Or do I need FlashFire?
I believe that this is the same update as the one in this post
https://forum.xda-developers.com/moto-x-style/general/maintenance-release-dec-2016-security-t3557903
You need full unroot, stock kernel, stock recovery and no system partition modification
lukas77 said:
You need full unroot, stock kernel, stock recovery and no system partition modification
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
could you tell me how I can do this? Is there a general guide?
Wow... how many times are we going to answer this question every single time an update comes out?!?!
A phone must be 100% stock to take an OTA... stock recovery, stock system partition, stock boot partition... or the update will fail.
You need to either restore your pre-root backup (you did one with TWRP, right?) or flash a factory image that is the same version or newer than you have installed. Period, those are the proper answers to how to go back to stock so you can get an OTA.
acejavelin said:
Wow... how many times are we going to answer this question every single time an update comes out?!?!
A phone must be 100% stock to take an OTA... stock recovery, stock system partition, stock boot partition... or the update will fail.
You need to either restore your pre-root backup (you did one with TWRP, right?) or flash a factory image that is the same version or newer than you have installed. Period, those are the proper answers to how to go back to stock so you can get an OTA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I apologize, this was my first time rooting my phone so I don't know a lot. I was able to root my phone, thanks to your thread on rooting.
I plan on using this thread by you to go back to stock.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/mo...de-return-to-stock-relock-bootloader-t3489110
ThanuTK said:
I apologize, this was my first time rooting my phone so I don't know a lot. I was able to root my phone, thanks to your thread on rooting.
I plan on using this thread by you to go back to stock.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/mo...de-return-to-stock-relock-bootloader-t3489110
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope it helps... Just remember to search around the forums or Google a bit before asking a question. I apologise if I sounded a little snappy, I had just answered some very dumb PM's that frustrated me and then this was the first open thread I saw, sorry if I was a bit abrupt.
This question has been answered a whole lot so it gets a little frustrating sometimes to see a new thread pop up for this issue. That being said and you being new to rooting, I can't stress this enough: please search and read through the threads (and know the XDA rules of course). This device has been out for a while and by now, a large majority of the questions, issues, and whatever else you may have is addressed in these forums. If you do run across anything that there is no answer for, by all means ask away.
Guys there is any chance of volte update because jio expanding their services to next one year
Can it is possible that after nought update it is possible
Suri149 said:
Guys there is any chance of volte update because jio expanding their services to next one year
Can it is possible that after nought update it is possible
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Possible? Yes, but it isn't likely and I certainly don't expect it to happen. Lenovo has shown no interest in updating the Pure/Style to support Jio, or even fixing the current VoLTE issues on supported carriers for that matter.
Hey could you also tell me how important the android security updates are? are they critical ? without it would my phone be vulnerable?
ThanuTK said:
Hey could you also tell me how important the android security updates are? are they critical ? without it would my phone be vulnerable?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well on this I have a pretty strong opinion, and it isn't always well liked... I work in the IT industry with networks, so security is kind of a big deal to me... but Android security updates are essentially worthless, and are only a marketing ploy to make the company look better.
For example, lets look at some major vulnerabilities that have supposedly affected MILLIONS of Android devices... Dirty Cow is a good one, I am in a group here on XDA that is trying to use this vulnerability for something, anything really, but mainly for rooting difficult devices, and in a modern device it is almost impossible because of all the other parts of Android that help keep it secure like DM-verity and SELinux, end result is no usable exploit in almost all cases, although we have some results in cases where we are in complete control of the device with hands on adb access, but even then it is very rare and device specific, not something that you could just download a random malware app and have it affect you, I would need the device in hand. Then there are the terrible ones like Quadrooter, Stagefright, and Towelroot that affected millions, no tens of millions of devices, but have you ever heard of anyone being actually effected by a real exploit of that vulnerability? Nope, me neither, because for the most part these have only been exploited in a lab and not in real life... Because in a modern (I am talking Marshmallow or maybe even Lollipop) there are other things that protect the device, application sandboxing, DM-verity, SE Linux, and IntentFirewall, are all things that would likely protect the device even IF (and that's a big IF) one of these vulnerabilities did happen to be exploited on a device.
So are security updates important... no, not from a technical perspective in real life for the average user, but I certainly wouldn't reject them if they are easy to apply. I accept and apply every single one, even though I know the chances of something happening if I don't are probably less than that of me winning the Powerball Lottery Jackpot twice in two consecutive weeks, or about the same as being stuck by lightning while being bitten by a shark.
Now, none of what I am saying applies to other updates which are often bundled with security updates, or upgrades.
My thoughts exactly on the security updates. The only "evidence" I have heard about has been a couple of individuals who do not appear to understand why an app from some unknown source or dodgy websites along with crazy permission requirements might infect their phone. I acknowledge this as a human exploit though and not on the part of Android.
If I make current twrp backup, wipe, restore original Stock unrooted twrp backup, flash Stock recovery, take ota, reflash twrp and restore only data from the backup in first step would that essentially preserve user apps/data? Otherwise I will just freeze Moto update apk and wait for 7.0 to full wipe.
Update: Nm, I guess at that point without restoring system to preserve settings I may as well just use Titanium Backup :silly:
I'm rooted and using Xposed, but got the Dec update using a completely stock TWRP backup of system and boot posted here. Afterwards I simply had to reroot and reinstall my Xposed framework in TWRP, but all my modules which were still installed worked and maintained their settings. Couple of other minor cosmetic things I had to redo, but for me this worked very well without having to fully return to stock and reinstall everything from scratch. YMMV, and also do your own TWRP backup first just in case.
roaming4gnome said:
If I make current twrp backup, wipe, restore original Stock unrooted twrp backup, flash Stock recovery, take ota, reflash twrp and restore only data from the backup in first step would that essentially preserve user apps/data? Otherwise I will just freeze Moto update apk and wait for 7.0 to full wipe.
Update: Nm, I guess at that point without restoring system to preserve settings I may as well just use Titanium Backup :silly:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dahenjo said:
I'm rooted and using Xposed, but got the Dec update using a completely stock TWRP backup of system and boot posted here. Afterwards I simply had to reroot and reinstall my Xposed framework in TWRP, but all my modules which were still installed worked and maintained their settings. Couple of other minor cosmetic things I had to redo, but for me this worked very well without having to fully return to stock and reinstall everything from scratch. YMMV, and also do your own TWRP backup first just in case.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is actually a valid way of doing it, but with so many variables to the state of your device prior to doing this the possible outcomes vary a lot.
But @Dahenjo has pretty much the proper procedure... if I was going to try it I'd do it that way... backup, restore stock, take OTA, reroot, reflash Xposed, restore user data... 99% of everything should be intact.
acejavelin said:
Well on this I have a pretty strong opinion, and it isn't always well liked... I work in the IT industry with networks, so security is kind of a big deal to me... but Android security updates are essentially worthless, and are only a marketing ploy to make the company look better.
For example, lets look at some major vulnerabilities that have supposedly affected MILLIONS of Android devices... Dirty Cow is a good one, I am in a group here on XDA that is trying to use this vulnerability for something, anything really, but mainly for rooting difficult devices, and in a modern device it is almost impossible because of all the other parts of Android that help keep it secure like DM-verity and SELinux, end result is no usable exploit in almost all cases, although we have some results in cases where we are in complete control of the device with hands on adb access, but even then it is very rare and device specific, not something that you could just download a random malware app and have it affect you, I would need the device in hand. Then there are the terrible ones like Quadrooter, Stagefright, and Towelroot that affected millions, no tens of millions of devices, but have you ever heard of anyone being actually effected by a real exploit of that vulnerability? Nope, me neither, because for the most part these have only been exploited in a lab and not in real life... Because in a modern (I am talking Marshmallow or maybe even Lollipop) there are other things that protect the device, application sandboxing, DM-verity, SE Linux, and IntentFirewall, are all things that would likely protect the device even IF (and that's a big IF) one of these vulnerabilities did happen to be exploited on a device.
