built a blank image with dd in /usr/local, formatted it with mkfs, mounted it to a folder, mounted the original system.raw.img to a folder, copied the files across, placed *all* the SuperSU files listed as 'required' in the SuperSU update-binary in the relevant places in /system in my new image, set permissions & contexts for those files, edited arc-system-mount.conf and arc-ureadahead.conf to point to the new image and, finally, patched /etc/selinux/arc/policy/policy.30 with the SuperSU sepolicy patching tool in order to boot my rooted Android instance with selinux set to enforcing.
I have created a couple of scripts which more-or-less fully automate this procedure, which can be downloaded from nolirium.blogspot.com. Please feel free to download, open the scripts in a text editor to check them out, and try them out if you like. Only tested on Asus Flip, though.
I seem to be unable to post attachments at the moment so I will just add the descriptions here, I could probably post the entire scripts here too if anyone wants. Feel free to let me know what you think.
DESCRIPTIONS:
1-3.sh
Combines the first three scripts listed below.
01Makecontainer.sh
Creates an 900MB filesystem image in /usr/local/Android_Images, formats it, then copies Android system files therein.
02Editconf.sh
Modifies two system files: arc-system-mount.conf - changing the mount-as-read-only flag and replacing the Android system image location with a new location; and arc-ureadahead.conf - again replacing the Android system image location. Originals are renamed .old - copies of which are also placed in /usr/local/Backup.
03Androidroot.sh
Mounts the previously created Android filesystem image to a folder, and copies SuperSU files to the mounted image as specified in the SuperSU update-binary.
04SEpatch.sh
Copies an SELinux policy file found at /etc/selinux/arc/policy/policy.30 to the Downloads folder, opens an Android root shell for the SuperSU policy patching command to be entered, then copies the patched policy back to the original location. A copy of the original policy.30 is saved at /etc/selinux/arc/policy/policy.30.old and /usr/local/Backup/policy.30.old
Uninstall.sh
Removes the folder /usr/local/Android_Images and attempts to restore the modified system files arc-system-mount.conf and arc-ureadahead.conf.
ok so two questions, one do you think this would work on the Acer r13 convertable? and 2 where can I find the actual instructions/scripts
keithkaaos said:
ok so two questions, one do you think this would work on the Acer r13 convertable? and 2 where can I find the actual instructions/scripts
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The R13 has a 64-bit Mediatek processor, right?
I have added a version for ARM64, but I haven't tested it.
You can find the instructions and scripts at nolirium.blogspot.com
ya, its a mediatek. and thanks ill go see if i can find it
---------- Post added at 03:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:58 AM ----------
wow, ok. i can do this but im not sure i want to.. after reading the possible problems i may run into. Im going to be getting the G. Home in a couple weeks and i gotta keep things running smooth. This seems like going a tad too far then i need to. The other day i had action launcher going and it looked pretty damn good but i really want to try and get the action3.apk that i have put into the pri-app folder or whatever the chromebook uses i found the syst folder but cant access it. Im wondering if i make the machine writable it would work but im afraid of losing my updates, as long as i could do them manualy, i guess that would be cool. Also since im already going on... has anyone found a way to disable the dev boot screen without tinkering with the physical chromebook yet?
SuperSU on Chromebook
Hey there I love this post but unfortunately im on the mediatek (well not unfortunately cause i love it) but i do really want super su .. But i found this other post that i tried out but i am having a problem executing the scripts. When i go to run the first one, it says can not open "name of script" but the dev takes a pretty cool approach. Im still new to Chrome OS but thanks for the post and if you have any advice on executing scripts id love to hear it!! http://nolirium.blogspot.com/
I'm guessing the above post was moved from another thread...
Anyway, it turns out that zipping/unzipping the files in Chrome OS's file manager sets all the permissions to read-only. Apologies! sudo chmod+x *scriptname* should fix it...
Regarding OS updates, I actually haven't had a problem receiving auto-updates with software write-protect switched off; the main possible potential issue I could imagine arising from the procedure I outlined would involve restoring the original conf files if both sets of backups get deleted/overwritten. This seems unlikely, but in that case either manually editing the files to insert the original string (/opt/google/containers/android/system.raw.img), or doing a powerwash with forced update might be necessary in order to get the original Android container booting again.
I don't think anyone's found a way to shorten/disable the dev boot screen without removing the hardware write-protect screw - from what I've read, the flags are set in a part of the firmware which is essentially read-only unless the screw is removed. Perhaps at some point the Chrome OS devs will get fed up of reading reports from users whose relatives accidentally reset the device by pressing spacebar, and change the setup. Here's hoping.
Hey just jumpig in the thread right quick to see if these instructions are old or what-- got a chromebook pro and the notion of having to update a squashed filesystem every timeto install su seems like a pain..
Is there any kind of authoritative documentation/breakdown regarding what Chromeos is mounting where before I start breaking things? Also anyone happen to know if there's a write-protect screw anywhere in the chromebook plus/pro?
