Now that we have smaller ASOP/AOKP ROMs, is it possible to Re-Size the System Partition to fully leverage the extra space that before was being used by the Samsung ROM?, thanks
I remember someone saying that, due to the fact the internal memory drivers are proprietary, there wouldn't be a way to resize partitions. Hopefully I'm wrong, though.
What I'm really hoping for is a well-laid-out tutorial for reallocating your external SD card as internal storage.
i'm wondering the same, recently installed SlimBean, still only have 9.7GB free of Internal Storage, my system root indicates only 2.6GB, thats 12.3GB, is that all the 16GB models have after formatting?
i think someone will have to get us to an engineering hboot of sorts
This will likely never happen, period. The eMMCs used in most Android smart phones are only set up to allow partitioning once at the factory, and then never again. It's a hardware thing. You can partition and divide up more, but you can't reclaim or change what's already been partitioned(unless you did it).
What's more likely to happen is, just like with most other Samsung phones I've owned, someone will take the Internal-External-Swap script and modify/update it to work on the Galaxy S4. Basically what this script does is change the mount locations inside the phone so Android believes the SD card is the internal storage, and the former Internal Storage is the external.
EDIT: Example of the script being modified/updated for the Galaxy Note 8.0: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2276193
We did on the Nexus One to get ICS on it. Called Blackrose. S-Off was created, not true, but enough to allow a hex editor to resize partitions. I did this many times to make System larger and Data smaller to flash the bigger rom's like ICS that needed more System size to run properly.
It was developed because of a strong need. If the need is not big enough, no dev may waste their time. The One S got that capability too--
rugmankc said:
We did on the Nexus One to get ICS on it. Called Blackrose. S-Off was created, not true, but enough to allow a hex editor to resize partitions. I did this many times to make System larger and Data smaller to flash the bigger rom's like ICS that needed more System size to run properly.
It was developed because of a strong need. If the need is not big enough, no dev may waste their time. The One S got that capability too--
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I acknowledge those feats, from my quick research, I'll point out that those were both done with custom HBOOTs which changed the bootloader. As the Galaxy S4's bootloader is not only locked but encrypted, I still have my doubts about this being able to be done.
Were the Nexus One or HTC One S able to reclaim internal storage space for the user in the way that the OP is asking? I'm curious because while making System larger and Data smaller is an good example of re-partitioning, weren't you simply moving around space that was already reserved to the OS area and unavailable to the user... if that statement makes any sense. This is stepping outside my realm of expertise here, and I'll admit that my technical knowledge is very limited. The last time I heard these proposals were back when the T-Mobile G2 came out and folks were asking the same questions then.
EDIT: Ultimately you're right, and demand will drive innovation either way. IF the devs find a way to do this, I'll be pleased. If they find way to swap the internal/externals, I'll be happy with that too.
It was a moving around of sizes. Make one larger and one smaller. Total size had to remain same. Not sure if anyone will do it. But, may be possible. Outside of my expertise too.
Sent From My 32gb Samsung Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 2
Awwww crap. In that case I think I'm refusing delivery of my AT&T GS4. Sucks...
the pit file for the gegs4 would resize it
HumanXv2 said:
the pit file for the gegs4 would resize it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You go first trying that
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda app-developers app
jd1639 said:
You go first trying that
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will when my phone gets here monday and the files are available. Really no reason it shouldn't work but I may be wrong. I odin'd Tmobile files onto my S3(bootloader,csc,rom) and it worked fine.
Im on Tmobile and would prefer to rid the phone of all traces of ATT =)
HumanXv2 said:
I will when my phone gets here monday and the files are available. Really no reason it shouldn't work but I may be wrong. I odin'd Tmobile files onto my S3(bootloader,csc,rom) and it worked fine.
Im on Tmobile and would prefer to rid the phone of all traces of ATT =)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Odin will probably error out if you try that, due to the locked bootloader.
I thought a full odin file had the bootloader?
mattdm said:
Odin will probably error out if you try that, due to the locked bootloader.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If he's lucky. I predict a brick.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda app-developers app
jd1639 said:
If he's lucky. I predict a brick.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe so. And if it bricks, it will be a hard brick.
HumanXv2 said:
I thought a full odin file had the bootloader?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unless it is signed by Samsung with the correct authentication key, it won't matter. If you run across said key...you will be one popular individual.