So are security updates important... no, not from a technical perspective in real life for the average user, but I certainly wouldn't reject them if they are easy to apply. I accept and apply every single one, even though I know the chances of something happening if I don't are probably less than that of me winning the Powerball Lottery Jackpot twice in two consecutive weeks, or about the same as being stuck by lightning while being bitten by a shark.
Now, none of what I am saying applies to other updates which are often bundled with security updates, or upgrades.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Real good explanation. Good balance of technological and practical
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
acejavelin said:
Well on this I have a pretty strong opinion, and it isn't always well liked... I work in the IT industry with networks, so security is kind of a big deal to me... but Android security updates are essentially worthless, and are only a marketing ploy to make the company look better.
For example, lets look at some major vulnerabilities that have supposedly affected MILLIONS of Android devices... Dirty Cow is a good one, I am in a group here on XDA that is trying to use this vulnerability for something, anything really, but mainly for rooting difficult devices, and in a modern device it is almost impossible because of all the other parts of Android that help keep it secure like DM-verity and SELinux, end result is no usable exploit in almost all cases, although we have some results in cases where we are in complete control of the device with hands on adb access, but even then it is very rare and device specific, not something that you could just download a random malware app and have it affect you, I would need the device in hand. Then there are the terrible ones like Quadrooter, Stagefright, and Towelroot that affected millions, no tens of millions of devices, but have you ever heard of anyone being actually effected by a real exploit of that vulnerability? Nope, me neither, because for the most part these have only been exploited in a lab and not in real life... Because in a modern (I am talking Marshmallow or maybe even Lollipop) there are other things that protect the device, application sandboxing, DM-verity, SE Linux, and IntentFirewall, are all things that would likely protect the device even IF (and that's a big IF) one of these vulnerabilities did happen to be exploited on a device.
So are security updates important... no, not from a technical perspective in real life for the average user, but I certainly wouldn't reject them if they are easy to apply. I accept and apply every single one, even though I know the chances of something happening if I don't are probably less than that of me winning the Powerball Lottery Jackpot twice in two consecutive weeks, or about the same as being stuck by lightning while being bitten by a shark.
Now, none of what I am saying applies to other updates which are often bundled with security updates, or upgrades.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So i recovered and now wifi is not working. From the other thread i see that others have this issue as well. What are my options now?
ThanuTK said:
So i recovered and now wifi is not working. From the other thread i see that others have this issue as well. What are my options now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its a radio version issue... your radio firmware doesn't a match what the kernel wants. You need to flash the right ones. You will have tell me more details of how you recovered.
acejavelin said:
Its a radio version issue... your radio firmware doesn't a match what the kernel wants. You need to flash the right ones. You will have tell me more details of how you recovered.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I used XT1575 to update and then just followed the directions. Does that answer your question? if not could you please clarify your question ?
https://androidfilehost.com/?fid=745425885120703327
In the other thread i see people using MPH24.49-18-4 FIRMWARE to fix this issue, but you stated that this might cause issues in the future, so i dont know what to do. Thanks again for helping me and understanding my lack of knowledge with all of this.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/mo...bootloader-t3489110/post69432451#post69432451
ThanuTK said:
I used XT1575 to update and then just followed the directions. Does that answer your question? if not could you please clarify your question ?
https://androidfilehost.com/?fid=745425885120703327
In the other thread i see people using MPH24.49-18-4 FIRMWARE to fix this issue, but you stated that this might cause issues in the future, so i dont know what to do. Thanks again for helping me and understanding my lack of knowledge with all of this.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/mo...bootloader-t3489110/post69432451#post69432451
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only difference in your links is one is a later build than the other one. Either one should work fine but if I had my choice, I might pick the first update and then use OTA to get to present. NOTE: I had to restore my September 1 backup with TWRP as the December 1 security patch broke my Bluetooth and I use Bluetooth all the time, it is too important to me to lose over a stupid security patch. I have since frozen the updater to avoid being nagged to death install the December 1 update again. When the next "real" OTA comes along, I will thaw the updater so I can take it and *hope* that the Bluetooth issue is solved. I will of course *always* make a TWRP backup prior to doing *any* update so I always have a way to back out of it in the event something is broken over the latest security patch OTA. HTH
Related
I am looking into rooting my Nexus S so I can install an ICS ROM. This is my first time rooting so got a question.
How will OTA updates work for me? Will the ICS update just work or will I have to in root to get the official OTA update?
Sry if this has been asked before couldn't find a clear answer.
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
Don't do OTAs. Any update released by Google or your manufacturer will be released here, rooted, within hours.
If you take an OTA you will lose root and could even find your phone locked again (as unlikely as that is with the NS, better safe than sorry. Ask the EVO users who took the GB OTA )
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk
Rooting requires flashing custom recovery
OTA requires stock recovery to work properly
So if your phone has custom recovery the OTA will not work.
Alright, thanks alot for the quick responses guys.
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
Once the ota is downloaded.....
* Put the zip on sdcard
* Reboot into custom recovery
* Manually flash it
* Directly after that, in the same recovery session, flash latest superuser zip
* Wipe cache
* Reboot
I run stock, so i'll add my two cents into this conversations. A few key points:
OTA's will NOT lock the boot loader
OTA's will work with CWM installed (The OTA will however remove CWM and needs to be manually applied)
OTA's will remove root access (the permissions on the binary get changed)
I have never seen an OTA on XDA that was pre-rooted. i have seen ROM packages that incorporate the OTA that are pre-rooted (installing these usually means a wipe of the device is needed)
if you replace the ROM on the phone, you will not get OTA updated. you must remain mostly stock to obtain them.
Custom kernels or custom google apps on stock roms will cause the OTA update to fail, however you will notified that the update is available.
I hope this answers your questions.
Good points.
What i do in order to maintain the full software (removing system apps, any system changes) is change the permissions of whatever i dont want to "000"
This will allow the verifying of OTA to flash.
snandlal said:
Good points.
What i do in order to maintain the full software (removing system apps, any system changes) is change the permissions of whatever i dont want to "000"
This will allow the verifying of OTA to flash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This does not always work, such as installing the "Black" version of gmail over top the original, the world-wide version of navigation or using market enabler to change the prop.build file. any of these changes will cause the OTA signature to fail.
Though if you are simply removing a system app, then yes, that would work well.
Also to be noted and this just occurred to me, if the OTA is a full ROM version, then the signature won't matter and it will just install. For ICS, this is what i'm expecting.
I'm on the fence about rooting. I know there are advantages like custom ROMs and added features, but I'm somewhat of a newb at this. While the instructions (for the Mac) seem simple enough, I always feel like something inevitably goes wrong or there's some variable I've either overlooked or don't understand that screws things up.
I definitely don't want to brick my phone.
I don't even know what I'm asking in my post, but I guess... what are some advantages of rooting? And if I root, is it fully reversible?
I'm also confused by some of the terminology. What is clockwork recovery? Is that a sort of ROM? I keep seeing that phrase every time I read instructions. Likewise, what's a bootloader? What's fastboot? Also, what's a kernel?
And after I root (as you can see, I am really tempted to), what happens next? How do I choose which ROM works for me? Is it a matter of flashing them and trying each of them out?
I'm afraid of entering the world of root, but I want to. Advice? Does it matter what baseband, or kernel or build number I have?