Other questions:
* adbd is running, but is not accessible from adb in the (linux) shell, which shows no devices. Do I need to access adb from another device (i'm short a usb c cable right now) or can I use adb (which is there!) on the chrome side to access adbd on the android side?
* Anyone know if adb via tcp/ip is available? Don't see it in the android settings.
Hey,
There's no real documentation AFAIK, the thing is that ARC++ is a bit of a moving target, as it's so actively being developed/reworked. For instance, with the method described earlier in the thread - it started off being possible to just swap out a file location in arc-ureadahead.conf, then they changed it to arc-setup-conf, and now, since a few CrOS versions ago, the rootfs squashfs image is mounted in a loop fashion via the /usr/sbin/arc-setup binary instead, making an overview of the setup somewhat opaque to the casual observer.
I was kind of hoping to implement a kind of hybrid systemless root style setup myself, but unfortunately I haven't really managed to find the time to sit down and fully figure out a few parts of the puzzle, in particular relating to minijail and working with namespaces. So, I'm still using the method mentioned in posts above for my rooting needs at the moment, the only significant changes being that at the moment I'm replacing /opt/google/containers.android.system.raw.img with a symlink to my writeable rooted rootfs img, and also that in recent CrOS versions the mount-as-read only and debuggable flags can be found in /etc/init/arc-setup-env ("Environment variables for /usr/sbin/arc-setup").
In general though, one can kind of get an idea of what's going on in the default setup by reading through the various /etc/init/arc-* Chrome OS upstart jobs (and their logs in /var/log). Though, like I say, things keep changing around somewhat with every CrOS update, as the implementation 'improves'. As time goes by, and the subsystem matures, it'll certainly be interesting to see what other approaches are possible relating to customizing Android on Chrome OS.
There should definitely be a write protect screw somewhere on the motherboard for the Samsungs, but so far I haven't come across any pics showing exactly which screw it is. So far, no-one seems to have been brave/foolhardy enough to fully tear down their own machine and locate the screw!
Regarding adb, on my device I found the following in arc-setup-env:
# The IPV4 address of the container.
export ARC_CONTAINER_IPV4_ADDRESS=100.115.92.2/30
adb 100.115.92.2 (in Chrome OS's shell) works fine for me, the authorisation checkbox pops up and then good to go. su works fine through adb as expected. There's also a useful little nsenter script in Chrome OS to get into the android shell; /usr/sbin/android-sh, which I've been using in my script to help patch SE linux.
I actually just updated my rooting scripts recently to support 7.1.1, though I've only tested on my own Armv7 device (Flip C100).
I'll attach them to this post in case anyone wants to take a look. There's a readme in the zip, some more details can also be found here and below
EDIT: Fixed the SE Linux issue occurring with the previous version I uploaded (it was launching daemonsu from u:r:init:s0 instead of u:r:supersu:s0).
Anyone considering giving them a spin should bear in mind that the method does involve creating a fairly large file on the device as a rooted copy of the android rootfs. (1GB for arm, 1.4GB for Intel). There's a readme in the zip but the other couple of important points are that:
a) The SuperSU 2.82 SR1 zip also needs to be downloaded and extracted to ~/Downloads on the Chromebook.
b) Rootfs verification needs to be off. The command to force this is:
Code:
sudo /usr/share/vboot/bin/make_dev_ssd.sh --remove_rootfs_verification --force --partitions $(( $(rootdev -s | sed -r 's/.*(.)$/\1/') - 1))
or the regular command to do it is:
Code:
sudo /usr/share/vboot/bin/make_dev_ssd.sh --remove_rootfs_verification
c) If, subsequent to running the scripts, there's a problem loading Android apps (e.g. after a powerwash or failed install), the command to restore the original rootfs image is:
Code:
sudo mv /opt/google/containers/android/system.raw.img.bk /opt/google/containers/android/system.raw.img
Hey this is a great response.. thanks!
Nolirum said:
Hey,
There's no real documentation AFAIK, the thing is that ARC++ is a bit of a moving target, as it's so actively being developed/reworked. For instance, with the method described earlier in the thread - it started off being possible to just swap out a file location in arc-ureadahead.conf, then they changed it to arc-setup-conf, and now, since a few CrOS versions ago, the rootfs squashfs image is mounted in a loop fashion via the /usr/sbin/arc-setup binary instead, making an overview of the setup somewhat opaque to the casual observer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
verity
Yeah playing with it now, I'm looking at these /etc/init/arc-*-conf files... I see that the /dev/loop# files are being set up... (more below)
Nolirum said:
I was kind of hoping to implement a kind of hybrid systemless root style setup myself, but unfortunately I haven't really managed to find the time to sit down and fully figure out a few parts of the puzzle, in particular relating to minijail and working with namespaces. So, I'm still using the method mentioned in posts above for my rooting needs at the moment, the only significant changes being that at the moment I'm replacing /opt/google/containers.android.system.raw.img with a symlink to my writeable rooted rootfs img, and also that in recent CrOS versions the mount-as-read only and debuggable flags can be found in /etc/init/arc-setup-env ("Environment variables for /usr/sbin/arc-setup").