Ok so there are keys on the phones non writable memory and when the phone boots up it has to match keys with the bootloader and all to boot?
Thank you. This is much better than "it wont work"
HumanXv2 said:
Ok so there are keys on the phones non writable memory and when the phone boots up it has to match keys with the bootloader and all to boot?
Thank you. This is much better than "it wont work"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, but it runs a lot deeper than that. The "chain of trust" employed by this phone goes all the way down to the hardware not just NV. Loki sidesteps the process (again, there is more to it than that), but can be software patched by AT&T / Samsung. So far, the three best ways at getting at this bootloader seem to be:
1. Obtaining Samsung's encryption key. It would most certainly have to be released or leaked because it would be near impossible to break the encryption by other methods.
2. Somehow allow a secondary bootloader to run on the device. I think Devs are still waiting for the full release of KNOX to see if it would allow this or not.
3. Somehow disable the hardware fuses that are part of the chain of trust. This is very unlikely and would require the ability to re-press certain circuitry and develop new code. And if successful, every single phone would have to be done that way. So although I mentioned it, it's really not a viable option at all.
The bottom line is to NEVER take a software OTA from AT&T or Samsung until it is checked and cleared by Devs and (in the near future), if you need to send your phone for warranty repair or need to exchange it, you might be screwed.
This is not wise at all. We're talking hardbrick here.
Related
Im not a big developer or hacker of any sort and so i just have a quick simple question. Dont get mad at me for not knowing. But do we NEED a perm root to be able to use ROMS? What happens if we use a rom without perm root? A bricked phone? Erased data? Ive always been wondering this and never came across an answer or a similar thread
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
hawaiian.monzta said:
Im not a big developer or hacker of any sort and so i just have a quick simple question. Dont get mad at me for not knowing. But do we NEED a perm root to be able to use ROMS? What happens if we use a rom without perm root? A bricked phone? Erased data? Ive always been wondering this and never came across an answer or a similar thread
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tmobile included the chip so it will revert back to stock if it is rooted, therefore eliminating the possibility of a brick. If you call cust support and tell them you are having issues because you tried to root your g2, all they have to say is "reboot your phone." I think tmo did this because of the slew of customers calling cust support when they bricked their g1/mt3gs. Therefore, it is the inexperienced user's faults that tmobile had to install the root kit. If noobs didn't brick their devices so prevalently and ask tmobile for help with their mess up, there wouldn't be a need for the chip.
Sent from my HTC Dream using XDA App
ad505 said:
Tmobile included the chip so it will revert back to stock if it is rooted, therefore eliminating the possibility of a brick.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ugh. This is not only false, but has been repeatedly debunked. There is no chip, mechanism, or anything else that "reverts" the phone back to stock.
The NAND itself is set to be read-only at boot, and no one has yet succeeded in disabling this protection. When people root the G2 and make changes to the system, these changes only appear to be present because the Linux kernel is caching them. They are never written to the device, and so at next reboot (or earlier, when the caches are flushed) they disappear.
itp said:
Ugh. This is not only false, but has been repeatedly debunked. There is no chip, mechanism, or anything else that "reverts" the phone back to stock.
The NAND itself is set to be read-only at boot, and no one has yet succeeded in disabling this protection. When people root the G2 and make changes to the system, these changes only appear to be present because the Linux kernel is caching them. They are never written to the device, and so at next reboot (or earlier, when the caches are flushed) they disappear.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, chip or not, the "reboot unroot" was because folks bricked their devices and asked tmobile for help, flooding their customer support and overwhelming their resources. It makes perfect sense to me why this was included in a flagship device like the g1's successor.
Sent from my HTC Dream using XDA App
Its a bug. Don't give tmobile too much credit.
Sent from my HTC Vision G2
luis86dr said:
Its a bug. Don't give tmobile too much credit.
Sent from my HTC Vision G2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More like "Unfortunate side-effect of being read-only but appearing as read/write to the OS."
In normal circumstances, it's not an issue (being that nothing needs /system to be r/w for normal operation.) Technically you are operating it out of spec, since you re-mounted /system as r/w.
Not that I agree with it, it's ****ty (and the main reason I returned my G2.)