I'm on Android 2.3.6
Matridom said:
I run stock, so i'll add my two cents into this conversations. A few key points:
OTA's will NOT lock the boot loader
I hope this answers your questions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1145056
I know it's not likely, particularly with this phone, but it can happen. I maintain that if you're going to go through the process of unlocking your phone and putting a rooted ROM on it that you might as well wait for a modified OTA ROM to get posted by a trusted dev before just installing what the carrier hands out to you.
I guess maybe I should have said "re-lock"?
onthecouchagain said:
I'm on the fence about rooting. I know there are advantages like custom ROMs and added features, but I'm somewhat of a newb at this. While the instructions (for the Mac) seem simple enough, I always feel like something inevitably goes wrong or there's some variable I've either overlooked or don't understand that screws things up.
I definitely don't want to brick my phone.
I don't even know what I'm asking in my post, but I guess... what are some advantages of rooting? And if I root, is it fully reversible?
I'm also confused by some of the terminology. What is clockwork recovery? Is that a sort of ROM? I keep seeing that phrase every time I read instructions. Likewise, what's a bootloader? What's fastboot? Also, what's a kernel?
And after I root (as you can see, I am really tempted to), what happens next? How do I choose which ROM works for me? Is it a matter of flashing them and trying each of them out?
I'm afraid of entering the world of root, but I want to. Advice? Does it matter what baseband, or kernel or build number I have?
I'm on Android 2.3.6
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK, let's clear a few things up here.
CWM or ClockWorkMod is a custom recover that can be installed on the phones. This step is needed because the default recovery on the nexus does not allow for updates to be installed that are unsigned. CWM does, so it's a necessary step to installing the SU binary (aka root your phone) or installing custom ROMs
The bootloader is the basic system on your phone that reacts to the power on and hands over operations to Android. The equivalent in the PC world would be a BIOS.
fastboot is a utility that is provided by google that allows you to send commands to the bootloader and direct it's operations. It's needed to unlock the bootloader (so you can replace parts of it.. like recovery with CWM)
Interestingly enough, you can boot your phone to a custom recovery WITHOUT replacing your existing stock recovery by using fastboot.
Rooting your phone is simply installing and providing the proper rights to the SU binary to allow you to have full administrative rights to the phone, the superuser application is almost always bundled with it as it allows for a form of control as to what applications can use root access. Rooting your phone allows you to install some very interesting application, most popular are titanium backup (let's you back up app data and restore them after a reset) and removing advertising (adfree/adaway or it's like) Root can also be used by some applications that allow you to "cheat" at games.
rooting your phone is reversable, though not always the easiest to do. With the stock ROMS, it's fairly easy, you just re-apply the latest OTA and it will kill Root access on your device.
When it comes to custom ROMs the vast majority come pre-rooted to save you the hassel of doing it yourself.
On other phones where the bootloader remains locked, you have to use an exploit to gain root access, this then allows you to modify the OS and install custom roms and CWM while keeping the bootloader locked. Since the Nexus line can be unlocked, it's not needed.
Please note, root access is NOT required to install a custom ROM.
---------- Post added at 02:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:56 PM ----------
MaxCarnage said:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1145056
I know it's not likely, particularly with this phone, but it can happen. I maintain that if you're going to go through the process of unlocking your phone and putting a rooted ROM on it that you might as well wait for a modified OTA ROM to get posted by a trusted dev before just installing what the carrier hands out to you.
I guess maybe I should have said "re-lock"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a link to a non-nexus phone. The question here is in regards to the nexus device and i believe my statement stands 100% true. Since it's a self proclaimed "newby" asking questions, i don't want to confuse the post with un-needed and non-relevant information.
Matridom, wow thanks. That clarifies a few things.
So, you say root access isn't required to flash custom ROMs? Let's say for example, I want to flash an ICS ROM, or even a ROM that allows me to have Backlight Notifications?
I don't need root? If I don't need root, how do I flash those ROMs?
Matridom said:
That's a link to a non-nexus phone. The question here is in regards to the nexus device and i believe my statement stands 100% true. Since it's a self proclaimed "newby" asking questions, i don't want to confuse the post with un-needed and non-relevant information.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure why it's so invalid to advise that he wait for someone to post an OTA that has been vetted for those of us who have unlocked our phones; I respect your opinion (even if you clearly don't mine), but your statement that I am providing "un-needed" and "non-relevant" information is a bit harsh.
The fact of the matter is that Sprint has had at least one OTA released (for the EVO 4G) that re-locked bootloaders and caused a lot of consternation for people who took the OTA on their unlocked phones and found themselves waiting months for a new exploit to be found. Those who waited had a rooted version of the OTA available on the forums very quickly, so if those who took the OTA had just waited they wouldn't have been stuck.
tl;dr: If you went to the trouble of unlocking your phone in the first place I don't see why you would rush to take an un-vetted update OTA.
MaxCarnage said:
I'm not sure why it's so invalid to advise that he wait for someone to post an OTA that has been vetted for those of us who have unlocked our phones; I respect your opinion (even if you clearly don't mine), but your statement that I am providing "un-needed" and "non-relevant" information is a bit harsh.
The fact of the matter is that Sprint has had at least one OTA released (for the EVO 4G) that re-locked bootloaders and caused a lot of consternation for people who took the OTA on their unlocked phones and found themselves waiting months for a new exploit to be found. Those who waited had a rooted version of the OTA available on the forums very quickly, so if those who took the OTA had just waited they wouldn't have been stuck.
tl;dr: If you went to the trouble of unlocking your phone in the first place I don't see why you would rush to take an un-vetted update OTA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The key here is that SPRINT released an OTA for a SPRINT branded device. This has zero relevance to updates provided by Google for Nexus devices.
MaxCarnage said:
I'm not sure why it's so invalid to advise that he wait for someone to post an OTA that has been vetted for those of us who have unlocked our phones; I respect your opinion (even if you clearly don't mine), but your statement that I am providing "un-needed" and "non-relevant" information is a bit harsh.
The fact of the matter is that Sprint has had at least OTA released (for the EVO 4G) that re-locked bootloaders and caused a lot of consternation for people who took the OTA on their unlocked phones and found themselves waiting months for a new exploit to be found. Those who waited had a rooted version of the OTA available on the forums very quickly, so if those who took the OTA had just waited they wouldn't have been stuck.
tl;dr: If you went to the trouble of unlocking your phone in the first place I don't see why you would rush to take an un-vetted update OTA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The issue at heart here is that fact that the OTA for the nexus line of phones comes straight from google and are not "tweaked" in any way by the carriers. (exception nexus 4g has additional applications required for CDMA support)
One of the selling features of the nexus phones is the fact that unlocking the bootloader is officially supported.
In regards to other phones getting their bootloader locked, I've experienced first hand the pains of that, having a galaxy S and the 2.3 installing a new bootloader and really screwing things up for me. In those cases, i agree with you whole heartily and to wait for pre-cracked roms that can be installed.
My question to you would be to please show an example of a nexus S getting it's booloader locked due to an OTA update as that is the phone we are discussing.
---------- Post added at 02:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:47 PM ----------
onthecouchagain said:
Matridom, wow thanks. That clarifies a few things.
So, you say root access isn't required to flash custom ROMs? Let's say for example, I want to flash an ICS ROM, or even a ROM that allows me to have Backlight Notifications?
I don't need root? If I don't need root, how do I flash those ROMs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All you would need to do is to unlock the bootloader, install CWM, then apply the .zip associated with the ROM you wish to install. I would however carefully read the installation instructions for the rom as in some cases, it might be a multi-step process (such as going from a 2.2 rom to a 2.3).