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry not sure what you mean by "hybrid systemless root style setup"? I take it you're modifying the startup script and replaced the squashfs file in /opt... my concern about doing it was whether they were implementing some kind of dm-verity equivalent to the squashfs file to make sure it hasn't been tampered with (say, by adding /sbin/su or whatever) or whether it's safe to replace that file.. Sounds like you're saying it is? (update: I guess that's what rootfs verification does, and we can turn it off....)
Also you mean arc-setup.conf:
env ANDROID_DEBUGGABLE = 0
right?
Nolirum said:
In general though, one can kind of get an idea of what's going on in the default setup by reading through the various /etc/init/arc-* Chrome OS upstart jobs (and their logs in /var/log). Though, like I say, things keep changing around somewhat with every CrOS update, as the implementation 'improves'. As time goes by, and the subsystem matures, it'll certainly be interesting to see what other approaches are possible relating to customizing Android on Chrome OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hadn't realized the boot was still in flux-- I'd have figured they'd worked that out by now...
Nolirum said:
There should definitely be a write protect screw somewhere on the motherboard for the Samsungs, but so far I haven't come across any pics showing exactly which screw it is. So far, no-one seems to have been brave/foolhardy enough to fully tear down their own machine and locate the screw!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Heh.. not gonna be me..
Nolirum said:
Regarding adb, on my device I found the following in arc-setup-env:
# The IPV4 address of the container.
export ARC_CONTAINER_IPV4_ADDRESS=100.115.92.2/30
adb 100.115.92.2 (in Chrome OS's shell) works fine for me, the authorisation checkbox pops up and then good to go. su works fine through adb as expected. There's also a useful little nsenter script in Chrome OS to get into the android shell; /usr/sbin/android-sh, which I've been using in my script to help patch SE linux.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool-- adb connect 100.115.92.2 does indeed work I was gonna use netcat to open port 5555 in chromeos and pipe it through, but looks like nc isn't here and I'm not yet ready to start changing the FS..though probably will be soon... btw any idea which partitions get overwritten when chrome it does it's updates? Will /root and /etc get overwritten, for example... would a "powerwash" overwrite it or can you get easily get into an unbootable state on these things?
It's also kind of strange that adb is listening to port 30 at that (internal?) bridge address by default witho no UI to turn it off.. and it's inaccessible from outside.. i wonder if there's an easy way to change the bridge to share the same IP as the actual interface...
Final thought-- I'd love to build that system image myself soup-to-nuts, but I can't find any "caroline" device tree set up... do you or anyone else happen to know if there's a standalone AOSP device tree for the chromebooks? It would be cool to have a mashup AOSP/lineageos if such a think could be possible-- I'm guessing chromiumos is just taking the android tree, building it and then adding it into their build... I Haven't build chromiumos for many years now so I can't even begin to imagine how this android build integrates with the whole emerge thing they had going.. but I bet it takes a while
Nolirum said:
I actually just updated my rooting scripts recently to support 7.1.1, though I've only tested on my own Armv7 device (Flip C100).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool I'll take a look at these scripts.
So I haven't yet run the scripts-- just looking through them-- I noticed the section starting:
if [ -e /etc/init/arc-setup-env ]; then
echo "Copying /etc/init/arc-setup-env to /usr/local/Backup"
This doesn't exist on the x86 CB Pro. There's an arc-setup.conf that sets up the environment variables though. It sets WRITABLE_MOUNT to 0, but then so does arc-system-mount.conf
Not sure if these are different between x86 and ARM or if it's just in the latest update.. but figured I'd let you know. Wanna throw thse scripts up on github somewhere? (Or I can do it) and we can maybe look at keeping them up to date and/or standardizing them? It wouldn't be hard to determine if it's running on ARM or x86_64 (uname -i for example)..
fattire said:
So I haven't yet run the scripts-- just looking through them-- I noticed the section starting:
if [ -e /etc/init/arc-setup-env ]; then
echo "Copying /etc/init/arc-setup-env to /usr/local/Backup"
This doesn't exist on the x86 CB Pro. There's an arc-setup.conf that sets up the environment variables though. It sets WRITABLE_MOUNT to 0, but then so does arc-system-mount.conf
Not sure if these are different between x86 and ARM or if it's just in the latest update.. but figured I'd let you know. Wanna throw thse scripts up on github somewhere? (Or I can do it) and we can maybe look at keeping them up to date and/or standardizing them? It wouldn't be hard to determine if it's running on ARM or x86_64 (uname -i for example)..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh, the arc-setup-env thing is intentional. There does appear to be another issue with the x86 version though. I've written up a detailed response to your previous post; it's in a text file at the moment so I'll copy it over and format it for posting here with quotes etc now - should only take a few minutes. Yeah, sticking them on github might be a good idea; I've been meaning to create an account over there anyway.