To answer the OP, yes - two things need to happen before ROMs can be released:
1) Permanent NAND unlock
2) Recovery (Clockwork Mod or similar) to write the ROM to un-locked storage.
Until both of these happen, ROM development is at a standstill.
luis86dr said:
Its a bug. Don't give tmobile too much credit.
Sent from my HTC Vision G2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What on earth makes you think it's a bug rather than a deliberate HTC feature?
keenerb said:
What on earth makes you think it's a bug rather than a deliberate HTC feature?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One could argue that the controller lying about syncs to "disk" is buggy behavior. But it's clear that it's very much deliberate.
How is it clear that it's deliberate? It only serves to let us mess around with our phones through a temporary root. It doesn't add to the underlying cause that we haven't rooted the phone.
At least, thats what I gathered from the wiki.
Uhhhh....sooooo.....what's the need for a perm root to use a rom again? Either no one answered or I completely missed it and I don't think I missed it haha
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
You're only making changes to the cache, so after using the phone for awhile, parts of the cache get emptied out, and they just go away. This is why when you have temp root, after enough time, your phone will just restart.
I've seen that theres work to get ROMs loading from SD cards, I haven't checked into this myself, so it might just be a pipe dream, but still, do you really want to run everything from your SD card?
At this point, it works better (and longer) to have temp root, and make small changes here and there.
And please someone correct me if I'm wrong on any point.
hawaiian.monzta said:
Uhhhh....sooooo.....what's the need for a perm root to use a rom again? Either no one answered or I completely missed it and I don't think I missed it haha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In fact, there is no such thing as permanent root. There is only root, the problem is that anything you do while being rooted is not preserved, as the memory card where the system is is write-protected. So you can't modify the system and make the root available permanently.
And to your question - no, you don't need permanent root to use ROMs. But permanent root needs write access to system and custom ROMs also need write access to the system. So they don't depend on each other, but both depend on another feature - the write access to the system (the integrated memory card, eMMC). Once you get write access, both problems ("permanent root" and custom ROMs) will be solved.
faugusztin said:
And to your question - no, you don't need permanent root to use ROMs. But permanent root needs write access to system and custom ROMs also need write access to the system. So they don't depend on each other, but both depend on another feature - the write access to the system (the integrated memory card, eMMC). Once you get write access, both problems ("permanent root" and custom ROMs) will be solved.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically, you only need recovery. But the fact of the matter is, they go hand-in-hand. Once one is compromised, the other is as well. This has been the pattern with HTC thus far anyway...
hawaiian.monzta said:
Uhhhh....sooooo.....what's the need for a perm root to use a rom again? Either no one answered or I completely missed it and I don't think I missed it haha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I answered here
No roms until those two things happen.
ad505 said:
Ok, chip or not, the "reboot unroot" was because folks bricked their devices and asked tmobile for help, flooding their customer support and overwhelming their resources. It makes perfect sense to me why this was included in a flagship device like the g1's successor.
Sent from my HTC Dream using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you think this is about anything but control, you're sorely mistaken. They do this because they can, and because they have commitments to Amazon, Photobucket, and every other pre-installed crapware provider they have a contract with to guarantee the user cannot remove their app.
If it's about bricked handsets, why not take the Nexus One approach: Make rooting trivially easy to do - anyone wishing to do so will likely take the path of least resistance. Once rooted, HTC/T-Mo can visually identify a rooted handset and decline warranty service. Problem solved.
franky1029 said:
How is it clear that it's deliberate? It only serves to let us mess around with our phones through a temporary root. It doesn't add to the underlying cause that we haven't rooted the phone.
At least, thats what I gathered from the wiki.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's deliberate because of the whole history behind it. S-ON, write protection, read-only partitions, gold cards, subsidy unlocking, etc. This arms race has gone on for years. All of this is done deliberately.
T-Mobile has an interest in making it as difficult as possible to use the handset on a different network, or use apps they don't like (which, btw, they have not started revoking yet, just wait, it's a matter of time...) Likewise, HTC has an interest in making their customer (T-Mobile) happy.
HTC doesn't give a **** that you, the end user, are unhappy. Their client is T-Mobile.
None of this will change until we (as customers) stop putting up with it, stop buying subsidized handsets from the Provider channel, and start buying un-subsidized handsets straight from the manufacturer. Unfortunately, this isn't going to happen in the U.S. for quite a while - people are too dumb to know what they are doing...
