or does anyone else feel like we dont have enough aosp love? I mean we have miui, cm7, had decks(went ghostbusters on us) and empiire(heard he got grounded for molesting his hard drive.) I understand theirs still kinks to be worked out but everything is Sense. Just wanted to see who else felt this way. PLEASE DONT COME IN AND START A PARAGRAPH WAR, I read enough in high school.
Temari x Shikamaru
Evervolv exists.
il Duce said:
Evervolv exists.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Link please. Ive been hunting it.
Temari x Shikamaru
Talked to shift on twitter yesterday, he said CM7 is being worked on. I honestly think what it is that people are happy with their phones just the way they are, so it brings less crowd. While it is smaller than the original Evo, there is still a pretty big following. Plus, this is just a US phone, so when comparing the Sensation with us is like apple and oranges. We just got mike and androidrevolution! Which is great.
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
PatrickHuey said:
Talked to shift on twitter yesterday, he said CM7 is being worked on. I honestly think what it is that people are happy with their phones just the way they are, so it brings less crowd. While it is smaller than the original Evo, there is still a pretty big following. Plus, this is just a US phone, so when comparing the Sensation with us is like apple and oranges. We just got mike and androidrevolution! Which is great.
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not just US. Theres gsm models for overseas.
Temari x Shikamaru
The problem is, most AOSP ROM's(99.99%) are based off CM kernel source, so with no update to CM, there's no update to other AOSP ROM's. Many devs might want to wait until a few more bugs are worked out of CM before they start kanging. Once we get an RC1 or a stable CM release, you may see more AOSP love.
Can the gsm users get some aosp love? Any roms?
Sent from my Evo 3D GSM...bring on the AOSP!!!
housry23 said:
The problem is, most AOSP ROM's(99.99%) are based off CM kernel source, so with no update to CM, there's no update to other AOSP ROM's. Many devs might want to wait until a few more bugs are worked out of CM before they start kanging. Once we get an RC1 or a stable CM release, you may see more AOSP love.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This man is right. Most AOSP is done by Cyanogenmod devs and kanged from there. I can guarantee you when they come out with a CM7 RC, there will magically be other AOSP roms.
housry23 said:
The problem is, most AOSP ROM's(99.99%) are based off CM kernel source, so with no update to CM, there's no update to other AOSP ROM's. Many devs might want to wait until a few more bugs are worked out of CM before they start kanging. Once we get an RC1 or a stable CM release, you may see more AOSP love.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your right. I forgot about that.
Temari x Shikamaru
housry23 said:
The problem is, most AOSP ROM's(99.99%) are based off CM kernel source, so with no update to CM, there's no update to other AOSP ROM's. Many devs might want to wait until a few more bugs are worked out of CM before they start kanging. Once we get an RC1 or a stable CM release, you may see more AOSP love.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have complained about this over and over, and will continue to complain in multiple threads until more people see the point I make and support that. Using someone else's kernel and/or ROM as a base for their "new" ROM isn't all bad all the time. It is analogous to game development on a PC using another developer's graphics/game engine (only with permission and proper credit of course!!). It saves time, and in some cases help that particular engine to advance, but it slows down new technological advancement in the industry as a whole.
Developers need to start honing their skills, start attempting to bring a ROM to the public that they built from the ground up, that includes a kernel build from the ground up too. Doing this eliminates such a large collection of ROMs that are all essentially the same, and because of the open source nature of Android it brings new technological advances to the public faster. It also raises the bar, the standard. The public will begin to expect more out of Android, and this in turn creates more motivation for a newer, better Android.
I think some developers have lost sight of the purpose and nature of open source information and products. Instead of hijacking someone's source code, and using it as a base for a new ROM with a new name, and small amount of new features, development should be done that conforms to the original intent and purpose of open source. Work together with a developer that has created a ROM [from the ground up] that is most similar to the product you want to create. Improve the ROM as a team, make bug fixes and enhancement to the existing ROM. That is what open source was meant to do. This will prevent a forum list of 32 half assed roms, and replace it with 10 really good yet unique roms.
If you can't find an existing ROM, a Dev team that has different ideas of what make a ROM good, or there is no ROM that exists that is similar enough to your vision of the product then, and only then should you develop something new.
I realize my views aren't going to match up with everyone else, but I am sure a happy medium could be found that produces a situation better than what we have now. Thanks for letting me rant, and for reading my thoughts!
Sad Panda said:
I have complained about this over and over, and will continue to complain in multiple threads until more people see the point I make and support that. Using someone else's kernel and/or ROM as a base for their "new" ROM isn't all bad all the time. It is analogous to game development on a PC using another developer's graphics/game engine (only with permission and proper credit of course!!). It saves time, and in some cases help that particular engine to advance, but it slows down new technological advancement in the industry as a whole.
Developers need to start honing their skills, start attempting to bring a ROM to the public that they built from the ground up, that includes a kernel build from the ground up too. Doing this eliminates such a large collection of ROMs that are all essentially the same, and because of the open source nature of Android it brings new technological advances to the public faster. It also raises the bar, the standard. The public will begin to expect more out of Android, and this in turn creates more motivation for a newer, better Android.
I think some developers have lost sight of the purpose and nature of open source information and products. Instead of hijacking someone's source code, and using it as a base for a new ROM with a new name, and small amount of new features, development should be done that conforms to the original intent and purpose of open source. Work together with a developer that has created a ROM [from the ground up] that is most similar to the product you want to create. Improve the ROM as a team, make bug fixes and enhancement to the existing ROM. That is what open source was meant to do. This will prevent a forum list of 32 half assed roms, and replace it with 10 really good yet unique roms.