Yeah, so... Regarding the scripts, since I've put them up here for people to download - I should mention that the first person to test them (aside from me) has reported that something's not working right (I'm waiting for confirmation but I think he tried out the x86 version). It's likely either an error on my part when copying across from my Arm version, or perhaps something not working right with conditionals, meant to deal with the various OS versions ('if; then' statements, I mean). Once I find out more, I'll edit my earlier post...
fattire said:
Sorry not sure what you mean by "hybrid systemless root style setup"? I take it you're modifying the startup script and replaced the squashfs file in /opt... my concern about doing it was whether they were implementing some kind of dm-verity equivalent to the squashfs file to make sure it hasn't been tampered with (say, by adding /sbin/su or whatever) or whether it's safe to replace that file.. Sounds like you're saying it is?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh, sorry for being a bit vague - I just mean perhaps implementing a kind of systemless root à la Magisk/SuperSU (from what I understand of how these work) - avoiding the need to actually replace files in /system. Since I'm mainly just using su for the privileges rather than actually wanting to write to /system, I had the idea that perhaps a sort of overlay on e.g. xbin and a few other locations, rather than actually rebuilding the whole of /system, might be an interesting approach....
Yep, I've been replacing /opt/google/containers/android/system.raw.img with a symlink to my modified image lately. Works fine... I think they've been focused on just getting the apps working properly, maybe something like dm-verity is still to come.
Although, one of the cool things with Chromebooks IMO is that once the Developer Mode (virtual) switch has been flipped, the system's pretty open to being hacked around with. I think a large part of the much-trumpeted "security" of the system is thanks to the regular mode/Dev mode feature, once in Dev Mode with verified boot disabled on the rootfs, we can pretty much do what we want (I like the message that comes up in the shell when entering the first command I posted under the spoiler - it literally says "YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN!").
So yeah, with Dev Mode switched off, verified boot switched on, we can't even get into the shell (just the walled-off 'crosh' prompt), making the system indeed rather secure (but, for some of us, rather limited).
fattire said:
Also you mean arc-setup.conf:
env ANDROID_DEBUGGABLE = 0
right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what I mean by a moving target, lol. On my device the Canary channel is at Chrome OS version 61; I think they started to move out some ARC++ (the acronym stands for Android Runtime on Chrome, version 2, if anyone's wondering, btw) environment variables to a separate file in version 60, or maybe 61. Problems with being on the more 'bleeding edge' channels include:
#Sometimes stuff gets broken as they commit experimental changes.
#Any updates sometimes overwrite rootfs customizations; the higher the channel - the more frequent the updates occur.
#Some of the stuff that gets updated, may later get reverted.
And so on...
fattire said:
I hadn't realized the boot was still in flux-- I'd have figured they'd worked that out by now...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah you'd think so. Honestly, the more I use CrOS the more it seems like a (very polished) work-in-progress to me. Though, I guess most modern OSs are also works-in-progress though. (I don't mean the former statement in a critical way; I'm very happy that new features keep getting added to the OS - Android app support being a perfect case in point, that was a lovely surprise, greatly extending the functionality of my Chromebook).
fattire said:
Cool-- adb connect 100.115.92.2 does indeed work I was gonna use netcat to open port 5555 in chromeos and pipe it through, but looks like nc isn't here and I'm not yet ready to start changing the FS..though probably will be soon...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Netcat's not there but socat, which I haven't any experience with but have seen described as a "more advanced version of netcat", is listed in /etc/portage/make.profile/package.installable, meaning that adding it to CrOS is supported, and as simple as:
Code:
sudo su -
dev_install #(sets up portage in /usr/local)
emerge socat
I tried socat out and it seems to work, might be interesting to play around with.
fattire said:
btw any idea which partitions get overwritten when chrome it does it's updates? Will /root and /etc get overwritten, for example...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Theres a question. I forget some of the exact details now (gleaned from browsing the developer mailing lists and the documentation on chromium.org), but from what I do remember and my experiences tinkering, I can say:
The auto-update model uses kernel/rootfs pairs, e.g. at the moment my device is booting from partition 2 (KERN-A) with the rootfs being partition 3 (ROOTFS-B). My understanding is that with the next OS update pushed to my device, CrOS will download the deltas of the files to be changed, and apply the changes to partitions 4 and 5 (KERN-B and ROOTS-B), setting new kernel GPT flags (priority=, tries=, successful=), which will, post-reboot, let the BIOS know that 4 and 5 will form the new working kernel/rootfs pair. Then the following update will do the same, but with partitions 2 and 3, and so on and so forth, alternating pairs each time. It's a pretty nifty system, and I think something similar might be happening with new Android devices from version O onward (?).