Many ROMS also do not come with the google apps and secondary zip file needs to be applied to get those running (cyanogenMod does this)
I wanted to add, that the process of unlocking your bootloader will erase EVERYTHING on the phone, including the SDcard partition. So make sure you back up anything of importance.
Matridom said:
My question to you would be to please show an example of a nexus S getting it's booloader locked due to an OTA update as that is the phone we are discussing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't provide an example because, as I have already stated, this was a precautionary suggestion only.
I'm not going to get into a debate with you over this; I've made my point and you've made yours. Thanks.
Matridom said:
This does not always work, such as installing the "Black" version of gmail over top the original, the world-wide version of navigation or using market enabler to change the prop.build file. any of these changes will cause the OTA signature to fail.
Though if you are simply removing a system app, then yes, that would work well.
Also to be noted and this just occurred to me, if the OTA is a full ROM version, then the signature won't matter and it will just install. For ICS, this is what i'm expecting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good point again but the trick is to put your apps in /system/framework
Along with framework-res.apk.
This will add a dex file to /data/dalvik-cache, which is needed for saving upon reboot
Does flashing another radio that's different from your original radio impact the ability to apply an OTA?
suksit said:
Rooting requires flashing custom recovery
OTA requires stock recovery to work properly
So if your phone has custom recovery the OTA will not work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rooting doesn't require flashing custom recovery.
iboj007 said:
Does flashing another radio that's different from your original radio impact the ability to apply an OTA?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. It doesnt
I've been running omni on my Galaxy Nexus (toro) for a while now and am very happy with it overall. I use SuperSU for root, and I've installed its auto backup script to keep it around for ROM updates.
I've read up on how OmniRom is intentionally distributed without root, but I'm curious about the fact that the binary update isn't automated as part of the backup script. It just seems to stick out that it wants to update and reboot every time, despite the effectiveness in automating everything else for ROM updates.
Is this approach strictly necessary? Might there be something I could put together with an addon.d script to placate SuperSU without breaking anything? Or would there be a reasonable feature request for the OmniRom updater script to do something that addon.d scripts can't do, under the premise of "if the user has already rooted, preserve root on the ROM side for future updates"?
Thanks for any info, I'd like to streamline updates but it's a minor thing so I'm mostly just curious about the mechanisms in play.
Move the supersu zip into the flash after ota update folder if you use ota. Else just dont forget to flash it always after the rom
maxwen said:
Move the supersu zip into the flash after ota update folder if you use ota. Else just dont forget to flash it always after the rom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, seems to work fine. This was on my eventual to-try list but I wasn't sure if it would completely reset the settings or somesuch.
I also had a peek at the SuperSU installer script and there's a lot going on so I'd need to sit down with it more if I want to pursue my curiosity, but I still don't see why its backup script doesn't handle this the same way. Maybe it's still a WIP, I see that the developer has been busy with it lately. Oh well.
maxwen said:
Move the supersu zip into the flash after ota update folder if you use ota. Else just dont forget to flash it always after the rom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No need for this, just use SuperSU's "install backup script" feature.
Also, Omni isn't "intentionally disabled without root" - we've done nothing to block root apps or rooting. We just haven't found a solution for integrating root into the ROM that we liked AND would allow for corporate users to use the device.
Entropy512 said:
No need for this, just use SuperSU's "install backup script" feature.
Also, Omni isn't "intentionally disabled without root" - we've done nothing to block root apps or rooting. We just haven't found a solution for integrating root into the ROM that we liked AND would allow for corporate users to use the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right, but the whole point is that SuperSU's backup script offers limited functionality in terms of automating updates. The program still wants to update the binary and reboot. I haven't been poking it too hard, but I think that root keeps working just fine if you ignore it. I've just been obliging it because I assume it knows more about itself than I do. It's a pretty minor thing, but fully automated updates are pretty neat for peace of mind. Maxwen's solution just cuts to the core though. Have the updater reflash SuperSU and the whole thing is actually automated with no fuss from the app when it first loads.
On your other point, I said "distributed" not "disabled". Other than the semantic issue I think we're on the same page on all that stuff. Again, I was mostly speculating on why the backup script seems to be limited here, and the fact that Omni is not rooted was just a straw I was grasping at. I'm imaging that in a world where the Omni design philosophy was different and SuperSU came built-in, it wouldn't want to update its binary after flashing an update, so I was really just comparing the hypothetical pre-rooted omni and my assumptions about it to the real-world unrooted omni where there's this odd quirk where the method of preserving root matters ever so slightly.
...although actually now that I've thought about it more, when else would the SuperSU app ever be performing this check and turning a positive? Maybe the only reason it wants to update the binary is because the backup script has some possible but necessary pitfall, so it has a specific function to warn the app about itself, and it's supposed to be a 2-step process. Hmm, I should look at it more closely later.
JoeSyr said:
Right, but the whole point is that SuperSU's backup script offers limited functionality in terms of automating updates. The program still wants to update the binary and reboot. I haven't been poking it too hard, but I think that root keeps working just fine if you ignore it. I've just been obliging it because I assume it knows more about itself than I do. It's a pretty minor thing, but fully automated updates are pretty neat for peace of mind. Maxwen's solution just cuts to the core though. Have the updater reflash SuperSU and the whole thing is actually automated with no fuss from the app when it first loads.
On your other point, I said "distributed" not "disabled". Other than the semantic issue I think we're on the same page on all that stuff. Again, I was mostly speculating on why the backup script seems to be limited here, and the fact that Omni is not rooted was just a straw I was grasping at. I'm imaging that in a world where the Omni design philosophy was different and SuperSU came built-in, it wouldn't want to update its binary after flashing an update, so I was really just comparing the hypothetical pre-rooted omni and my assumptions about it to the real-world unrooted omni where there's this odd quirk where the method of preserving root matters ever so slightly.
...although actually now that I've thought about it more, when else would the SuperSU app ever be performing this check and turning a positive? Maybe the only reason it wants to update the binary is because the backup script has some possible but necessary pitfall, so it has a specific function to warn the app about itself, and it's supposed to be a 2-step process. Hmm, I should look at it more closely later.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Something is strange if SuperSU keeps on wanting to update the binary and reboot - as I don't see this behavior on any of my devices when using the backup script.
I could have sworn you wrote "disabled" - ugh my brain may be more fried than I realized if I'm completely subconsciously altering words as I read.
I have the same issue. It started happening recently, even though I have the backup script installed and had no problems in the past. Probably something changed, app or ROM?
Entropy512 said:
Something is strange if SuperSU keeps on wanting to update the binary and reboot - as I don't see this behavior on any of my devices when using the backup script.
I could have sworn you wrote "disabled" - ugh my brain may be more fried than I realized if I'm completely subconsciously altering words as I read.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No worries. Actually I feel like I must have edited out something critical to my original rambling making any sense because now when I read it back, I'm not really sure where I was going with that particular part of the post, so my context wasn't helping.
paps79 said:
I have the same issue. It started happening recently, even though I have the backup script installed and had no problems in the past. Probably something changed, app or ROM?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm running recent Omni builds on multiple devices, along with the latest SuperSU - no issues here.
Unless maybe it only affects new installations of the backup script. (e.g. doesn't happen if you updated SuperSU since installing the backup script)
Entropy512 said:
I'm running recent Omni builds on multiple devices, along with the latest SuperSU - no issues here.
Unless maybe it only affects new installations of the backup script. (e.g. doesn't happen if you updated SuperSU since installing the backup script)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm also on the latest SuperSU and I have been with Omnirom from early KitKat days with no such issue until now.
