Roms, Kernal Patches, etc. - Captivate Android Development

Alright lets get the record straight. Has anyone tried the kernal patch that puts your mem on a partition on the sd card. Supposidly this boosts performance out of this world. Please post here if you have tried this.
Secondly, we need to attract some developers. I'm willing to donate if anyone wants to code for us. We got a great user base and a really good product. Im conviced the captivate is by far one of the better phones from the galaxy s lineup. If any one knows some developers, introduce them tot his godly beast and let them know there are people out here willing to pay for good quality fixes and roms.
I was thinkin about asking for help from the guys running international s. We could post and ask in the xda area and also modaco and androidforums which have big communities as well.
Any other ideas on how to attract developers? Post here.

systoxity said:
Alright lets get the record straight. Has anyone tried the kernal patch that puts your mem on a partition on the sd card. Supposidly this boosts performance out of this world. Please post here if you have tried this.
Secondly, we need to attract some developers. I'm willing to donate if anyone wants to code for us. We got a great user base and a really good product. Im conviced the captivate is by far one of the better phones from the galaxy s lineup. If any one knows some developers, introduce them tot his godly beast and let them know there are people out here willing to pay for good quality fixes and roms.
I was thinkin about asking for help from the guys running international s. We could post and ask in the xda area and also modaco and androidforums which have big communities as well.
Any other ideas on how to attract developers? Post here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm down to donate as well and do anything I can to add to the cause. I really hope this phone takes off cause it is great. I think we have a good chance that a lot of the N1 devs might just come over to this phone and if not they should be getting the Vibrant and I doubt that it will be much trouble to port over to Captivate.

Err why is it better lol? all the samsung galaxy S phones are exacly the same internaly...none its better than the other, the only difrence is the lack of flash/camera and keyboard from the other variants.

rafyvitto said:
Err why is it better lol? all the samsung galaxy S phones are exacly the same internaly...none its better than the other, the only difrence is the lack of flash/camera and keyboard from the other variants.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Image, Image, Image. If the galaxy lineup were real life siblings, the captivate would be the only one going to the prom. It also sports fewer gps issues than the vibrant and galaxy s. Ive also seen way less people complain about lag in these forums than the ones for the vibrant and galaxy s (and we have more viewers here than on the vibrant page).
When devs see this device they should be seeing potential.

systoxity said:
Image, Image, Image. If the galaxy lineup were real life siblings, the captivate would be the only one going to the prom. It also sports fewer gps issues than the vibrant and galaxy s. Ive also seen way less people complain about lag in these forums than the ones for the vibrant and galaxy s (and we have more viewers here than on the vibrant page).
When devs see this device they should be seeing potential.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All of these so called "issues' are software based, its samsung ****ty touchwiz UI that lags like ****ing hell, not the device hardware, and yes i do agree that the captivate is the sexiest of them all.

Im pretty sure it would be painless to port over Vibrant or Galaxy S fixes to the Captivate. Internally they are the same except for a few minor differences like rafyvitto said which wouldn't be that hard to fix. I'm brushing up on my Java skills and learning about the internals of Android right now. Ive been a iPhone person for a while. Hopefully soon I can be of some help and get hacking on Captivate. From what I've seen and read we have a good phone to develop for because its easily rooted and has an unlocked bootloader. I've also heard that the drivers for the Galaxy S lineup are encrypted, but I haven't seen any confirmation of that. What we need is a dump of the current ROM and also we need a better recovery system like Amon_RA's recovery. The source for his recovery system is on GitHub so we could try and port it over to the Galaxy S lineup.

shouldnt samsung be releasing source for drivers any day now? I thought the word around town was that they were being open with the community on this jazz.

systoxity said:
shouldnt samsung be releasing source for drivers any day now? I thought the word around town was that they were being open with the community on this jazz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They have already released the source code for the Galaxy S here. They don't have to release the source for the drivers because they are proprietary, but from what ive read the binaries for the drivers are in that download so all someone would have to do in link them in. I just don't know if the drivers are encrypted meaning that it has to be an official samsung ROM for them to work. Hopefully not because that would make cooking new ROMs a hell of alot easier.

we should ask the modaco guys for help and info. I dont think we can use the source or drivers from the galaxy s international. I think someone tried doing stuff that way and bricked.
i could be wrong tho

Would also be willing to donate to the cause. The only reason I didn't buy an iPhone 4 is the developers for this phone.

@wesgarner is on the CyanogenMod team / TeamDouche and has ordered a Vibrant.
We might be able to encourage him to port the latest CyanogenMod build once he has the Vibrant's build completed.
He purchased a Vibrant and I think a laptop to do the work. I've already sent him an email about being a beta tester for the Captivate.
Just remember the devs have a life outside of working on phones! Don't ask for timelines - whether you donate or not!
Wes is working on a port for the slide and then he'll be working on the Vibrant.
While the hardware is similar - the software isn't exactly the same. I was messing around with the MMS.apk today and tried to replace my corrupted one with the one from the Vibrant - did NOT work.
Also, the device is capable of having a REAL FMRadio. The Euro versions have an FMradio.apk. I pushed it to the Captivate - but, the Captivate will need the drivers (to build into a kernal) for the FMRadio to work. But, this is entirely possible.
So, yes the hardware is basically the same or similar - it won't necessarily easy. If any of you remember, LOL - this will be akin to porting the N1 build over to the Desire - I think.

The first thing to go should be that awful samsung UI lol. I think the challenge will be porting ROMs for all these different Galaxy S models. I saw this coming when I read the device would make it to all four major carriers in the US plus.

thanks shane, i also heard another dev recently purchased a captivate, do you know anything about this? i'd like to support his endeavors.

Yea I read over in the Vibrant forums that a dev just got a captivate and is working on a recovery. They also have wes working on the Vibrant so hopefully they get cookin on some ROMs. It won't be that much of a hassle to port them over to the captivate. I would advise not fooling around too much with your phone because someone has already messed up his/her phone. They will either have to take it into ATT store and replace it or wait for a dump of the original ROM to come out.

I have tired the MoDaCo rom and it does (kinda - not brick) work with the SGH-I897 (captivate model), I was able to use it to remove the ATT crapware and nearly everything seems to be working. Phone reports its self as Model Number: GT-I9000 in the about phone tab.
One very IMPORTANT problem - I am having difficulty making outgoing phone calls.
Things that I can confirm work:
Bluetooth file transfer
3g data
GSM phone calls (incoming calls work)
Camera
Audible app, pandora ect.
SMS outgoing and incoming messages
Pretty much everything I have tested on the phone except making outgoing phone calls (important as it is a phone after all). So DON'T use this ROM yet, and if you do make a backup.
Hope this helps.

Related

The state of Android homebrew.