So partitions 2,3,4,5 are fair game for being overwritten (from the perspective of the CrOS updater program). Partition 1, the 'stateful partition') is a bit special, in addition to a big old encrypted file containing all of the userdata (/home/chronos/ dir?), it also has some extra dirs which get overlaid on the rootfs at boot. If you have a look in /mnt/stateful/, there should also be a dir called 'dev_image', which (on a device in Dev mode) gets mounted up over /usr/local/ at boot. As I mentioned above, if you do
Code:
sudo su -
dev_install
you can then emerge anything listed in /etc/portage/make.profile/package.installable (not a great deal of stuff admittedly, compared to Gentoo), which gets installed to subdirs in /usr/local/. So I think stuff in partition 1; /mnt/stateful/, should be safe from being overwritten with an OS update. I think crouton chroots get put there by default.
Most of the other partitions don't really get used, and shouldn't get touched by the updater, here's a design doc on the disk format, and here's a Reddit post (from a Google/Chromium employee) mentioning dual booting from partitions 6 and 7.
fattire said:
would a "powerwash" overwrite it or can you get easily get into an unbootable state on these things?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not too hard to mess up the system and get it into an unbootable state, lol. The "powerwash" just seems to remove user data, mainly. If you change up (the contents of) some files in /etc, or /opt, for example, then powerwash, normally they won't get restored to their original state (unless you also change release channel).
But, as long as the write-protect screw's not been removed and the original BIOS overwritten, it's always possible to make a recovery USB in Chrome's Recovery Utility on another device, and then restore the entire disk image fresh (this does overwrite all partitions). Another thing that I did was make a usb to boot into Kali; I was experimenting with the cgpt flags on my internal drive and got it into an unbootable state, but was still able to boot into Kali with Ctrl+U, and restore the flags manually from there. (To successfully boot from USB, it was essential to have previously run the enable_dev_usb_boot or crossystem dev_boot_usb=1 command in CrOS). I understand also that the BIOS type varies with device release date and CPU architecture, and that Intel devices may have some extra potential BIOS options ('legacy boot').
fattire said:
It's also kind of strange that adb is listening to port 30 at that (internal?) bridge address by default with no UI to turn it off.. and it's inaccessible from outside.. i wonder if there's an easy way to change the bridge to share the same IP as the actual interface...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think I saw something related to this on the bug tracker. If I come across any info, I'll let you know...
fattire said:
Final thought-- I'd love to build that system image myself soup-to-nuts, but I can't find any "caroline" device tree set up... do you or anyone else happen to know if there's a standalone AOSP device tree for the chromebooks? It would be cool to have a mashup AOSP/lineageos if such a think could be possible-- I'm guessing chromiumos is just taking the android tree, building it and then adding it into their build... I Haven't build chromiumos for many years now so I can't even begin to imagine how this android build integrates with the whole emerge thing they had going.. but I bet it takes a while
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I haven't built Chromium OS or anything, but apparently, there's an option to create a 'private' overlay for the build, which doesn't get synced with the public stuff.
I think that the higher-ups at Google might be still umming and ahing as to whether or not to make source code available for the Android container, it's certainly not been made public yet. Actually, I remember seeing a Reddit post from a Google/Chromium employee mentioning this.
"That article is a little misleading in terms of open source. While the wayland-server and services that communicate with the ARC++ container are open source, the actual ARC++ container is not."
Perhaps they're waiting to see how similar implementations of Android within a larger Linux setup (e.g. Anbox) fare.
There doesn't seem to be too much that differs from AOSP in the ARC++ container - a few binaries and bits and pieces linking the hardware to the container (e.g. the camera etc), maybe some stuff related to running in a container with the graphics being piped out to Wayland?, and so on.
Oh, I was searching the bug tracker for something else, and just saw this (quoted below). Looks like it might be possible to run AOSP based images on CrOS soon!
arc: Implement android settings link for AOSP image
Reported by [email protected], Today (72 minutes ago)
Status: Started
Pri: 1
Type: Bug
M-60
When ARC started without the Play Store support there is no way for user to activate Android settings. We need implement corresponded section that has
Title: Android settings:
Link: Manage android preferences:
Inner bug: b/62945384
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great response! I read it once and I'll read it again in more detail then will probably have questions For whatever it may be worth, my only experience with chromiumos was building the whole thing maybe 4 years ago for my original 2011 Samsung "snow" Chromebook-- and making a bootable USB (or was it an SDcard?) to run it on (with a modified firmware that did... something I can't remember.. i think it was basically a stripped down uboot and I remember adding a simple menu or something-- I think I was trying to bypass that white startupscreen or something..). However, after doing this a few times to play with it, I realized that Chromiumos without the Chrome goodies kinda sucks and I promptly forgot everything and went back to stock.