Incidentally, I've reverted to the 25th nightly because of this video bug - http://jira.omnirom.org/browse/OMNI-1181 - and still the same issue occurs.
It's strange. :|
After a clean ROM installation the problem is gone.
I've been rooting devices since my first android device. And using Titanium Backup, to always restore my app data across devices. Or restoring Nandroid backups at times. But it seems with that, upgrades to new OS have become more of a hassle. Since I can not simply let the OTA apply its self.
Having to change to stock recovery depending on the device and in some more recent cases, having to wipe data for the update to go well. It has become a bit of a pain, harder than it used to be.
With Marshmellow doing app data backup. I'm going to try keeping things virgin, no rooting. I may not need to continue with Titanium Backup and since OTAs will work flawlessly, I won't have much personal need to get into the system file area.
So what about you? Respond to the poll and give your take .
I've always done clean install of ROMs, and I always start from scratch with each ROM flash. I'll root as soon as there's a root out.
I mistakenly marked "Yes" to my poll .
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk
Root/Unlocked Bootloader is 75% of the reason why I go with Android. I like the feeling of knowing that I "own" the device and can do with it as I please.
rockerrock said:
Root/Unlocked Bootloader is 75% of the reason why I go with Android. I like the feeling of knowing that I "own" the device and can do with it as I please.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1. I got rid of my Verizon S6 because it was way too locked down.
lol asking this on a dev forum... I'd be surprised if anyone says no. It's more than just app back ups. I think phone should ship with root, just enable it/ disable it in the development options. It's like being a standard user on your own laptop instead of administrator... I mean why?
I can see this option on Nexus devices and non-carrier branded devices, but it would never be allowed with a Carrier device. It would be like a work laptop being allowed on that network with software meant to bypass firewalls. Bigger companies will never allow it because of security risks. That being said, I do agree that it should be an option for everyday users.
Hello everyone,
My Moto X Pure edition is on the way on the mail. I'm already excited to root it and get twrp on it. However, I believe the phone will come with android lollipop installed, and I should get an option for an OTA update for android 6.0.
My question is: Should I root my phone and install twrp BEFORE receiving the update, or after? I plan to use WinDroid Toolkit to root my phone and install twrp (seems to be the easiest way) so have any of you done it while having 6.0 already installed?
Your phone will most likely arrive with 6.0 pre-installed on it. You can't take an OTA with TWRP installed. I can't answer the WinDroid question.
Edit: It will most likely come with 6.0 already assuming you purchased it from Motorola.
quakeaz said:
Your phone will most likely arrive with 6.0 pre-installed on it. You can't take an OTA with TWRP installed. I can't answer the WinDroid question.
Edit: It will most likely come with 6.0 already assuming you purchased it from Motorola.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks a lot for your help! It's good that the phone will most likely come with MM. Does Motorola also offer an OTA update to 6.0.1?
I wanted to flash a pre-rooted stock-based ROM because I thought it would be easier to get root. Although, my preference really would be to get the stock update, then just root that. The only reason I wanted to flash an already rooted ROM was because it seems kind of tricky to root it haha. Is the systemless root by ivcarlos the easiest way to root MM? Or have you perhaps found another way to root it on MM?
Additionally, just to make sure before I go on with anything: I should first let the clean phone upgrade to android 6.0.1, AFTER that I should unlock the bootloader, followed by installing TWRP and root, correct? @vertigo_2_20
Thank you for any help you can give me!
Henryy97 said:
Thanks a lot for your help! It's good that the phone will most likely come with MM. Does Motorola also offer an OTA update to 6.0.1?
I wanted to flash a pre-rooted stock-based ROM because I thought it would be easier to get root. Although, my preference really would be to get the stock update, then just root that. The only reason I wanted to flash an already rooted ROM was because it seems kind of tricky to root it haha. Is the systemless root by ivcarlos the easiest way to root MM? Or have you perhaps found another way to root it on MM?
Additionally, just to make sure before I go on with anything: I should first let the clean phone upgrade to android 6.0.1, AFTER that I should unlock the bootloader, followed by installing TWRP and root, correct? @vertigo_2_20
Thank you for any help you can give me!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IIRC, that's how I did it (OTA 6.0.1 > unlock bootloader > flash TWRP > root), though I did miss some things along the way that I only found out about after the fact, so I've included warnings about those thing here. Before I rooted, I read the following (and a LOT more, but these are the primary ones I based how I did it on):
ivcarlos' method, which you mentioned
And this, which is what I followed for rooting, though I don't remember why. I also had to use 2.62-3 as mentioned in the instructions vs 2.65 which is mentioned at the end as verified working, since it didn't work for me.
I ran across this as well, probably when 2.65 didn't work, and there's some good tidbits in there, worth reading through.
I also found this, but only after I finished rooting with the other method, and I didn't have the time to mess with it. I don't know enough to say whether it's really a better method or not, but something worth checking out if you have the time.
Just make sure you backup anything you want to keep (phone log, texts, pictures, etc) before unlocking the bootloader. I recommend SMS Backup & Restore with Titanium Backup as a secondary backup. Then, use fastboot to back up your recovery before flashing TWRP (I didn't know to do this until too late). Also, make sure you back up your /system and /boot partitions (don't need /data, since you're dealing with a freshly wiped phone from unlocking the bootloader, so nothing there to back up) with TWRP (and store the backups on the external SD card and/or your computer) as soon as you get TWRP flashed, before you do anything else.
Remember, anything you do that modifies /system can potentially break the "systemless" aspect of this root, thereby breaking Android Pay as well as the ability to receive OTA updates. Examples of things that might do this are AdAway (there's apparently a systemless file that needs to be flashed before installing it, which I didn't realize until too late, so mine may be broken already) and battery apps like GSam and BetterBatteryStats. I've yet to get an answer on if these really do break it, though. One that definitely will is Xposed, but I just found there's a systemless version, so when I get time I plan on trying that out. I think even if you do break it you can just a) reflash your backup (/recovery, /boot, & /system) then take an OTA and reflash TWRP and re-root, or b) flash the updated partitions from the OTA then reflash recovery and re-root. Of course, any of those things that changed /system (AdAway, Xposed, battery apps, etc), will probably be broken by this, and I believe they're supposed to be uninstalled first and reinstalled after.
I wouldn't doubt if I've screwed something up, so hopefully somebody can correct me on anything I did, as well as provide more information regarding the breaking of systemless.
vertigo_2_20 said:
IIRC, that's how I did it (OTA 6.0.1 > unlock bootloader > flash TWRP > root), though I did miss some things along the way that I only found out about after the fact, so I've included warnings about those thing here. Before I rooted, I read the following (and a LOT more, but these are the primary ones I based how I did it on):
ivcarlos' method, which you mentioned
And this, which is what I followed for rooting, though I don't remember why. I also had to use 2.62-3 as mentioned in the instructions vs 2.65 which is mentioned at the end as verified working, since it didn't work for me.
I ran across this as well, probably when 2.65 didn't work, and there's some good tidbits in there, worth reading through.
I also found this, but only after I finished rooting with the other method, and I didn't have the time to mess with it. I don't know enough to say whether it's really a better method or not, but something worth checking out if you have the time.
Just make sure you backup anything you want to keep (phone log, texts, pictures, etc) before unlocking the bootloader. I recommend SMS Backup & Restore with Titanium Backup as a secondary backup. Then, use fastboot to back up your recovery before flashing TWRP (I didn't know to do this until too late). Also, make sure you back up your /system and /boot partitions (don't need /data, since you're dealing with a freshly wiped phone from unlocking the bootloader, so nothing there to back up) with TWRP (and store the backups on the external SD card and/or your computer) as soon as you get TWRP flashed, before you do anything else.