When the G1 came out it was the only Android powered device so modding it worked for everybody. And it was just one brand, HTC, so this forum was a one stop destination for modding our phone.
However, things have changed, now there are multiple phone with incompatible hardware from different manufacturers. Now a custom rom made for the G1, won't work on a DROID for example and vise versa. This complicates things quite a bit.
Right now Cyanogen mods are the best thing for our G1 and maybe the best thing for Android as a whole. I'm used to the build in tether capability and apps to SD and compcace and the other perks of a modded rom. But if I wanted to upgrade my phone, I would lose it all.
There are no Cyanogen mod for anything other than G1 and myTouch phones as far as I know and if I were to upgrade to DROID, I would lose root, lose tether, lose apps to SD, lose everything about my phone that makes it my phone.
Everything I wrote may not be facts, I don't really know what goes on at other forums, but I know that we don't have roms build to run on the DROID and we don't have them built to run on the HERO hardware, it's all for G1 and myTouch, and it seems to me that if I don't ha.ve on of those phones, I lose everything.
I do understand that this forum is for HTC devices which DROID and a few other's are not which is why I don't see homebrew for them. Is there a another website similar to this that supports all Android hardware?
These are thoughts that have been running through my head lately. If I am totally wrong here, please let me know.
I would say check out websites such as androidcommunity.com, androidandme.com, phandroid.com. The developers might not be on there but you can probably find links to where there are custom roms for the phones.
And you are right about different phones having different development oppurtunities. I thought about this today and realized that the next android phone I get not only has to be what I want but also be a popular phone that will attract developers such as cyan, maxisma, jac, manup and everyone else. My best guess and hope is that it will be a snapdragon android handset, hopefully for T-Mobile USA.
What we'll end up having to do is pick our phones based on it's community support and what kind of home brew is available for it.
The reason I love the G1 is the fact that it's rooted and has a large community. This phone is the best on the market, all things considered, because the rooted OS allows so much.
If and when the Droid is rooted, when a GSM version is released, and when it has T-Mo's 3G bands, I will move to it. But all those may not happen for another year or more. If you haven't played with a Droid yet, do so. Incredible speed and the best screen I have ever seen on a phone. Till then, G1 all the way.
The man is right, we have a problem on the dev side.
I think though, once 2.0 gets standard, we'll only need root for a few things like tethering and setting the CPU clock. Really cyanogen's only advantage is optimization, but once 2.0 and snapdragon rolls around, who cares? We'll always want to tinker, but it won't eclipse getting the phone you want.
The big problems right now are that the market isn't getting what it needs. Nothing compares to the HTC widgets, yet instead of cloning them on the market, we try and run a ROM that doesn't even work on our phones! We still don't have BT in Hero and it may just never happen.
2.0 will be what we need as a base, but the market needs our help now.
I'd contest the cyanogen are the best rom's.. maybe for someoen who wants to flash an upgrade every 3 days.. but for the majority of users.. Dwang is the way to go. Lengthy discussion about this, is over here..
alec.baldwin said:
I'd contest the cyanogen are the best rom's.. maybe for someoen who wants to flash an upgrade every 3 days.. but for the majority of users.. Dwang is the way to go. Lengthy discussion about this, is over here..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks but this thread is not about who has the best rom.
The point is, when you get a new Android phone, your rom of choice won't be available for it. So what do you do?
alec.baldwin said:
I'd contest the cyanogen are the best rom's.. maybe for someoen who wants to flash an upgrade every 3 days.. but for the majority of users.. Dwang is the way to go. Lengthy discussion about this, is over here..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think we all get it already, YOU are dwang's biggest fan
But, to stay on topic. My G1 is the first HTC device I've ever owned and I've only discovered XDA since I've had it, and I think that because of the community involvement here and the custom roms that have come out, I will definitely lean towards another HTC phone when I look for my next upgrade, and it will definately be an android phone.
Also another thing to look at is the availability of the phones that are out to actual dev's. Unless people are donating phones, I doubt everyone can just run out and pick up all the latest devices, and network restrictions/preferences that come along with them.
I think the easiest solution is as follows:
1. Find the dev you like best.
2. Find the phone you like best.
3. Buy phone you like best.
4. Buy/Create a donate link to get said dev the same phone.
Assuming said dev doesnt turn around and craigslist the phone you bought him/her, you have (hopefully) ensured said dev will migrate and develop on your favorite hardware.
Not the best solution but probably the most reliable.
alec.baldwin said:
I'd contest the cyanogen are the best rom's.. maybe for someoen who wants to flash an upgrade every 3 days.. but for the majority of users.. Dwang is the way to go. Lengthy discussion about this, is over here..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seriously dude, are you going to diss me in every thread? What do you even contribute to this community? I've not received any patches or even logs of the "problems" you claim.
cyanogen said:
Seriously dude, are you going to diss me in every thread? What do you even contribute to this community? I've not received any patches or even logs of the "problems" you claim.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For real.
Alec, you're like the little annoying brother that no one wants to be around.
Grow up, let your balls drop, and enjoy your phone, your life, and whatever rom you want.
But, you don't have to go around dissing well-respected devs.
The Droid hasn't been out long enough for a community to gather around it. Many of the Android big names are waiting to get GSM versions before tinkering.
Also, remember that the HTC Dream was in circulation well before it launched last year. The Android development phone is identical to the Dream, with the only difference being some swish art on the back cover. The hardware and software were free-flowing long before it landed in our hands. In contrast, the Droid was a much more secretive launch; we've only just got Eclair source code, and the SDK was kept under wraps by a non-disclosure agreement (probably to conceal the nuclear bomb that is Google Maps Navigation).
I find the cracking of the Droid to be inevitable. The poor thing is going to be broken just as much as our Dreams were. Just give it time.
As for ROMs being available over a span of phones, I'm not sure that's even a good idea. Android variants like XROM, cyanogenmod, The Dude's ROM, yadda yadda... they're all about maximising the capabilities of the Dream. Not the Droid, the Dream. Adding in features that the hardware can support, changing CPU frequencies, Apps2SD, all that jazz. Droid ROMs will be built around adding in core features, like Apps2SD, and whatever else the Droid has tucked away. Likewise, speed optimisations may not be portable between phones, as what gives the Dream a boost may hinder the Droid.
For me, features of a ROM are not the best part of homebrew Android builds. The best part is being able to upgrade your phone outside of the carrier's say-so. If T-mobile have no plans to push Eclair to Dreams, I will install it myself. I am not tied down by the say-so of a room full of suits three thousand miles away. If T-mobile don't include an app that I like, such as the IM app or the Amazon MP3 store (which T-mobile UK don't), I can get ROMs with them myself. If a carrier would rather I didn't tether without paying for my bandwidth twice, I can do it anyway, so long as I'm not an idiot.