I did have it re-partitioned to run linux as a dual boot from the SD slot or something-- I remember using that cgpt thing to select the different boot modes and vaguely recall the way it would A/B the updates (which "O" is now doing)... but anyhoo I was using the armhf ubuntu releases with the native kernel and ran into all kinds of sound issues and framebuffer only was a little crappy so...
I'm gonna re-read in more detail soon and I'm sure I'll have questions-- one of which will be-- assuming that most stuff is the same on x86 vs arm, why are there two scripts? How do they differ?
ol. On my device the Canary channel is at Chrome OS version 61; I think they started to move out some ARC++ (the acronym stands for Android Runtime on Chrome, version 2, if anyone's wondering, btw) environment variables to a separate file in version 60, or maybe 61.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the -env file I'm missing, I presume?
I think that the higher-ups at Google might be still umming and ahing as to whether or not to make source code available for the Android container, it's certainly not been made public yet. Actually, I remember seeing a Reddit post from a Google/Chromium employee mentioning this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It looks from the response that the gapps portion might be what's in question-- just like ChromiumOS vs Chrome has all the proprietary bits taken out?
Here's what I'd ideally like to see:
* Rooted Android, with a toggle switch to hide su in settings a la lineage (requires a kernel patch something like this one) + settings changes from lineageos
* adb access from outside the device-- critical for quickly testing apks from android studio w/o a cable. Basically put the chromebook in a "device mode" where adb is passed through... I'm going to see if I can pipe adb through with socat as you suggest...
* what else... I dunno watch this space.
An update from a couple of guys that have tested out the scripts on Intel: It seems to be that while they are able to launch daemonsu manually (with daemonsu --auto-daemon), it apparently does not seem to be getting launched at boot.
I am waiting for some more information on this. Previously, for Marshmallow, the script was setting up the app_process hijack method in order to to launch daemonsu at boot; to support Nougat I changed it to instead create an .rc file with a service for daemonsu, and add a line to init.rc importing it. This works for me, and from what I can gather, it copied/created all files successfully on the testers devices, too, so I'm not sure at this point what the issue is there.
Edit: Fixed the issue. I updated my previous post with further details.
fattire said:
I realized that Chromiumos without the Chrome goodies kinda sucks and I promptly forgot everything and went back to stock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol yeah. True, that.
fattire said:
...assuming that most stuff is the same on x86 vs arm, why are there two scripts? How do they differ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's literally just two things that differ: the few lines where we copy the su binary over e.g.
/x86/su.pie → /system/xbin/su, daemonsu, sugote
vs
/armv7/su → /system/xbin/su, daemonsu, sugote
...and also the size of the created container. The x86 container is about 30 percent larger than the Arm one.
I had a little look at how to determine the CPU architecture programmatically on Chrome OS a while back, but couldn't seem to find a reliable way of doing this, at least not without maybe getting a bunch of people with different CrOS devices to run something like, as you mentioned, uname -i (which returns 'Rockchip' on my device, uname -m (which returns 'armv7'), or such similar, and collating the results. It was just easier to do separate versions for x86/arm, rather than introduce more conditionals (with potential for errors). I'm certainly not averse to adding a check for $ARCH, and thus standardizing the script, as long as it's reliable.
fattire said:
This is the -env file I'm missing, I presume?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep! It's just the same few envs as in the .confs, moved into a new file. I'm fairly confident that the script's conditionals deals with them OK.
fattire said:
It looks from the response that the gapps portion might be what's in question-- just like ChromiumOS vs Chrome has all the proprietary bits taken out?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, although the respondant there perhaps doesn't seem to realise that he's talking to a Google/Chromium dev, the way he responds. Not that that makes anything he says in his post is necessarily less valid, though.
fattire said:
Here's what I'd ideally like to see:
* Rooted Android, with a toggle switch to hide su in settings a la lineage (requires a kernel patch something like this one) + settings changes from lineageos
* adb access from outside the device-- critical for quickly testing apks from android studio w/o a cable. Basically put the chromebook in a "device mode" where adb is passed through... I'm going to see if I can pipe adb through with socat as you suggest...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting... I agree, those would both be useful additions to the functionality of ARC++...
Quick question-- has Samsung provided the source for the GPL components (including the kernel, obviously)? I looked here but didn't see anything...? Previously the kernel was included along with the chromium source and there was like a kernel and kernel-next repository.. but this was like five years ago. I think the codename for the samsung chromebook pro is called caroline... let me quickly see if I can find a defconfig in the chromium source...
Back.. nothing here in the chromeos-4.4 branch. Nothing here either in the master branch. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong branches-- master is probably mainline kernel. Also the directories.. it took me five minutes to realize it wasn't going to be in arch/arm - force of habit I guess. I'll keep looking unless anyone knows. This "chromium-container-vm-x86" one seems to have dm_verity as an unused option. Ah, this is looking promising.
...and... here!