It was no accident that the device is designed to make writing to /system difficult. It was no accident on any other HTC handset either.
Why would you want temporary root over persistent root? It doesn't serve us at all - it only makes it harder on them (HTC - in the long run) once someone like Unrevoked roots it forever.
Did Samsung purposefully build in the recovery mode and download modes for us to be able to root and stuff?
Or were they for like Samsung's use only, and not all personal uses?
I don't know, but you have to appreciate the way Samsung doesn't lock their phones to the extent other manufacturers do.
ColorNapkin said:
I don't know, but you have to appreciate the way Samsung doesn't lock their phones to the extent other manufacturers do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I mean they did start getting hardware locked vibrants out there later during the year and then on 2.2 they tried to make a barrier for us to not do the recovery reisntall packages because it checked the signature and other stuff... so.. they did TRY later on to stop us... but i'm asking if the modes were built for them to use, and if it was only for them, how can they be so stupid to make it so easy to get in because i'm sure some dev just looked at the system files and saw the download mode etc and adb'd it in there.
I'm sure it was initially meant for Samsung use only. If they didn't care about us rooting our phones it wouldn't void the warranty. At least they don't use encrypted boot loader's like Motorola has started to do. They make it pretty much impossible to flash a custom ROM.
xriderx66 said:
I mean they did start getting hardware locked vibrants out there later during the year and then on 2.2 they tried to make a barrier for us to not do the recovery reisntall packages because it checked the signature and other stuff... so.. they did TRY later on to stop us... but i'm asking if the modes were built for them to use, and if it was only for them, how can they be so stupid to make it so easy to get in because i'm sure some dev just looked at the system files and saw the download mode etc and adb'd it in there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IIRC, in the case of the hardware locked vibrants, Samsung did admit that it was a manufacturer's fault there. All that got fixed by the JI6 update (if you didn't flash the fix beforehand).
Oniyuri said:
IIRC, in the case of the hardware locked vibrants, Samsung did admit that it was a manufacturer's fault there. All that got fixed by the JI6 update (if you didn't flash the fix beforehand).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope it wasn't fixed in ji6 not for me
And recovery comes in almost all phones.
Download mode was a bonus
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA Premium App
CrazyCharlie said:
I'm sure it was initially meant for Samsung use only. If they didn't care about us rooting our phones it wouldn't void the warranty. At least they don't use encrypted boot loader's like Motorola has started to do. They make it pretty much impossible to flash a custom ROM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
After I rooted and did an update a while back, I got some boot loops. Took it back to T-mobile and the rep asked me if I had rooted. He didn't mention anything about warranty and replaced it since I was under 30 days. Not sure if they don't care about root or if he was being nice.
muathib said:
After I rooted and did an update a while back, I got some boot loops. Took it back to T-mobile and the rep asked me if I had rooted. He didn't mention anything about warranty and replaced it since I was under 30 days. Not sure if they don't care about root or if he was being nice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
probably because you were on your 30 day thing, if you tell them you rooted, then their going to "black mark" you on your tmo acc so you don't get any more refurb. phones.
Now if they only release driver source..
Can some one explain to me in plain English why it's bootloader can't be unlock?
And what's the purpose of it?
its encrypted with a 1024 bit key that is damn bear impossible to crack, the only way we can get through the locked bootloader is to get the signing keys used to encrypt it, and then signing rom with those keys, theres no other way around it. the reason the locked bootloader is a bad thing is that with it, we cant install custom kernels, which are needed to make truly aosp roms.
i don't see what's the purpose for Motorola to do that, because isn't the idea of Android to be open and free, and to mod and work on it without limitations?
Thats the idea, but motorola basically did it to help prevent people from bricking phones, although personally I font think it helps much
Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using XDA App
You're right but the carriers have reason not to want people rooting their phones i.e free tethering and warranty replacements when people mess up their **** and don't know how to fix it.
Sent from my ADR6300 using XDA App
With all of that being said, would it be possible to use something like the RSDLite to access the bootloader and push up another GB Kernel? Granted it might be a noob question, but my goal is to get away from Verizon's Kernel for several reasons. Is there a stock Motorola GB Kernel out there we could replace it with....i.e.non VZW SBF file?