You may have guessed that I have a very dim view of cell carriers.
With root, we are free to do as we like. This is the real killer feature of homebrew, and the Droid will benefit from it too.
Anyway...
dwang said:
I want to acknowledge cyanogen, daproy, cyrowski, loccy, and alla for their contributions to the android community.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It seems dwang himself has a much higher opinion of the man than a certain other someone.
AthlonBoy said:
The Droid hasn't been out long enough for a community to gather around it. Many of the Android big names are waiting to get GSM versions before tinkering.
Also, remember that the HTC Dream was in circulation well before it launched last year. The Android development phone is identical to the Dream, with the only difference being some swish art on the back cover. The hardware and software were free-flowing long before it landed in our hands. In contrast, the Droid was a much more secretive launch; we've only just got Eclair source code, and the SDK was kept under wraps by a non-disclosure agreement (probably to conceal the nuclear bomb that is Google Maps Navigation).
I find the cracking of the Droid to be inevitable. The poor thing is going to be broken just as much as our Dreams were. Just give it time.
As for ROMs being available over a span of phones, I'm not sure that's even a good idea. Android variants like XROM, cyanogenmod, The Dude's ROM, yadda yadda... they're all about maximising the capabilities of the Dream. Not the Droid, the Dream. Adding in features that the hardware can support, changing CPU frequencies, Apps2SD, all that jazz. Droid ROMs will be built around adding in core features, like Apps2SD, and whatever else the Droid has tucked away. Likewise, speed optimisations may not be portable between phones, as what gives the Dream a boost may hinder the Droid.
For me, features of a ROM are not the best part of homebrew Android builds. The best part is being able to upgrade your phone outside of the carrier's say-so. If T-mobile have no plans to push Eclair to Dreams, I will install it myself. I am not tied down by the say-so of a room full of suits three thousand miles away. If T-mobile don't include an app that I like, such as the IM app or the Amazon MP3 store (which T-mobile UK don't), I can get ROMs with them myself. If a carrier would rather I didn't tether without paying for my bandwidth twice, I can do it anyway, so long as I'm not an idiot.
You may have guessed that I have a very dim view of cell carriers.
With root, we are free to do as we like. This is the real killer feature of homebrew, and the Droid will benefit from it too.
Anyway...
It seems dwang himself has a much higher opinion of the man than a certain other someone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You seem to have almost got my point but not quite. Of coarse DOID doesn't need Cyanogen MOD specifically. But would you buy an Android phone if there weren't a mod that lets it do the things that we are used to and have only become available by modding? Apps to SD, tethering, themeing?
Sure DROID might get all these things though a custom rom but we won't see it on this website. The problem is that things will get too spread out and hard to find with all these new hardware options.
What would be nice is a rom that works on nearly every Android device that just adds root access to the phone and some basic universal packages like A2SD and tethering etc. That way you can buy any Android device you want and still have these basic privileges.
Do you think something like that would be possible?
Pinesal said:
You seem to have almost got my point but not quite. Of coarse DOID doesn't need Cyanogen MOD specifically. But would you buy an Android phone if there weren't a mod that lets it do the things that we are used to and have only become available by modding? Apps to SD, tethering, themeing?
Sure DROID might get all these things though a custom rom but we won't see it on this website. The problem is that things will get too spread out and hard to find with all these new hardware options.
What would be nice is a rom that works on nearly every Android device that just adds root access to the phone and some basic universal packages like A2SD and tethering etc. That way you can buy any Android device you want and still have these basic privileges.
Do you think something like that would be possible?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Beats me, man. I'm not a developer. But I think it's unlikely.
For the DROID (and other/future android phones) is Apps2SD really necessary? The only reason why we need it on our phones is because of the pathetic amount of internal space the G1 has, the same goes for Swap Partitions etc.
As long as people buy the phone there is always going to be someone who is smart enough to work on rooting it IMO. And even without root what do you really lose? The only things I think I would really miss are Wireless Tether and Bluetooth File Transfer (Which I THINK is in 2.0 anyway).
I'm not buying a new phone until it's rooted and Cyanogen has it too.
My biggest requirement for any android phone..and any cell phone in general is the keyboard. I bought the G1 because of the keyboard and lucked out with the high number of developers available for it. I didn't find this place for several months during the time when the grandfather of the G1 mod program was still active =) JF!. I enjoyed all the modding and updating because I personally feel that the phone is, well mine. And I should be able to do what ever I want with it. I had picked up the V3C Razer because it could play MP3's. I get it home and then discover that the Verizon Nazi's completely locked down that feature so you where forced to use their service at an additional cost. Of course the motorola dev/repair/store software allowed us to get in a enable the various features that Verizon required to be locked. I also love the Aps2sd. No matter what phone you have, the internal memory will never be enough. And with the Cliq supporting 32gig sd cards, a full keyboard, and NOT verizon was enough for me. I'm patient and confident it will be rooted eventually. If not, I still have my G1 and I still do Cyanogen updates and play around with it. And when my contract is up with Tmob(renewed for the Cliq), I'll see who has the next most popular rooted phone with a keyboard and switch over. I just really hate people telling me how to use a device I own. Its like going to McDonalds and having them dictate what condiments to put on my BigMac and Fries, and then telling me I can only eat it a certain way and which hand to use. If Cyanogen was down with the Cliq, or interested in it. I may be willing to ship him my phone to see what he can come up with.
As far as a universal O/S for all phones, isn't that just the core Android software with specific drivers provided by each manufacturer and custom UI? There should be a way to make 1 O/S for all android phones, then have update packs with the drivers and UI enhancements and add-ons for each android phone released? Not sure of the SPL locks though. Thats a bit beyond me. But i wouldn't think it would be to hard to run Cyanogen on the Cliq or droid provided the correct drivers and such where bundled with it. Kind of like slipstreaming a service pack into a bootleg Windows OS . Each phone eventually has to release the source code which contains the drivers for that phone. Thats how we get the Cliq's OS onto the G1, should work the other way around too. Sounds easy, but Cyanogen's Rom should run on my Cliq, provided the drivers are slipstreamed into it for the Cliq...right? Only problem is root.. :/ hehehe
and there he flames again...alec.baldwin, no one has the problems you have with cyanogen's latest. actually, lets delve into this...what exactly are your "problems" with 4.2.5? PLEASE, answer this question so cyanogen can dutifully fix the "problems" you are having.
You might check out some of the Q/A threads to first learn how to properly flash cyanogen's ROM. It is slightly different than Dwang's because Cyanogen uses the legal method. In fact, check out www.cyanogenmod.com and you might find a ton of useful info on getting cm to work on your phone.
Best of Luck,
njuncos
P.S. Cyanogen, mad props on once again reaching over a million thread views on your latest. Now you own 3 of the top 4 most viewed threads of all time in Dream Android Development!