So it would seem that this would be built as part of the chromiumos build system, which seemed to be half gentoo five years ago building out of a chroot and was kind of a pain to set up... still, I'm guessing that since it's got that weird script to make the defconfig, what you could do is use google's chromiumos build script to make the kernel image (with whatever changes you want), then, assuming that it doesn't care if you replace the kernel, just throw it over the right Kernel A/B partition and see if it boots and starts up chromeos... it's weird cuz the kernel has to do double-duty for chromeos and android.. but I bet you can just replace it and it would work fine...
I had a cursory go at building a couple of kernel modules for my Flip C100 a while back - I didn't get too far though, lol. People do seem to have had success building their own kernels and running them with Chrome OS though, as with most things I suppose it's just how much time/effort you're willing to put in.
I think I used this and maybe this, from the crouton project to guide me.
From what I remember, I just got fed up of all the arcane errors/config choices. I remember that even though I'd imported my current device config from modprobe configs, there were then such an incredibly long string of hoops/config choices to have to go through one by one, to then be confronted with various errors (different every time ISTR) that I think I just thought "screw this". I think there were some other issue with the Ubuntu version I was using at the time as well. I know that sort of stuff's kind of par for the course with kernel compilation, but I was mainly only doing it so I could edit xpad in order to get my joypad working, in the end I found a different solution.
It shouldn't be too much hassle though, in theory I guess.... Oh, also, in order to get a freshly built kernel booting up with the CrOS rootfs, in addition to the gpt flags, I think you might have to sign it, too? (just with the devkeys & vbutil_kernel tool provided on the rootfs), some info here, and here.
From what I remember, the build system would do whatever key signing was necessary.... although I do now remember you're right there was some manual step when I was building the kernel, but I can't remember if that's because of MY changes or that was just part of the build process.
I I just dug out the old VM (Xubuntu) I was using to build and, well, let's just say I'll be doing a LOT of ubuntu updates before I can even realistically look at this. I do kinda recall setting up the environment was a huge pain so I'm going to see if I can just update the 5 year old source, target the pro and just build the kernel image and see what pops out the other end. At least I won't have to deal with the cross compiler, though I think it should hopefully take care of that itself.
Interesting to see that those crouton projects have emerged (no pun intended) so I'll check them out too while ubuntu updates itself
Thanks for the github links.. I'm going to go read that wiki.
Update: Looked at it-- funny they just stripped out the chromeos-specific parts they needed rather than emerge everything which is smart. My only question is now that Android is involved, there's that script I linked to earlier that seems to say "if you want Android support you'll need these bits too"-- wonder if the same config scripts apply, and if there are any other device tree considerations as well...
I may play a bit and see how smoothly it goes.. Unfortunately I don't have unlimited time either :/
Also, please do let me know if you put the scripts on github and I can send you pull requests if I come up with anything.
Update: Finally updated like 3 major versions of ubuntu... the "depot_tools" repo had its last commit in 2013, so I updated that. Wow, this is so much clearer than previous docs... it looks like something called gclient is used now, which I configured with:
gclient config --spec 'solutions = [
{
"url": "https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git",
"managed": False,
"name": "src",
"deps_file": ".DEPS.git",
"custom_deps": {},
},
]
'
that let me do gclient sync --nohooks --no-history ...which i think is updating the ancient source. I probably should have just started over, but anyway... we'll see what happens.
Update again: After updating with this new gclinet tool, it appears that the old repo sync method is still required as described here. That hasn't changed after all, so now I'm going to go through this old method, which will probably completely overwhelm my storage as it's downloading with history.. but anyway, in case anyone is trying this-- looks like the whole chroot/repo sync thing may still be how it's done... the /src directory described above may only be for building just the browser, not the whole OS...
...and here it is. I will have zero room to actually build anything tho, but hey.
* [new branch] release-R58-9334.B-caroline-chromeos-3.18 -> cros/release-R58-9334.B-caroline-chromeos-3.18
Note to self: use cros_sdk --enter to actually get in the chroot. Then:
~/trunk/src/scripts $ ./setup_board --board=caroline
to set up the build for caroline. Then to build:
./build_packages --board=caroline --nowithdebug
Useful links:
* Building ChromiumOS
* [URL="http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/how-tos-and-troubleshooting/portage-build-faq"]eBuild FAQ
[/URL]

Tasker 'Secure Settings' ADB access - How 'safe' is it ??