Remember, anything you do that modifies /system can potentially break the "systemless" aspect of this root, thereby breaking Android Pay as well as the ability to receive OTA updates. Examples of things that might do this are AdAway (there's apparently a systemless file that needs to be flashed before installing it, which I didn't realize until too late, so mine may be broken already) and battery apps like GSam and BetterBatteryStats. I've yet to get an answer on if these really do break it, though. One that definitely will is Xposed, but I just found there's a systemless version, so when I get time I plan on trying that out. I think even if you do break it you can just a) reflash your backup (/recovery, /boot, & /system) then take an OTA and reflash TWRP and re-root, or b) flash the updated partitions from the OTA then reflash recovery and re-root. Of course, any of those things that changed /system (AdAway, Xposed, battery apps, etc), will probably be broken by this, and I believe they're supposed to be uninstalled first and reinstalled after.
I wouldn't doubt if I've screwed something up, so hopefully somebody can correct me on anything I did, as well as provide more information regarding the breaking of systemless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your reply! I'll read the links you sent me, although from what I can see the "root done right" is for the nexus 6, and if it works for the moto x pure it doesn't seem to be overall that much beneficial over the systemless root.
What exactly is the effect of breaking the "systemless" aspect of the root? For example, if I install AdAway, what will happen? I didn't really get that from your post.
Perhaps after all this process, I'll write a how-to guide, heh
So according to your experience, SUPERSU 2.62-3 is the adequate version to use for android 6.0.1?
Thanks again!
Henryy97 said:
Thank you for your reply! I'll read the links you sent me, although from what I can see the "root done right" is for the nexus 6, and if it works for the moto x pure it doesn't seem to be overall that much beneficial over the systemless root.
What exactly is the effect of breaking the "systemless" aspect of the root? For example, if I install AdAway, what will happen? I didn't really get that from your post.
Perhaps after all this process, I'll write a how-to guide, heh
So according to your experience, SUPERSU 2.62-3 is the adequate version to use for android 6.0.1?
Thanks again!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My understanding is that breaking it will render Android Pay inoperable and will make it so you can't take an OTA, though as I mentioned, it seems you still can by reverting back, it's just a LOT more work. But again, as I said, I'm not completely sure and I haven't been able to get an answer.
As for the supersu version, it doesn't really matter, because you'll just update it once you're rooted and booted into the OS. I just found that, despite what that post said, 2.65 did not work for me, so I had to flash 2.62-3 which did. Not a big deal, was just a little frustrating and scary when 2.65 didn't work because I was worried that I broke something and that the method wasn't going to work.
Edit: Good catch BTW on the link having to do with the Nexus. I didn't even look at what sub-forum it was in. At least it's one less thing to worry about for now, though I do hope it spreads to more devices, because we could always use more, not to mention better (assuming it is) ways of doing things.
vertigo_2_20 said:
My understanding is that breaking it will render Android Pay inoperable and will make it so you can't take an OTA, though as I mentioned, it seems you still can by reverting back, it's just a LOT more work. But again, as I said, I'm not completely sure and I haven't been able to get an answer.
As for the supersu version, it doesn't really matter, because you'll just update it once you're rooted and booted into the OS. I just found that, despite what that post said, 2.65 did not work for me, so I had to flash 2.62-3 which did. Not a big deal, was just a little frustrating and scary when 2.65 didn't work because I was worried that I broke something and that the method wasn't going to work.
Edit: Good catch BTW on the link having to do with the Nexus. I didn't even look at what sub-forum it was in. At least it's one less thing to worry about for now, though I do hope it spreads to more devices, because we could always use more, not to mention better (assuming it is) ways of doing things.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. I am aware that you can revert back to lollipop, and do the update from there whenever you want to update to a newer OTA MM update. However, my real question is, what does it mean to break the systemless aspect? I know that it will prevent further OTA updates, but will xposed work as it should, etc? If I am rooting my device, it's really to get xposed. So, if it means that I must revert to an unrooted stock rom everytime I wanna update, then so be it. I just want to make sure that breaking the systemless root aspect will not make the ROM unstable. Will it?
Henryy97 said:
Thanks. I am aware that you can revert back to lollipop, and do the update from there whenever you want to update to a newer OTA MM update. However, my real question is, what does it mean to break the systemless aspect? I know that it will prevent further OTA updates, but will xposed work as it should, etc? If I am rooting my device, it's really to get xposed. So, if it means that I must revert to an unrooted stock rom everytime I wanna update, then so be it. I just want to make sure that breaking the systemless root aspect will not make the ROM unstable. Will it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you'll find all the info you're looking for and more in those links. But in summary, as I said, AFAIK the only consequence is breaking OTAs. It does not prevent you from using xposed, rather xposed is one of the things that breaks it. Systemless is so called because it roots without affecting the /system partition, therefore preventing the breaking of Android Pay and allowing OTAs. Once /system is modified (unclear if at all or just beyond a point), these two will no longer function. So if you "break" the systemless root by doing stuff that modifies /system (i.e. xposed, etc), you basically now have a standard (non-systemless) root, which simply negates the benefits it provides. But as far as I could tell, systemless is the only option anyway, so you just do it since it works and it's easy, then you either are careful not to break it if Pay/OTAs are important to you, or if you don't care about those then you just do whatever you want just as if you were rooted in the traditional way. But as I said, once I get the time, I plan to try out the systemless xposed, though it may not matter since I might have already broken it, but may as well, and maybe it'll mean not having to uninstall it when it comes time to take an OTA. If you play with it and figure it out, let me know.
vertigo_2_20 said:
I think you'll find all the info you're looking for and more in those links. But in summary, as I said, AFAIK the only consequence is breaking OTAs. It does not prevent you from using xposed, rather xposed is one of the things that breaks it. Systemless is so called because it roots without affecting the /system partition, therefore preventing the breaking of Android Pay and allowing OTAs. Once /system is modified (unclear if at all or just beyond a point), these two will no longer function. So if you "break" the systemless root by doing stuff that modifies /system (i.e. xposed, etc), you basically now have a standard (non-systemless) root, which simply negates the benefits it provides. But as far as I could tell, systemless is the only option anyway, so you just do it since it works and it's easy, then you either are careful not to break it if Pay/OTAs are important to you, or if you don't care about those then you just do whatever you want just as if you were rooted in the traditional way. But as I said, once I get the time, I plan to try out the systemless xposed, though it may not matter since I might have already broken it, but may as well, and maybe it'll mean not having to uninstall it when it comes time to take an OTA. If you play with it and figure it out, let me know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Once again, thanks. I reached the limit of thanks I can give for today, haha. I'm reading up much more on the process, etc. Just one final question, how often do the OTA updates come on average? I always like having the latest software installed, so MAYBE I can consider having an unrooted phone.. although that will be very difficult. I love my xposed. Anyway, I guess if updates only come about once a month, then rooting is fine. Not too much of a loss. I will definitely be making a how-to guide once I'm done with all of this! (and once my device arrives)
Henryy97 said:
Once again, thanks. I reached the limit of thanks I can give for today, haha. I'm reading up much more on the process, etc. Just one final question, how often do the OTA updates come on average? I always like having the latest software installed, so MAYBE I can consider having an unrooted phone.. although that will be very difficult. I love my xposed. Anyway, I guess if updates only come about once a month, then rooting is fine. Not too much of a loss. I will definitely be making a how-to guide once I'm done with all of this! (and once my device arrives)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bought my phone ~5-6 months ago. When I got it, the MM update was waiting (released late last year). Probably ~2 months later, another update came through. Since then, nothing. So it looks like probably 3 maybe 4 a year. I'd rather be rooted with all the benefits than get a small update, though I'd really rather have both.