Will pure AOSP Froyo ROM ever be a reality on Samsung Galaxy S devices?

Im thinking of getting a Epic 4g when they are released but Im very hesitant on this because what I have read about Samsung devices being "locked down". First off I prefer AOSP over touch wiz or sense, and I hoping to see this possible on theses devices someday. From what I have seen this may come down to a driver issue as they are encrypted by Samsung. I also want to use Wifi Tether too. Id like anyone who knows about theses devices to shed some light on this and help me make a decision. I dont understand why manufactures feel they need to put crap onto of Android when is more usable with out it. I just wish Samsung they just gave us the option of either roms.
WhiteWidows said:
Im thinking of getting a Epic 4g when they are released but Im very hesitant on this because what I have read about Samsung devices being "locked down". First off I prefer AOSP over touch wiz or sense, and I hoping to see this possible on theses devices someday. From what I have seen this may come down to a driver issue as they are encrypted by Samsung. I also want to use Wifi Tether too. Id like anyone who knows about theses devices to shed some light on this and help me make a decision. I dont understand why manufactures feel they need to put crap onto of Android when is more usable with out it. I just wish Samsung they just gave us the option of either roms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you must be mistaken there mate
http://www.careace.net/2010/06/07/samsung-releases-open-source-code-for-galaxy-s/
this was one of the biggest reasons i chose the galaxy S over the droid X and ordered it yesterday ... it appears to me that the hackmmunity will grow quite big with the galaxy s series
edit:
in contrast to: http://www.mydroidworld.com/forums/content/612-bad-news-droid-x-lovers-droid-x-lockdown.html
jodue said:
you must be mistaken there mate
http://www.careace.net/2010/06/07/samsung-releases-open-source-code-for-galaxy-s/
this was one of the biggest reasons i chose the galaxy S over the droid X and ordered it yesterday ... it appears to me that the hackmmunity will grow quite big with the galaxy s series
edit:
in contrast to: http://www.mydroidworld.com/forums/content/612-bad-news-droid-x-lovers-droid-x-lockdown.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This contradicts what I read elsewhere for the better Ill see if I can locate where I read this at, If this is the case why is there no custom roms besides Cyanogenmod? Where is a AOSP roms at? Or is the device just that new nothing is out yet? If this is true Ill be getting the Epic over the Evo
Wifi tether comes with the device, and I have to say I haven't had any problems with its use so far
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
While trying this and putting my N1 aside, I'm surprised how much I'm missing FroYo
Any devs that would care to comment on the possibility of a FroYo port for the SGS?
jodue said:
you must be mistaken there mate
http://www.careace.net/2010/06/07/samsung-releases-open-source-code-for-galaxy-s/
this was one of the biggest reasons i chose the galaxy S over the droid X and ordered it yesterday ... it appears to me that the hackmmunity will grow quite big with the galaxy s series
edit:
in contrast to: http://www.mydroidworld.com/forums/content/612-bad-news-droid-x-lovers-droid-x-lockdown.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sincere advise dont get samsung GS you will be hugely dissappointed. Cancel order if you can or hopefully you will have 14 days return policy.
riz157 said:
sincere advise dont get samsung GS you will be hugely dissappointed. Cancel order if you can or hopefully you will have 14 days return policy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What nonsense
I'm a little confused about the situation with ROMs myself, coming from the Windows Mobile world. If the entire source to the build of Android on the Galaxy S is available, surely it's possible to change anything, theoretically? It also seems that the bootloader has no or negligible security as to what it can flash.
On the other hand, I've seen claims that it would be impossible to get Froyo or any future Android updates if Samsung don't release them first (I know they've committed to Froyo). Unless the driver model changes dramatically in Froyo, which I doubt since then new drivers would be required for every phone, why would it be any more difficult to port newer versions of Android to the Galaxy S than any other phone?
riz157 said:
sincere advise dont get samsung GS you will be hugely dissappointed. Cancel order if you can or hopefully you will have 14 days return policy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why do you say this? I purchased mine today and so far am very satisfied with
the phone.
Just testing xda app.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
jodue said:
you must be mistaken there mate
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it's just that there are different components and layers which can be considered open or "locked down", and you both use different ones.
The bootloader for the samsung galaxy is not locked.
But there is an argument by the XDA forum member psychoace that some of the drivers for the galaxy S were not open sourced, and that in earlier android devices from samsung this made it very hard to create ROMs which are not based on Samsung's own ROMs.
As far as I know, this argument from psychoace was never countered, and so I see no reason not to believe it. (I did not look over the sources myself yet).
So can someone port new versions of Android over to the Galaxy S after Samsung has abandoned the device? I really don't know, but I wouldn't count on it, until someone who has experience with making custom ROMs says it is realistic.
The reason I state this is because other then the graphics, video playback, camera there is not much to shout about this device. The lagging is awful, it can't cope with multi tasking compared to say aswell the desire. The issue with the keyboard lagging. Internet crashing for no apparent reason. It seems as the samy gs cant handle the goodies packed into this device. No trackball, flash or led which is very useful.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
riz157 said:
The reason I state this is because other then the graphics, video playback, camera there is not much to shout about this device. The lagging is awful, it can't cope with multi tasking compared to say aswell the desire. The issue with the keyboard lagging. Internet crashing for no apparent reason. It seems as the samy gs cant handle the goodies packed into this device. No trackball, flash or led which is very useful.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
as far as i understand it, the lagging issues are just because of the touchwiz and especially the samsung-widgets. removing the widgets and replacing the luncher with luncher-pro/adw will be the first thing i do when i have the device in my hands. on the other side: the hardware of the galaxy s is very good in my opinion!
@bookwormat:
i think you are wrong! i have read in some forums that samsung has released the drivers for 2.1 together with all other code! in fact i am just pulling the code (including the full kernel) from the samsung open source center (http://opensource.samsung.com/). it's huge, 148MB ... when it's finished i will give it a look an confirm what's in there and what not.
You might just want to take into consideration the fact that the Nexus and Desire had some problems as well right after launch.
The nexus took some time ( a couple of months) to set things straight, the Desire- A couple of weeks only. But it's understandable, since it's 95% identical to the nexus, so HTC probably knew what is going to be problematic.
Also, you're taking things to major extremes. You make it sound like the device is catastrophically slow to the level of being unuseable, and crashes every 2 minutes.
Reality, well, is different. The longest lag i had personally is 1.5 seconds when loading asphalt 5. Every other lag when opening an app- less than half a second.
I'd also like you to refrain from stating one personal problem as a bug in the device, you are the only known member in this forum that is having trouble with the keyboard.
A little search in MoDaCo forums reveals that some users are reporting slight problems with the keyboard, but it's limited to Firmware JG01 only.
It's sad that instead of taking a moment to see if you can solve these problems or helping others find a solution, you preffer to bash the device in every occasion.
For some reason Riz is really down on his SGS and to such an extent that it seems he's got a grudge against the device. Sell it or trade it in if it really makes you that unhappy.
For me it's really an awesome phone that comes with some minor annoyances that seem entirely caused by the fact that it's brand new. So far it appears that Samsung is putting a lot of effort in maturing the software and I expect the issues to be solved within a matter of weeks. In all reality it would take about 10 minutes to setup a new phone and have it operate well without even upgrading any firmware. A simple switch to launcherpro followed by a root with update.zip and then installing autokiller (i use strict profile) will solve 99% of the lag problems.
Battery life is very good after the first initial cycles.
GPS doesn't work right you may all ***** about that.
I'm sure I would be happy with the new HTC's, or even the iphone 4 (the thought of buying into apple's nasty attitude does make me cringe a bit) but I would still choose the SGS again providing they fix the gps.
Perhaps I'm being over critical but there are serious flaws with this device, there is no denying this.
GPS not working - there doesn't seem to be a solution, can't use copilot or googlemaps.
Lagging/freezing - changed to launcher pro not as bad but still occurs.
I hope the boys at samy are working hard to find fixes for these problems. If there are solutions then please guide me to them.
Don't get me wrong this device has potential and there alot of good features but due to issues mentioned above it just ruins the users experience.
I paid good money for this device not so that I could put it down but to use it. I'm just stating my experience for the benefit of others who maybe considering to buy this device.
If there are solutions wonderful p
dakine said:
For some reason Riz is really down on his SGS and to such an extent that it seems he's got a grudge against the device. Sell it or trade it in if it really makes you that unhappy.
In all reality it would take about 10 minutes to setup a new phone and have it operate well without even upgrading any firmware. A simple switch to launcherpro followed by a root with update.zip and then installing autokiller (i use strict profile) will solve 99% of the lag problems.
Okay - could you please give me link to guide on rooting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really dont uderstand all this gps not working talk.I use co pilot a lot and its extremely accurate and keeps lock in all weathers.Googe maps works indoors to within a house or so and out side gets me within 15 feet or so.I did have gps issues initially until I flashed firmware and factory reset.My i8910 hd had better gps but that was an exeptional phone for gps
Okay - could you please give me link to guide on rooting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Download the update.zip file from this thread.
Or direct link here
Copy the file to the internal storage card of the phone using Kies or whatever method you like.
Disconnect the usb cable
Turn off the phone
Press and hold these buttons at the same time: volume up+home+power, keep them pressed until you see the samsung logo.
Use volume rocker to navigate to update.zip and then press home to select.
Phone will reboot and you are now rooted with superuser.
The whole process takes less than 5 minutes.
I'm not responsible for anything
I like the phone but there are problems
1.keyboard has dup presses... solved with HTC keyboard. Also l key in portrait mode doesn't always work.
2. Gps lock not as good or reliable as my I 8910
3. StallING.. fix fixed it the only program that has a lag to load is sygic.
4. Image resizing not working well in gallery and web.
5. Still doesn't always switch back to 3g from edge. Jg1 is better than previous.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

Why it is so difficult?