Ok lets first explain the situation
I've been dabbling with Tasker (Paid for version)- getting some automation depending on certain situations (mainly stuff like 'If I'm @ {location} get volumes set high' or ' If Unread msg then vibrate my Amazefit bip watch' - Nothing too complicated using variables / javascript etc)
One situation I want to attempt though is 'If Gpay app is started - turn on NFC, but when I leave the app - turn NFC off'
Now I already know there are 2 'main' ways I can turn on/off NFC in Tasker.. either use 'AutoInput plugin' or use 'Secure Settings'
- I've tried with Autoinput plugin but the problem is that with the free option, you need to watch an Ad every day to use it but of course I can pay for it (its only a couple of quid)
However you can't Install it & pay for it directly from within the plugin - you need to install yet another App (AutoApps) first - & although this one is free - I just don't like adding more bloat to my phone than necessary. Adding both the plugin & this additional App adds (although only a 'minor' amount) up to 20Mb
The other method is give Tasker 'Secure settings' permission
- So I read the 'What to do to give 'Write Secure Settings Permission' to Tasker' (enable Developer mode > Usb Debugging > Install ADB on PC etc etc) & it looks simple enough,
But (a loooong time ago) I tried other 'hacks' & it ended up disastrously (probably I did something wrong with missing a step or something) & I just want to make sure that it IS as simple as it seems and also ask how safe is it
for example
* If I type in the command in ADB - could something go wrong & could it crash/brick the phone ?
* Is this permanent - ie if I turn off/on phone or if I get an OTA update & phone restarts - will it stay, or will I have to repeat the ADB command each time ?
* Will this 'break' official OTA updates (whether security &/or Android firmware) - I once did a firmware update with a step that used ADB (IIRC) & it broke something that prevented any updates from happening
- official OR manual firmware updates
Any help/advice would be appreciated
Cannon_Foddr said:
* If I type in the command in ADB - could something go wrong & could it crash/brick the phone ?
* Is this permanent - ie if I turn off/on phone or if I get an OTA update & phone restarts - will it stay, or will I have to repeat the ADB command each time ?
* Will this 'break' official OTA updates (whether security &/or Android firmware) - I once did a firmware update with a step that used ADB (IIRC) & it broke something that prevented any updates from happening
- official OR manual firmware updates
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ADB is the door to your phone's Android. It's a tool not meant to be used by John Doe. Wrongly used you can brick your phone. Hence it's by default disabled.
1. Yes, using ADB you can render your phone absolutely useless. If you e.g. enter
Code:
adb shell rm -rf /
then phone gets totally wiped ( really all gets destroyed, it gets naked ) - you can throw it into electric waste.
2. ADB commands aren't persistent, but their results may be.
3. ADB itself breaks nothing: it's a driver installed on your computer that let you access Android's files and launch Android executables.
Thanks for the reply
I doubt I'll use THAT command.
I forgot to mention what tasker's command is
adb shell pm grant net.dinglisch.android.taskerm android.permission.WRITE_SECURE_SETTINGS
Not 100% sure about your last comment though.
ADB allows access to android files so changing android files could break things, which I'm worried about especially with OTA updates etc. (my last phone stopped getting OTA updates when I rooted it despite using official firmware)
However IF I understand the above command all this does is tell the android operating system ('android') to only give the tasker app (which 'Real' name is 'net.dinglisch.android.taskerm') the rights ('permission') to access the required settings ('WRITE_SECURE_SETTINGS') which the NFC on/off toggle is part of (settings >connected devices > connection preferences> nfc) & 'shouldn' t' affect any other files such as OTA (unless OTA is also part of secure setting?)
@Cannon_Foddr
As I can see you until now haven't understood what ADB is, how it works.
Same probably your understanding of what an OTA is.
Personally never would allow 3rd-party apps ( like Tasker ) to modify sensible system settings: Tasker isn't an open-source app, so you can't control what it does in the last run.
It's simply on you to decide whether Tasker is given that right, or not ...
Can't see why 'open-source' has to do with this
IMHO if Open-source - anyone can release similar apps with added extra hidden code that could spy's on you/steal info etc, but a 'closed sourced' app from a long running developer (tasker been around for 10yrs with over 1mil downloads) must mean people seem to trust him/them & if he was 'dodgy' surely he would've been caught out by now
Anyway the Bottom line seems to be
Safe route: pay for plugin & live with extra bloatware
Or
Risky route: give access to secure system resources, see what happens & keep fingers cross nothing does
Thanks for your replies.. I think I may have to sit down & have a long hard think which route I feel more comfortable with
I have been using Automate for about 4 months now. I granted it WRITE_SECURE_SETTINGS and I have not noticed any modifications in my system. Granted I may have not looked specifically for them but as far as braking the system or disruption of OTAs no issues so far
DennisHarrows said:
I have been using Automate for about 4 months now. I granted it WRITE_SECURE_SETTINGS and I have not noticed any modifications in my system. Granted I may have not looked specifically for them but as far as braking the system or disruption of OTAs no issues so far
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I assume you had to do something like Taskers command then to grant the secure settings
( "adb shell pm grant net.dinglisch.android.taskerm android.permission.WRITE_SECURE_SETTINGS" )
Cannon_Foddr said:
I assume you had to do something like Taskers command then to grant the secure settings
( "adb shell pm grant net.dinglisch.android.taskerm android.permission.WRITE_SECURE_SETTINGS" )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Automate is straight forward, there is a toggle for "modify system settings" needed for some tasks to run and one you run the ADB command, it's done

Categories

Resources