6.0.1 is not out yet although there is a reteu version posted which works great. Rooting is as simple flashing su 2.62-3 with twrp.
lafester said:
6.0.1 is not out yet although there is a reteu version posted which works great. Rooting is as simple flashing su 2.62-3 with twrp.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll check it out. Do you mind sharing the link to that version just in case? I am very confused now though, because @vertigo_2_20 says he has 6.0.1, and you say you didn't get it. Perhaps location matters? Can you elaborate a little bit more?
And actually, I've just realized: I think I was looking at too many outdated posts perhaps with all the complicated root procedures such as the one by ivcarlos. The guide that amit.lohar made is very simple which is the one vertigo kindly shared in this OP. One final question @vertigo_2_20 (sorry for so many questions). Does the method by amit.lohar work for 6.0 anddd 6.0.1? I would assume so since they're pretty much very similar. What is your take on this?
I assumed I was on 6.0.1 because I received a system update after being on MM, so I don't know what else it could be. Though it does just say 6.0 in settings. Regardless, I only did it a few weeks ago, so if you're fully updated, you'll be the same as what I was. Even if not, I would think it wouldn't matter. As long as you do a back up before messing with things, worse case scenario is you screw something up and restore the backup.
Henryy97 said:
I'll check it out. Do you mind sharing the link to that version just in case? I am very confused now though, because @vertigo_2_20 says he has 6.0.1, and you say you didn't get it. Perhaps location matters? Can you elaborate a little bit more?
And actually, I've just realized: I think I was looking at too many outdated posts perhaps with all the complicated root procedures such as the one by ivcarlos. The guide that amit.lohar made is very simple which is the one vertigo kindly shared in this OP. One final question @vertigo_2_20 (sorry for so many questions). Does the method by amit.lohar work for 6.0 anddd 6.0.1? I would assume so since they're pretty much very similar. What is your take on this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No I don't get links for people... this forum is small and easy to read. Dev section has one pre loaded with franken and there are two threads in general.
Henryy97 said:
Once again, thanks. I reached the limit of thanks I can give for today, haha. I'm reading up much more on the process, etc. Just one final question, how often do the OTA updates come on average? I always like having the latest software installed, so MAYBE I can consider having an unrooted phone.. although that will be very difficult. I love my xposed. Anyway, I guess if updates only come about once a month, then rooting is fine. Not too much of a loss. I will definitely be making a how-to guide once I'm done with all of this! (and once my device arrives)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If receiving the OTA updates is something you really want, systemless root will allow you to get them with a lot less effort. The trick is knowing which of the apps that require root privileges will end up modifying your system. Avoid the ones that will and you can enjoy root with less work to get updates. If the only root required apps you are interested in modifies the system, then it will be a matter of what you value more.
Sent from my awesome phone!
That reminds me of another thing I haven't yet figured out. If /system is modified, I'm assuming the OTA will still show up and just won't install, but I wonder if it won't even show up anymore. Anyone know?
aybarrap1 said:
If receiving the OTA updates is something you really want, systemless root will allow you to get them with a lot less effort. The trick is knowing which of the apps that require root privileges will end up modifying your system. Avoid the ones that will and you can enjoy root with less work to get updates. If the only root required apps you are interested in modifies the system, then it will be a matter of what you value more.
Sent from my awesome phone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahhh! I guess I'll just flash ROMS to update my phone then because I need my xposed Besides, after 6.0, if we want root, we can only get the systemless one anyway, right?
Also, I did not quite understand something about systemless root. If the root is 'systemless', then how can apps still edit the system? I've read up that after a memory wipe, the root will actually go away but what happens if I have apps that already modified the system? I just don't quite get how the apps can get into the system and modify it, if the root itself cannot do that because it is systemless. Am I getting the wrong idea here? I've read, and read, and read. I can't find an answer to that :/ According to what you have said though, if I were to get an app that modifies the system, then it would essentially *break* the systemless aspect of it, right? Therefore, it just becomes a normal root?
I feel like I'm going in circles now so I hope someone will be able to explain this for me or just point me in the right direction!
Systemless root does not mean root doesn't have access to /system, it simply means a way of gaining root access without modifying the /system partition, because if you gain root with the old methods, which DO modify /system, it breaks Android Pay and OTAs. Root still has access to modify system, hence why you have to be careful in installing apps, xposed, etc, because if they have root access, they can modify it, and if they do, your systemless root just became useless. The whole point is to NOT modify it so as to keep those certain functions intact, but it doesn't prevent you from doing so after gaining root.
vertigo_2_20 said:
Systemless root does not mean root doesn't have access to /system, it simply means a way of gaining root access without modifying the /system partition, because if you gain root with the old methods, which DO modify /system, it breaks Android Pay and OTAs. Root still has access to modify system, hence why you have to be careful in installing apps, xposed, etc, because if they have root access, they can modify it, and if they do, your systemless root just became useless. The whole point is to NOT modify it so as to keep those certain functions intact, but it doesn't prevent you from doing so after gaining root.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My experience was rooting 5.1.1 on the new phone. I backed up at every stage. I tried a few roms, no big deal. I liked 5.1.1 better due to micro sd card usage. I stupidly allowed the OTA to attempt to install. I knew it would fail but hoped it would stop nagging. The result I did not expect was phone continually rebooting on its own, trying to complete the update. After it completed the reboot it would start to shut down and begin the reboot process again. I restored a backup and froze the Motorola Update app with Titanium Backup. Problem solved. Don't do what I did!
Why would you want to stay on L? M is so much better. Between Doze and permission control, you'll have better battery life and more privacy and security. Not to mention the increased security from having more up-to-date software. I'd recommend just taking the update.
It has come to light that a new update has been released for the Prime version stock ROM. This update is called V6.6 (duh), and the update replaces the preloader. Some people have reported bootloops, one has gotten a brick, and I am all but certain that Amazon is trying to patch the preloader to remove any chance of rooting or converting to OEM ever again. It also replaces the boot image, which we believe is a way to re-lock the bootloader, or possibly even make fastboot ignore the unlocked status. This could also destroy your ability to root, run TWRP, or run any custom ROM ever again. If you are on the Prime stock ROM, DO NOT take the OTA to V6.6. It's really not worth it for the security patch. I also encourage all users of V6.1, V6.4, or V6.5 to go ahead and convert your phone to the non-Prime variant while you have the chance. Amazon is known for jamming updates down people's throats so I would not be surprised if they have a way of installing that update without your approval.
The conversion guide is here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/r1-hd/how-to/guide-convert-to-prime-rollback-ota-t3432499
There is some discussion about the OTA in the last few pages of the general discussion thread here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/r1-hd/how-to/blu-r1-hd-t3418354/post68565531#post68565531
We can use this thread to further dissect and discuss the update.
The boot img can lock the Bootloader.
Thanks for the warning. I would have taken it as I think V6.5 was a good update and improved performance (at the expense of battery life).
DarkBlood. said:
The boot img can lock the Bootloader.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, but some kernel/ramdisk shenanigans could lock it at boot.
We've now confirmed that this update breaks SPFT. It is currently unknown if we will be able to recover from this, but I'm hoping we can.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=68578922&postcount=1319
It doesn't appear to relock the bootloader or break fastboot in any way, so if your bootloader is already unlocked you might be okay. I still highly recommend against it.