I do not want to upset anybody, just trying to get some understanding of the entire upgrade to a new OS version.
I'm a programmer myself, but on Windows platform and mostly do middle tier business server side apps. Do not know a thing about Linux and android. But had some java experience in the past.
I wonder why we cannot get Froyo so long? Ain't the sources open? Even if we do not have some drivers, these parts cannot change dramatically from version to version. Published API must be stable...
Is this about Dalvik JVM? But, I guess this must be in released ROMs for other phones in the line.
What's the deal? Will appreciate some explanation here.
Android is open source, but that is only the operating system and the kernel, but the drivers and RIL that make the device actually functional are the issue as far as I'm aware. From what I've read here and in IRC, Samsung gave us a hack-job RIL, which is causing many of the issues with getting an AOSP ROM fully compiled and working. I think there may be some driver issues as well to be worked out yet, but I feel those are less important than getting things like phone/data/messaging working. I'm guessing there are more technical reasons why they can't just get 2.1 or 2.2 built from source, but those are probably the big issues.
Honestly, it boils down to Samsung.
Put simply, they're crappy coders (as HTC once was many moons ago), or they're just hella lazy (I strongly believe its the former, given RFS and this RIL mess). Most companies are pretty crappy coders, but most of the time, it doesn't interfere with major things, like OS upgrades.
That, plus the lack of effort or support on Samsung's part, has me never wanting to buy another Samsung phone again, or ever recommending an Android phone from Samsung....
I'm gonna do my best to find in my next phone another quick processor with a nice super AMOLED screen and be done with Samsung, I've had enough, and I'm a very patient person....
What is RIL? Is this Radio Interface Library?
Is it linked into kernel or other module? Not extractable at all?
As I imagine it to myself, if it is some sort of dll or package, it shouldn't matter if we do not have source, because it's interface have to be already strictly defined. It doesn't matter if it is buggy. It should work with any android version.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
P.S. I have Dell Axim v50x and people already created ROM from scratch! However it doesn't have RIL. ;-)
CNemo7539 said:
What is RIL? Is this Radio Interface Library?
Is it linked into kernel or other module? Not extractable at all?
As I imagine it to myself, if it is some sort of dll or package, it shouldn't matter if we do not have source, because it's interface have to be already strictly defined. It doesn't matter if it is buggy. It should work with any android version.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
P.S. I have Dell Axim v50x and people already created ROM from scratch! However it doesn't have RIL. ;-)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if it could have been done, birdman would have done it already
Well I think it's a valid question. Some might think it tedious or obnoxious, but absolutely valid. This is a development forum after all. The reason we don't have 2.2 isn't a hardware limitation, so it must be a practical one -- or yes it would be here.
But I'll just speak from speculation in the hopes that someone will correct me. For god sakes this is a development forum! We've got releases, we have fixes, we have patches, we have complaints, we have gossip. I'd love to see all the _development_ discussion I can get.
From a wider puzzle-piece perspective, I would like to know what is missing. We have working drivers. We have working hardware. We have full source from Google for the operating system. There are several other android phones on Verizon, a few even have Froyo. Sprint currently offers a CDMA Galaxy S phone (Epic) with android 2.2, and that phone possibly shares some hardware (though the WIMAX radio is totally irrelevant to us).
I'm not up to speed on exactly what the RIL is, or how it gets plugged into the android kernel. The RIL (Radio Interface Layer) is a software layer between android itself and the drivers controlling the phone hardware. Google provides some samples for a carrier to create one to govern communication on their network. I'd expect one issue of randomly hacking something like this, is if you are taking over your radio hardware's communications, then you have the capability of putting unwanted data on the network, which might even be criminal. Am I being extreme? So, perhaps we can't touch the RIL and need to wait for it to be spoonfed to us by those that bought the radio band from the FCC. Perhaps this code is inexorably married to particular hardware, unavailable for reading, or even encrypted. Maybe the primary limitation is the royal pain in the apricots that it is to inspect, decompile, and reverse engineer binary code.
But what if we could do something?
My understanding is the RIL is only a carrier-specific interface to the underlying hardware. Shouldn't it be similar between phones, even with wildly different hardware? Shouldn't its interface also be similar between close versions of android? The Droid 2 is a verizon phone with a RIL that does indeed work with Froyo. What I'd like to know is A) can another phone's RIL be extracted within the same carrier, and B) Being the abstract entity that it is, what prevents it from being married to the Fascinate's hardware base?
To be honest, I ardently believe a frank discussion (sans opinions, complains, problems, just productive discussion w/ a smattering of facts) BELONGS in the Development forum.
I'll stop here, in case this thread dies, as so many of mine do.
Jt1134, adrynalyne, and fallingup(angel12) are all very capable as well. This is solely the fault of none other Samsung.
Edit: to answer your question, i think that.the answer about RIL is no, although i dont have a good qualified answer about why the RIL from D2 cant be ported im sure that if it could have, it would have. Sorry thats not a better answer.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App
I don't know anything about how the RIL works, but I would assume that it could only be easily ported from one device to another if they were using the same chipset in the underlying hardware for the phone. I doubt you'd be able to take the Droid 2/X RIL, and take it to the Droid 2 Global or Droid Pro. Given that, I'm guessing that you can't really take a RIL from one phone and put it on another without extensive work, since most OEMs tend to use different hardware in their devices. From what I've heard, there is a semi-working AOSP build floating around, so the devs are trying, but Samsung's crappy source to work from is not making things easy for them.
There are actually some semi-working builds of aosp floating arpunfld but the last time I checked one out it was missing one thing that I consider to be kind of a biggie. It couldn't quite make calls. I'm sure they have it to make calls now but there is a reason its not out to the forums yet. I agree withstand nuts up there. Thanks you Samsung.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App
ksizzle9 said:
There are actually some semi-working builds of aosp floating arpunfld but the last time I checked one out it was missing one thing that I consider to be kind of a biggie. It couldn't quite make calls. I'm sure they have it to make calls now but there is a reason its not out to the forums yet. I agree withstand nuts up there. Thanks you Samsung.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i believe there was still no radio at all in aosp, and the hope is that 2.2 can fill in the gaps
Wow, wow, wow!
Why do we need another phone RIL? Current one from SF at hand should do perfectly. Did Google changed something in android API related to a RIL? I don't know for sure, but never heard or read anything making me think they did it. Android should call RIL and that is set in stone. ALL calls signatures must to be known. Something new may be added, but it is not show stopper.
So, I still do not understand - is it not extractable or what?
Even if not and it is somewhere in protected memory, encoded or whatever, Froyo slapped on top must work, IMHO. And sources available. So, why we stuck waiting for Samsung?
I know, one may say - do it yourself if you are so smart... Once again, I just want to understand root of the problem. I probably can do something, because I have degree and experience. But, it will take me forever. From what I've tried and seen learning curve is very steep.
On the other hand, skilled developer might simply need fresh look at the problem... May be guys just hitting wrong wall?
CNemo7539 said:
Wow, wow, wow!
Why do we need another phone RIL? Current one from SF at hand should do perfectly. Did Google changed something in android API related to a RIL? I don't know for sure, but never heard or read anything making me think they did it. Android should call RIL and that is set in stone. ALL calls signatures must to be known. Something new may be added, but it is not show stopper.
So, I still do not understand - is it not extractable or what?
Even if not and it is somewhere in protected memory, encoded or whatever, Froyo slapped on top must work, IMHO. And sources available. So, why we stuck waiting for Samsung?
I know, one may say - do it yourself if you are so smart... Once again, I just want to understand root of the problem. I probably can do something, because I have degree and experience. But, it will take me forever. From what I've tried and seen learning curve is very steep.
On the other hand, skilled developer might simply need fresh look at the problem... May be guys just hitting wrong wall?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
is it possible? perhaps...but the 5 or so guys who really develop for this phone havent been able to get it to work....nor is aosp working 100% on any galaxy s phone
Response from developers?
Anyone?
Yes, you know so much, we are waiting for you to fix it.
Hurry the hell up.
adrynalyne said:
Yes, you know so much, we are waiting for you to fix it.
Hurry the hell up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree get your ass moving so we can have teh honeycombzzzz. Quit being such a lazy stingy jerk and get us our AOSP!
ksizzle9 said:
Jt1134, adrynalyne, and fallingup(angel12) are all very capable as well. This is solely the fault of none other Samsung.
Edit: to answer your question, i think that.the answer about RIL is no, although i dont have a good qualified answer about why the RIL from D2 cant be ported im sure that if it could have, it would have. Sorry thats not a better answer.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes i was just pulling one dev name out for the heck of it
but i subscribe to the "if it could have been done, it would have been done"
adrynalyne said:
Yes, you know so much, we are waiting for you to fix it.
Hurry the hell up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't care what you did for community! But you behave like f****g jerk.
No real explanation for the rest of us? Stay on irc, we will survive without your comments here.
CNemo7539 said:
I don't care what you did for community! But you behave like f****g jerk.
No real explanation for the rest of us? Stay on irc, we will survive without your comments here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that may be a problem for those who just stay here as virtually everything is irc only these days...or the majority of it anyway
CNemo7539 said:
I don't care what you did for community! But you behave like f****g jerk.
No real explanation for the rest of us? Stay on irc, we will survive without your comments here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How many different ways do people need to say that "it's being worked on"? The devs are doing a lot of work on our device, but also working with other stuff, all in their free time. Follow the stuff they do on Twitter and github, or join in on IRC.
Attitudes such as your's are precisely why the devs have stopped posting stuff here. You act as though it's a simple process to do things, when it isn't, especially when Samsung gives you a crappy base to start from. The devs have to first get Samsung's source fixed and cleaned up, then start on whatever it is they want to work on, all while finding more bugs and issues that need fixed, primarily all stemming from the crappy source. If you want to be angry at someone, make it Samsung, not the few devs that are working on our device.
Sent from my StupidFast Voodoo Fascinate
As I said - I will survive. I'm OK even with not rooted stock.
Was it so difficult to answer what the real problem is? I don't know what is the problem with this generation? Do I need to be on FB, irc or whatever to get the answer? Why do not answer in place? Ain't it this forum purpose?
No, seems like I need to kiss somebody ass to get meaningful response these days... That way he can maintain his "super god" status.
I do believe I've been pretty polite stating my question, even though English is not my native language. What generated so much sarcasm?