If it were possible, it would have been done by now.
Tappin' and Talkin' with Tapatalk
Here's one way to think of it: 1024 bits doesn't mean much to most people. A way to illustrate how how it would be to crack it would be this:
If the were a quadrillion computers (over 100 per person in the world) doing a quadrillion tries per second, which is impossible due to the massive heat it would generate, it would take over a billion years to guarantee we have the right key
Let me ask this question then.
With the given circumstance of not being able to swap out the Kernel, I have a question to it's limitations. The MAIN reason I want Gingerbread on my phone is in order to gain SIP Calling Support. On other Rooted Gingerbread Phones this is found under Settings > Call Settings. (I've used it on other devices and it works great) It is simply gone currently on my Droid 2 which has been rooted with GB on it. Is this limitation in place because of the Kernel? Does anyone see any other way around it?
Thanks.
This is a great topic. I've wanted to know about this for a while.
Move my post if you feel the need. I hate picking forums. Anyways. I have a XPRT from boost mobile running android 2.3.5 and I have been working for a few days to no avail in any vulnerabilities to rooting. Searching for users with same model and objective?
Sent from my MB612 using xda app-developers app
Anyone with the same phone please post or PM me.
Anybody? Seriously?
Almost 300 views and no responses? Anyone have the same model and want to collaborate?
I would really like to see some type of update this is crazy that no one has done anything with this system yet.
nyxclusive1 said:
I would really like to see some type of update this is crazy that no one has done anything with this system yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have the the same model and carrier right?
BlackFire27 said:
You have the the same model and carrier right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is currently no way to root the Boost Mobile version of the XPRT at the moment. I looked around and tried the .zip file from sd and it bricked. I have talked to numerous people who tried the Sprint .SBF which bricked the system to. Right now you will just have to sit back and wait and see if someone comes up with something. Sorry for the bad news.
jklung84 said:
There is currently no way to root the Boost Mobile version of the XPRT at the moment. I looked around and tried the .zip file from sd and it bricked. I have talked to numerous people who tried the Sprint .SBF which bricked the system to. Right now you will just have to sit back and wait and see if someone comes up with something. Sorry for the bad news.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that sucks ._. I do believe that a heavy amount of editing was done to the software and firmware by Boost. But this isn't bad news. Its actually a huge relief that finally I've gotten some feedback. We need a small community of people wishing to root this phone. Developer or not.
BlackFire27 said:
Well that sucks ._. I do believe that a heavy amount of editing was done to the software and firmware by Boost. But this isn't bad news. Its actually a huge relief that finally I've gotten some feedback. We need a small community of people wishing to root this phone. Developer or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I would love to just get a stock sbf so I can get mine working again lol.
Yes, rooting the boost version would be great, they just have so many restrictions on the phone. No hotspot, tethering is very limited, Hoping someone will find something soon.
jklung84 said:
Well I would love to just get a stock sbf so I can get mine working again lol.
Yes, rooting the boost version would be great, they just have so many restrictions on the phone. No hotspot, tethering is very limited, Hoping someone will find something soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is actually my first Motorola phone. Lol. I normally used HTCs beforehand. Would you be so kind as to explain what an SBF is and where they come from?
An SBF ( SYSTEM BOOT FILE) file from what I gather is the original Image of the Phone. It's kind of like if you are running a windows computer you need a Windows image to run the operating system. The same is true for a cell phone. The only place to get them is have them leaked from Motorola Techs. Each tech has different level access to be able to work on your phone.
A normal tech has Level 1 and Level 2 access which can look at your phone and figure out what is wrong. The "head Motorola Techs" have Level 3 and Level 4 access and they are the ones who actually can pull the files ( SBF ) and do the reflashing and other needed services.
This may not be totally accurate but it is what I have put together from the massive amount of research and reading I have done on these phones. If anyone has anything to add or correct please do because I don't want to give bad information. =/
I have currently been browsing around a lot, and trying to figure out this development thing. I am also reading currently on how the "rooting" process is achieved on phones. I have a moderate amount experience on linux machines so the reading is going fairly easy. Hopefully we can get some real DEVS in here to help us out.