With the fire tablet they disabled the preloader and changed the pid
ColtonDRG said:
We've now confirmed that this update breaks SPFT. It is currently unknown if we will be able to recover from this, but I'm hoping we can.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=68578922&postcount=1319
It doesn't appear to relock the bootloader or break fastboot in any way, so if your bootloader is already unlocked you might be okay. I still highly recommend against it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, I wonder then, if we dont get a custom rom soon, can the security updates be pulled from the prime OTA and be incorporated into non Prime. I bet if 6.6 plugged SPFT and makes it near impossible for new users to switch to non prime or debloat, that will be the last OTA we see for awhile.
I installed V6.6 OTA update...not sure if I'll regret it. The amazon ads haven't bothered me because I always have notifications, and the ads are smaller than them...plus I was on a CHEAP phone ($10.00) from best buy via slickdeals ad about a year ago...so now I feel like I'm on a contender...it's all relative...Compared to http://www.lg.com/us/cell-phones/lg-LS620-realm I'm flying.
I am sticking to the prime version. I had disabled OTA. Bootloader unlocked. Hopefully someone can see if 6.6 has anything to offer.
DarkBlood. said:
With the fire tablet they disabled the preloader and changed the pid
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You cannot simply "disable" the preloader. We discussed what exactly Amazon did with the Fire a little bit in the private hangout the other day. The bottom line is that we still don't know exactly what shenanigans Amazon is up to, or what tricks they have up their sleeve. Knowing Amazon, it can't be good for us.
jacewt said:
I am sticking to the prime version. I had disabled OTA. Bootloader unlocked. Hopefully someone can see if 6.6 has anything to offer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It has the August security patch and some things that lock things down. Nothing else that I'm aware of.
bionictoothpick said:
I installed V6.6 OTA update...not sure if I'll regret it. The amazon ads haven't bothered me because I always have notifications, and the ads are smaller than them...plus I was on a CHEAP phone ($10.00) from best buy via slickdeals ad about a year ago...so now I feel like I'm on a contender...it's all relative...Compared to http://www.lg.com/us/cell-phones/lg-LS620-realm I'm flying.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you unlocked your bootloader (fastboot style) via one of the methods before, you should still be able to gain root. If not, you are probably hosed, at least for now. Weather or not you will end up regretting that is up to you, but I certainly would.
kal250 said:
So, I wonder then, if we dont get a custom rom soon, can the security updates be pulled from the prime OTA and be incorporated into non Prime. I bet if 6.6 plugged SPFT and makes it near impossible for new users to switch to non prime or debloat, that will be the last OTA we see for awhile.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. By the way, I will be releasing a TWRP version of the image for people who did manage to unlock their bootloader to use to convert after taking the update. I will also try to get a TWRP image of the old-school preloader image working once I've figured out if it's safe.
As for mixing the ROMs, I've considered doing it before. I worry about breaking some of the advantages of the OEM ROM. If this continues for too much longer, I'll consider it more seriously and start looking into it, but I think for now it remains a case of "there are more important things to do".
ColtonDRG said:
I agree. By the way, I will be releasing a TWRP version of the image for people who did manage to unlock their bootloader to use to convert after taking the update. I will also try to get a TWRP image of the old-school preloader image working once I've figured out if it's safe.
As for mixing the ROMs, I've considered doing it before. I worry about breaking some of the advantages of the OEM ROM. If this continues for too much longer, I'll consider it more seriously and start looking into it, but I think for now it remains a case of "there are more important things to do".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fortunately, I had OTA blocked and as I said the other day when i get downtime(hopefully Sunday), I'm back to OEM, to hell with security patches!!
@ColtonDRG, @DarkBlood., @waingro808, @kal250, @ jacewt
Do we have the zip file for the OTA update yet ?
It's usually very trivial to repackage the update zip in order to make it update only /boot and /system, and nothing else (I've done this back with V6.5 since I wanted to keep the oldest bootloaders available). This way one gets all the updates, without any impact on the preloader, unlock status, etc.
This is kind of similar to how it's done for Fire 7 :
http://forum.xda-developers.com/amazon-fire/general/howto-install-fireos-5-1-1-root-gapps-t3265594
bibikalka said:
@ColtonDRG, @DarkBlood., @waingro808, @kal250, @ jacewt
Do we have the zip file for the OTA update yet ?
It's usually very trivial to repackage the update zip in order to make it update only /boot and /system, and nothing else (I've done this back with V6.5 since I wanted to keep the oldest bootloaders available). This way one gets all the updates, without any impact on the preloader, unlock status, etc.
This is kind of similar to how it's done for Fire 7 :
http://forum.xda-developers.com/amazon-fire/general/howto-install-fireos-5-1-1-root-gapps-t3265594
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The zip is available in https://na.mirrors.coltondrg.com/coltondrg/r1hd/stockota/prime/
bibikalka said:
@ColtonDRG, @DarkBlood., @waingro808, @kal250, @ jacewt
Do we have the zip file for the OTA update yet ?
It's usually very trivial to repackage the update zip in order to make it update only /boot and /system, and nothing else (I've done this back with V6.5 since I wanted to keep the oldest bootloaders available). This way one gets all the updates, without any impact on the preloader, unlock status, etc.
This is kind of similar to how it's done for Fire 7 :
http://forum.xda-developers.com/amazon-fire/general/howto-install-fireos-5-1-1-root-gapps-t3265594
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Go for it, but I'm not interested in taking any of Amazon's **** either way.
As @DarkBlood. said, the zip file is mirrored on https://na.mirrors.coltondrg.com/coltondrg/r1hd/stockota/prime/
I am curious, and we may already know, but did they fail to properly implement the version check in their OTA updater script? Just looking at the reviews on Amazon, it seems a few have suddenly been borked, and only able to boot to stock recovery since Sept 6th or so. I am curious as one of the recovery system check failure messages appears to be hanging up on the v6.1 files and refusing to boot saying they were modified. Was wondering if those are devices that updated from v6.1 straight to v6.6 whereas it seems Amazon/Blu should have ensured the updater abort if device was not v6.5. Thoughts? They may have created a real mess for themselves....
ariesgodofwar said:
I am curious, and we may already know, but did they fail to properly implement the version check in their OTA updater script? Just looking at the reviews on Amazon, it seems a few have suddenly been borked, and only able to boot to stock recovery since Sept 6th or so. I am curious as one of the recovery system check failure messages appears to be hanging up on the v6.1 files and refusing to boot saying they were modified. Was wondering if those are devices that updated from v6.1 straight to v6.6 whereas it seems Amazon/Blu should have ensured the updater abort if device was not v6.5. Thoughts? They may have created a real mess for themselves....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A handful of people around here actually got their phone bootlooped just after taking the upgrade straight from 6.5 to 6.6. At first I figured it was a fluke because their phones were altered, but at this point it's getting very suspicious (almost like it's a hit or miss thing for everyone, even those that haven't touched anything). I hope this doesn't damage the device's reputation too bad, and Amazon better get their **** together. Chopping off their nose in spite of their face. I guess I shouldn't be surprised at this point. This is Amazon we're talking about here.
bibikalka said:
@ColtonDRG, @DarkBlood., @waingro808, @kal250, @ jacewt
Do we have the zip file for the OTA update yet ?
It's usually very trivial to repackage the update zip in order to make it update only /boot and /system, and nothing else (I've done this back with V6.5 since I wanted to keep the oldest bootloaders available). This way one gets all the updates, without any impact on the preloader, unlock status, etc.
This is kind of similar to how it's done for Fire 7 :
http://forum.xda-developers.com/amazon-fire/general/howto-install-fireos-5-1-1-root-gapps-t3265594
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the zip can be modified, can we inject the 6.1 preloader and bootloader into the 6.6 OTA and modify it to run over current 6.6 installs allowing those who have been locked to at least unlock themselves?? I'm not savy enough to try....