[Q] Why can't we compile our own 2.2 OS?

Let me start by saying I'm fairly new to Android, and that this probably should go in a general Android forum, but since I'm a Fascinate user, this seems appropriate to me. I've searched, but haven't found a real explanation, and I'm not one to take things as fact without a reasonable explanation.
So it seems like everyone is waiting for an official 2.2 release for the Fascinate, flashing 2.1 ROMs but not capable of upgrading to 2.2+; but I'm wondering why we can't just compile our own OS for our phones? Android is a Linux-like OS, and I know Linux users would never stay on an old version if a newer (better?) version was available. I'm talking down-and-dirty tweak-every-option-by-hand Slackware here. Is the source available for download? If so, why can't we do something with it? Is something in the phone completely locked and unhackable? Is it the fear of having a $500 paperweight? Is it difficult to regain Verizon network connectivity?
Again, forgive the noob question, and thanks in advance for any help you can give me!
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=792986
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=883004
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=882946
There is currently work being done by jt, birdman, and the other skew of developers trying to develop a working AOSP version of 2.2/2.3. The biggest struggle that they have encountered was the RIL (Radio Interface Layer) binaries. Samsung produced some bogus complex proprietary binaries with no properly working source code. Because this phone is CDMA and not GSM, we can't simply use galaxy s files.
Anyways, the point is that there is work being done to bring it to our phone. They have a working AOSP 2.1 that is currently in alpha stage. Jt basically built his own RIL for this phone to get it working.
If this RIL works, we may end up with 2.3 sooner than later.
eulipion2 said:
Let me start by saying I'm fairly new to Android, and that this probably should go in a general Android forum, but since I'm a Fascinate user, this seems appropriate to me. I've searched, but haven't found a real explanation, and I'm not one to take things as fact without a reasonable explanation.
So it seems like everyone is waiting for an official 2.2 release for the Fascinate, flashing 2.1 ROMs but not capable of upgrading to 2.2+; but I'm wondering why we can't just compile our own OS for our phones? Android is a Linux-like OS, and I know Linux users would never stay on an old version if a newer (better?) version was available. I'm talking down-and-dirty tweak-every-option-by-hand Slackware here. Is the source available for download? If so, why can't we do something with it? Is something in the phone completely locked and unhackable? Is it the fear of having a $500 paperweight? Is it difficult to regain Verizon network connectivity?
Again, forgive the noob question, and thanks in advance for any help you can give me!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You obviously have not searched hard enough, as this has been discussed in many places. I would suggest you start by searching this forum (edit: or seeing the links and posts above).
I will say, however, that recent achievements by (edit: the developers mentioned above) have made your suggestion quite possible. If you want to get a taste of what is to come, see the aosp alpha sticky located in the development section. The rom still has bugs, but it is a giant step forward for the Fascinate.
Sent from my Galaxy-S Fascinate
Florynce said:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=792986
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=883004
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=882946
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^^^^^
10char
I must add/point out that the work these guys are doing could easily pave the way for Cyanogenmod- and other well-featured roms to be compiled/ported and used on Fascinate as well.
I've read the above links, but they didn't really quite answer my question. I guess I'm wondering why a Linux-based OS isn't acting/being treated like a Linux-based OS.
Let's say I go out and buy a new computer today. I want to put Linux on it. I get the machine home, download my distro of choice and make an install cd. As I'm installing, I configure the installation either for my specific hardware or I can use a generic profile if my hardware isn't listed.
Now say a new version of the Linux kernel comes out. I can upgrade without having to wait for a version for my hardware. Or if I install MyDistro v1 when I get my machine, and MyDistro v2 comes out the next day, I don't have to wait for someone to develop a version to work with my hardware.
So my question is more of a why can't we upgrade our distro like other Linux variants? Is it because there's no generic replacement for the Samsung RIL? If I were to download the source and do a generic build, or even a specific one, I wouldn't be able to install it because...?
Sorry to be a pain, but I genuinely have no clue. Again, thank you for the insight!
2.2 will boot on the I500 just nothing works. If you would like to help http://opensource.samsung.com/
The source code can be found there. Please feel free to help the development along.
I suggest you read through the reply's to your question and pay special note to those bringing up the RIL as that seems to be the biggest hurdle right now.
I think maybe the answer you are looking for is that it is possible to do it, it's just extremely difficult because Samsung's open source is very shoddy and isn't based on AOS, which is what is used for most other phones.
Since the developers don't have a build that works, they have to work from the ground up with AOS and get every last feature on the fascinate working without using Samsung's code (TouchWiz, widgets, etc).
The links they gave you explain most of it but you have to sift through the posts. There is a dev named jt (amongst others) who is working on a ROM that is upgradable based on AOSP and it looks very promising.
edit: It's also worth noting that when I say "not based on AOS" I mean that it is proprietary software used by Samsung-only phones and is not coded by Google. It still, of course, is based on Android OS. It would be akin to a ROM coded by Samsung for their phones rather than generic ROMs that could be downloaded by other phones.
Perfect, thanks!
Try thinking of it as buying an Ubuntu laptop from dell. Sure its " Ubuntu" but not stock. It so full of bloat and badly written drivers that aren't supplied openly for the user that it would be hell trying get the latest version of ubuntu to run on it.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
For clarification.... so I can wrap my brain around this. Is this situation kinda like having bought a new computer that's running an os, but has no installed device drivers and nowhere to download them from, so they have to be written by hand?
Edit: that last post came thru while I was writing this one, I think it basically answers my question...
So what the devs on here are trying to do is develop a "generic" profile that can work on our phone (as well as others?), creating a solid base to allow users to upgrade and change at-will without having to wait for official releases?
See, that's the part I'm having a hard time with. No generic profile built into the OS to use in the absence of a hardware specific one?
LoverBoyV said:
Try thinking of it as buying an Ubuntu laptop from dell. Sure its " Ubuntu" but not stock. It so full of bloat and badly written drivers that aren't supplied openly for the user that it would be hell trying get the latest version of ubuntu to run on it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On a sidenote, I bought a Dell netbook witih Ubuntu. Didn't waste time with Ubuntu, but I chose it because I didn't want MS to get money from a license fee. Installed Mac OS X on it the day it arrived
Ya know, I tried to do the same thing with my inspiron 1525 notebook, with snow leopard 10.6.3 since I have a spare hard drive. Spent a whole day with numerous guides, trying this n that. Got it to actually boot to the desktop once, bit as I was putting the drivers in, it went into KP and from that point on, I could never even reinstall back to the desktop again.
Well, Samsung is giving us a simple/reliable update to Froyo with unique functionality, as soon as possible.
Source: (Twitter, About 12pm 1/2/2011 from Samsungtweets via Cotweet - http://twitter.com/Samsungtweets/samsung-usa )
Samsungtweets We are working to make the Android 2.2/Froyo upgrade available to all U.S Galaxy S owners as soon as possible.
Samsungtweets We want Galaxy S owners to have simple/reliable upgrade. We r running tests due to complexity/unique functionality
EDIT: gave more specific time and source of tweets. Post is meant to be objective, without definition of ASAP for this context.
Swyped w/ XDA App. When in doubt, mumble.
soba49 said:
Well, Samsung is giving us a simple/reliable update to Froyo with unique functionality, as soon as possible.
Source (Twitter, 6 hours ago):
Samsungtweets We are working to make the Android 2.2/Froyo upgrade available to all U.S Galaxy S owners as soon as possible.
Samsungtweets We want Galaxy S owners to have simple/reliable upgrade. We r running tests due to complexity/unique functionality
Swyped w/ XDA App. When in doubt, mumble.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure if this is meant to be funny or not haha. Are those recent tweets?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
They seem to post the same things over and over, of course this is also because people constantly ask when is froyo coming, and every time they say there is no definite date. It is coming soon that that is all they will say; yelling, moaning and crying isn't gonna make it come any sooner, just sit back and it will eventually come.