That's a nice amount of research. I appreciate that. And android is linux. So you may find some nice similarities. I personally am much more experienced on the hardware side of the computer world ._. I need to brush up on my coding...and from what I assume. Root is achieved by exploiting the kernel in order to pretty much shove Busybox into the root filesystem. The Su binary. And the Superuser app.
From what I understand YES, that is exactly how it is done.
But getting permission is the challenge.
BlackFire27 said:
But getting permission is the challenge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Anyone know of a way to get the drivers and stuff to work on a linux machine? I just can't seem to find anything.
What I don't understand is the sbf file is like a backup of everything on the phone, if they can put it there, there has to be some way of pulling it off. I would like to know and understand why we can't pull the .sbf file off of the phone it's self? Any developers out there give me a shout and fill me in?
Well what an sbf seems to be basically a zip encoded specially for Motorola devices. I don't think its really possible to get it off without a factory reset and a custom recovery or bootloader.
BlackFire27 said:
Well what an sbf seems to be basically a zip encoded specially for Motorola devices. I don't think its really possible to get it off without a factory reset and a custom recovery or bootloader.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is what I was wondering about. Thanks.
I find it odd how carriers feel they need to go so far to prevent rooting, I find it wrong.
This is atleast my perspective. I go out to buy lets say a computer from best buy. I have the right to change anything on the computer, hardware and software.
Even mircosoft lets you modify (they just don't want you stealing it)
Their os and have built in applications to do so.
So why when I buy a phone and I can't do it. All of it is my property, Hard/software. If I brick it it'll bee my fault. Meaning I'll have to buy another one.
Sent from my MB612 using xda app-developers app
bingo here is the sbf http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=30831590#post30831590
You cant root the Sprint Gingerbread (Leaked version) and the Boost as well. I tried lots of tools, but nothing.
So, phones shipping with nougat get seamless updates. Phones that just update to it normally do not. This is a community full of geniuses that are far smarter than I will ever be. Any chance anyone has figured out how to manually make seamless updates a thing yet? Or is that not even possible on stock, even if the whole device was wiped and recoded by hand? Would it be ROM only?
popinloopy said:
So, phones shipping with nougat get seamless updates. Phones that just update to it normally do not. This is a community full of geniuses that are far smarter than I will ever be. Any chance anyone has figured out how to manually make seamless updates a thing yet? Or is that not even possible on stock, even if the whole device was wiped and recoded by hand? Would it be ROM only?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The devices shipping with Nougat are partitioned differently, they have two system partitions, something you can't just apply on a device that's already partitioned.
Heisenberg said:
The devices shipping with Nougat are partitioned differently, they have two system partitions, something you can't just apply on a device that's already partitioned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is it not possible to repartition it manually?
popinloopy said:
Is it not possible to repartition it manually?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course it is. But not on the fly.
Heisenberg said:
Of course it is. But not on the fly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never said anything about "on the fly." I just want to know if it's possible to repartition the device, whether or not that would make it compatible for seamless updates, whether or not anyone had done it yet, and if so, how to do it.
popinloopy said:
I never said anything about "on the fly." I just want to know if it's possible to repartition the device, whether or not that would make it compatible for seamless updates, whether or not anyone had done it yet, and if so, how to do it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, by "on the fly" I meant in a non-engineering environment. My fault for using the wrong term. It's possible, but to do it correctly they'd (Google) need to take your device. Whether or not it pops up here on XDA, I doubt it, unless somehow with the proper experience and know-how desperately wants it. The work vs reward is probably a bit outweighed.
Heisenberg said:
Sorry, by "on the fly" I meant in a non-engineering environment. My fault for using the wrong term. It's possible, but to do it correctly they'd (Google) need to take your device. Whether or not it pops up here on XDA, I doubt it, unless somehow with the proper experience and know-how desperately wants it. The work vs reward is probably a bit outweighed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, that makes sense. Well dang, I was kinda hoping. Oh well, thanks for the response.
You could repartition. Other users have already done it, just for different purposes. The updates themselves would have to be done differently. We'd need to package ROMs differently, to start. It would be easier to say for sure once there is a device taking advantage of the update process. To see how exactly it's being handled.
Edit: Realistically, you don't want automatic custom ROM updates. Unless you are comfortable being pushed into beta environments, and fully trust the developer. Not to mention the security risks of potential mitm attacks.