Why the epic 4g CyanogenMod port is not backed by the CM team my opinion.

Hello,
This was brought up in another thread that is now locked.This post asked the question.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=11287492&postcount=40
and this is the blog post by Cyanogen
http://www.cyanogenmod.com/home/a-note-on-unofficial-ports-and-how-to-get-it-right
From what I can make from the blog post that Cyanogen put up on the CM website the Epic 4g as well as the other Galaxy S CM ports are not backed by Cyanogen because they do not go through the normal chain of how they add their code into their source code tree.The Galaxy S CM github has many changes to the stock android code that could possible and probably does break the code from being compiled for other phones. The framework is modified to work with the Samsung RIL that our phones use. The CM team will make additions to the stock android code not modifiy the stock code itself. So from my understanding of thing this is why Cyanogen does not consider what the CMSGS team has done as a part of the mainline CM code base. I believe this goes for all the Galaxy S phones not just the Epic.
Does being backed by the CM team make it get done any quicker? If so....
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Being backed by the Cm team would definitely speed up the porting process, Cyanogen had the Evo Release Client up and running in a little over a month without source
So its a matter of pulling the source together and prperly placing it into their source control so their build bot can properly dov what build bots do...build...then CM helps with the port process?
If I think I'm following that right...somone better start uploading code to Cyanogens t&c's(terms and conditions) so we can have some epic awesomesauce.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Most importantly, no major hardware functionality should be broken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What this statement implies is that no Cyanogenmod port is ever gonna be official right away; there's always an in-progress period where major functions are broken. Regardless of other issues, that's where our Epic port is at right now and part of the reason why it's not official.
Poryhack said:
What this statement implies is that no Cyanogenmod port is ever gonna be official right away; there's always an in-progress period where major functions are broken. Regardless of other issues, that's where our Epic port is at right now and part of the reason why it's not official.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True but there is code that is changed in the Galaxy S port that doesn't get changed at all in other CM ports as far as I know.
If we had HTC Epic's instead of Samsung Epic's and still identical devices... CM would officially support the Epic.
Period. They can say whatever they want but we all know this to be the case. You can't tell me Samsung changes their code that much more then HTC... last I checked Sense was a much more in depth overall to the underlying OS then Touchwiz is.. but maybe not.
The thing is, HTC uses the same hardware across the board (snapdragon processors, same camera etc.) which makes Rom ports much much easier to pull off, whereas the Hummingbird in the Galaxy S is only in the Galaxy S and only the Unlocked Galaxies and Gsm have froyo source so far.
Thanks for osting this skeeter
Android Creative Syndicate- From spontaneous ingenuity, comes creative brilliance
063_XOBX said:
The thing is, HTC uses the same hardware across the board (snapdragon processors, same camera etc.) which makes Rom ports much much easier to pull off, whereas the Hummingbird in the Galaxy S is only in the Galaxy S and only the Unlocked Galaxies and Gsm have froyo source so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The changes in the code have nothing at all to do with the cpu its all for the radio which even having froyo source will not help a bit with.Its all in the way the code changes were done. Rather then adding to the base code in CM the code was directly changed which is what Cyanogen has an issue with doing so basically could and probably has broken the radio code for other cdma phones, I don't know what or if any of the code in the frameworks was changed for the gsm Galaxy S phones so I can't say for sure that it the source from the CMSGS github wouldn't work on another GSM phone I only know that changes were made to get it working on the Epic and Fascinate.I don't think what the CMSGS team did was wrong they did what they had to do to get things working and from the time I spent working on it it didn't seem like there was much input from the CM team at all but that was probably happening in another irc channel that I was not invited into if they were involved.I was hoping that the Galaxy S would have had more interest from the CM team as a whole I know a phone or two was collected and donated to at least one dev and i also heard that Koush was supposed to take over the Captivate port of CM I am not sure if that ever happened or not but the Epic and Fascinate were from the beginning the red headed step children of the Galaxy S line it really is too bad that there wasn't for developers around to help work on it and make an offical Cyanogen backed CM port.I blame it all on the Evo personally if the Epic came out first it would be the Epic sporting all the kernel and roms that you can find in the Evo forum instead we are left with a handful or less of devs and a phone that is far from the potential that it has.
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
dreamsforgotten said:
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where's the thank spam? hah.
I've slowly been dipping myself into the Developer 'pool' for the epic if you will..and at first when I started working nobody really ever helped out..they just threw me a link and was like..start reading blah blah blah..
Reading only gets you so far; Imho you learn better when you've got the experience of working first hand with the material you're trying to learn.
dreamsforgotten said:
This statement brings up one of my biggest questions I have for the epic forums that I have yet to understand. If a lack of devs are the biggest problem for the epic why is it they are not attempting to train anyone else. Here's my point. I have cataloged every bit (and still am) of info I know about themeing android and the samsung epic. I wrote guides breaking down every part of installing the tools necessary and using them so anyone just sitting down with a fresh windows and their first android phone would understand. Where are our dev guides besides "read developer.android.com". I've read it, I've set everything up. I've downloaded source, I've even ran make with success. But it does nothing without proprietary files. How do you plug them in. extract files.sh dont work without cm6 running on my phone. Where do we learn how to edit our build.prop, init.rc, compile drivers and modules. Joey krimm it's a great beginners source but what about updates since the stall between ubuntu 10 64 support, and 64 becoming the default. I feel like not only it's sammy and sprint at fault, but so are devs that arent open with their knowledge. The best gift this community could have gotten in all of this "down time"waiting was time spent learning. Devs stuck waiting on modems and source, start writing and teaching so when you get that source, you'll have a team behind you. That's the spirit of linux and it dont exist on xda's Samsung Epic Development section!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When it comes to working on CM most of the work that needs to be done is all coding which we have very few if anyone java coders. Also you can use extract-files.sh on a phone running straight DK28 to get the propietary files needed to build CM with.When it comes to everything else most of the devs have taught themselves how to do the things they so by trial and error and alot of reading the internet. I know I have little coding skill so its would be hard to teach someone something you don't know how to do yourself and alot of the other things like putting togther device files to build android even on the google site has no real information on how to do it at all the best way I think is to just compare what the other phones use and piece it together from that.
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
theimpaler747 said:
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I can see its not that Cyanogen doesn't want to support the galaxy s devices its that it seems they don't give any input to the devs that are working on CM for the galaxy s. They have basically split off from the main CM source tree itself and run their own source tree. It seemed like (and this is from the limited amount I saw on irc) that there was no input from the CM team they just let them work on their own. CM has ways to setup the code so the source tree remains workable across the board on all the devices it supports, the cmsgs team has just taken a different route on things and gone their own route thus making it not backed by cyanogen, was it the right way to do it who knows but it has made all the galaxy s devices redheaded step children in the eyes of Cyanogen and the CM team as a whole by the looks of it. I know from the point of view of having an Epic the major hold up to it is having coders with the proper skills to do the coding in general we had one coder working on it I don't know if he is still involved or not at this point. All I know is to make is a backed by Cyanogen CM port the coding that has been done so far would have to be completely redone in the ways that the rest of the CM team adds code to the CM source tree with as little to no modification of the stock CM code as possible.
Also I would like to add that I am not trying to put anyone down that is working on the CMSGS team they have done CM working on these devices and am in no way bad mouthing the work that has been done. This is just my view on things and why Cyanogen doesn't back the galaxy s CM ports.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
theimpaler747 said:
Yet it still makes me wonder; why no epic/galaxy s support? Virtually every other phone, and even some tablets like the gtab, have CM support and even CM7 support. Even the HTC Hero, with obviously no source code for 2.2 or 2.3 and no official 2.2 ever to be released, has a working build of CM7. Is it pure incompetence of Epic developers? Is it a lack of interest? Is it simply cyanogen not wanting to support galaxy s devices? I really don't know, but I'd really like to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, trying to comprehend everything that is going on here, I feel like the CMTeam does not feel the Epic is worth porting to CM7 due to it's delay on a FroYo source, which I am positive would make the Epic's porting much easier.
However, it still makes me wonder why they could not have used 2.1 to port to CM7, as like you said, the Hero has been able to do.
It also confuses me that the Captivate has even been able to run a Gingerbread port (I believe cyanogen) then. I realize that the Captivate has no 4G or a slide or anything, but the fact that they were willing to work off of 2.1 I assume gets me wondering why no one has tried making a CM port for the Epic's 2.1
I am trying to understand this as best as I can, so please forgive me if I seem to be giving false input on this conversation.
Its the time taken to port a phone, combined with the number of phones above yours on their list. The fact is they have a list of other phones they feel like investing their time in over the galaxy s line in general which is even more of a reason all knowledge of development on the Epic should be layed out even in pieces like the rest of the information here. Honestly thinking "leak it to noobnl, then we'll get all the goods" isn't going to cut it. Java coders, ubuntu fanatics who have compiled a few apps, and new people willing to learn should be putting heads together compiling new ****. If we dont start a group effort of making a bone stock aosp froyo altering the existing drivers were not going to be much further with source code. And it should be layed out here irc dont work for everyone.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
acer1096xxx said:
Well, trying to comprehend everything that is going on here, I feel like the CMTeam does not feel the Epic is worth porting to CM7 due to it's delay on a FroYo source, which I am positive would make the Epic's porting much easier.
However, it still makes me wonder why they could not have used 2.1 to port to CM7, as like you said, the Hero has been able to do.
It also confuses me that the Captivate has even been able to run a Gingerbread port (I believe cyanogen) then. I realize that the Captivate has no 4G or a slide or anything, but the fact that they were willing to work off of 2.1 I assume gets me wondering why no one has tried making a CM port for the Epic's 2.1
I am trying to understand this as best as I can, so please forgive me if I seem to be giving false input on this conversation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But like I said, there's CM7 (Android 2.3 if you don't know) for the HTC hero, with no 2.2 or 2.3 source code. So why not us?
theimpaler747 said:
But like I said, there's CM7 (Android 2.3 if you don't know) for the HTC hero, with no 2.2 or 2.3 source code. So why not us?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright, this is what I believe.
The Hero does not have 4G, or a QWERTY keyboard, two things the Epic does have that could make a pure AOSP port more difficult without a source. Also, HTC runs Snapdragon throughout the whole system, making tweaks a lot more simpler than SGS's Hummingbird Processor, which uses something else (I can't remember) with their system as well.
The last part I'm not sure if that makes a big deal or not, since I have seen a (what I think) CM7 port for the Samsung Captivate, so it may simply be because of 4G and the QWERTY keyboard.
I see what you're saying though. I guess the CMTeam should have no problem making a CM7 port based off of the Epic's 2.1 source...maybe they're just waiting because 2.2 might make it easier and supposedly 2.2 is coming soon so there'd be no point in starting now...otherwise I have no clue.
acer1096xxx said:
Alright, this is what I believe.
The Hero does not have 4G, or a QWERTY keyboard, two things the Epic does have that could make a pure AOSP port more difficult without a source. Also, HTC runs Snapdragon throughout the whole system, making tweaks a lot more simpler than SGS's Hummingbird Processor, which uses something else (I can't remember) with their system as well.
The last part I'm not sure if that makes a big deal or not, since I have seen a (what I think) CM7 port for the Samsung Captivate, so it may simply be because of 4G and the QWERTY keyboard.
I see what you're saying though. I guess the CMTeam should have no problem making a CM7 port based off of the Epic's 2.1 source...maybe they're just waiting because 2.2 might make it easier and supposedly 2.2 is coming soon so there'd be no point in starting now...otherwise I have no clue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think we also have 'limited functionality' w/ 2.1 as far as the phone's full capability.
2.2 will unlock some hidden potential IMO. Could be the reason why all the hubbub to 'wait for 2.2'.. again, just speculating.

Categories

Resources