If you can't find an existing ROM, a Dev team that has different ideas of what make a ROM good, or there is no ROM that exists that is similar enough to your vision of the product then, and only then should you develop something new.
I realize my views aren't going to match up with everyone else, but I am sure a happy medium could be found that produces a situation better than what we have now. Thanks for letting me rant, and for reading my thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn. Such a long read. It was good though.
Temari x Shikamaru
knowledge561 said:
Damn. Such a long read. It was good though.
Temari x Shikamaru
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sorry, I originally had hoped for a much shorter post. I always try to get the thoughts in my head out "on paper" in the shortest, most efficient and least complex manner. This is my vision of a more free, "open source" world though. I think the freedom of information could be applied to many facets of society that would create a better future for all of us, and still preserve the competition that drives a more peaceful, better, cheaper, faster world. Sorry again!
Sad Panda said:
I have complained about this over and over, and will continue to complain in multiple threads until more people see the point I make and support that. Using someone else's kernel and/or ROM as a base for their "new" ROM isn't all bad all the time. It is analogous to game development on a PC using another developer's graphics/game engine (only with permission and proper credit of course!!). It saves time, and in some cases help that particular engine to advance, but it slows down new technological advancement in the industry as a whole.
Developers need to start honing their skills, start attempting to bring a ROM to the public that they built from the ground up, that includes a kernel build from the ground up too. Doing this eliminates such a large collection of ROMs that are all essentially the same, and because of the open source nature of Android it brings new technological advances to the public faster. It also raises the bar, the standard. The public will begin to expect more out of Android, and this in turn creates more motivation for a newer, better Android.
I think some developers have lost sight of the purpose and nature of open source information and products. Instead of hijacking someone's source code, and using it as a base for a new ROM with a new name, and small amount of new features, development should be done that conforms to the original intent and purpose of open source. Work together with a developer that has created a ROM [from the ground up] that is most similar to the product you want to create. Improve the ROM as a team, make bug fixes and enhancement to the existing ROM. That is what open source was meant to do. This will prevent a forum list of 32 half assed roms, and replace it with 10 really good yet unique roms.
If you can't find an existing ROM, a Dev team that has different ideas of what make a ROM good, or there is no ROM that exists that is similar enough to your vision of the product then, and only then should you develop something new.
I realize my views aren't going to match up with everyone else, but I am sure a happy medium could be found that produces a situation better than what we have now. Thanks for letting me rant, and for reading my thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is that people don't always give credit where credit is due, which is one of the reasons some people don't like sharing stuff. I mean, let's say I made this awesome mod and let everybody use it. Then some kitchen dev comes along, kangs the **** out of it, doesn't mention me in his rom, and slaps a gigantic DONATE button at the bottom of his signature. It's frustrating.
Now I'm all about open source. I won't use a rom that doesn't post the source. That's the exact reason I won't use MIUI.
SolsticeZero said:
The problem is that people don't always give credit where credit is due, which is one of the reasons some people don't like sharing stuff. I mean, let's say I made this awesome mod and let everybody use it. Then some kitchen dev comes along, kangs the **** out of it, doesn't mention me in his rom, and slaps a gigantic DONATE button at the bottom of his signature. It's frustrating.
Now I'm all about open source. I won't use a rom that doesn't post the source. That's the exact reason I won't use MIUI.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I fully understand your frustration. I am a software engineer too so I know what you are going through. I have not yet begun developing for Android, but will. There is a little bit of a problem here that could easily be solved, and the community has a responsibility to protect the intellectual property rights that you and every other developer like you is entitled to. In fact it is a right that is protected by the integrity of the constitution of the united states, and many other countries and law enforcement around the world. This is a failure that not just developers, mods, and admins have, but a responsibility and failure that every user at xda shares no matter who they are.
First off; not to offend any MIUI developers that may be watching, but if you are developing for Android you need to be using a license that is open, and your source needs to be open too. This is especially true if you are using xda as a distribution medium, but sadly while xda has said they encourage, and want every development to be open source they are not forcing the matter. This is a failure I think. It also makes MIUI look suspicious too, as there isn't a way to verify if their source is uniquely theirs'. I personally believe xda should not allow software that is not open source to be distributed. If google didn't keep the open source principle when they acquired Android roms like MIUI would NOT exist! It is highly unethical to take the base ROM from google because it is open source, and then close the source. That is wrong wrong wrong! It is also illegal! You can not redistribute the Android OS even if you have made changes and then close the source and not maintain the software license google has on place.
Second; I believe as a user of xda it is your duty to maintain the integrity of the principles of xda, and Android. Don't support closed source works, voice your disgust so that xda sees the will of its users, that the over whelming majority wants things to remain open source. Tattle your ass off if someone has broke the copyright law and used someone's work without permission and credit.
It is important to keep both xda and Android running on the same principles it started with. Don't let this keep happening guys! This is very serious, a lot of developers are breaking the law doing what they are doing!
Sad Panda said:
I have complained about this over and over, and will continue to complain in multiple threads until more people see the point I make and support that. Using someone else's kernel and/or ROM as a base for their "new" ROM isn't all bad all the time. It is analogous to game development on a PC using another developer's graphics/game engine (only with permission and proper credit of course!!). It saves time, and in some cases help that particular engine to advance, but it slows down new technological advancement in the industry as a whole.
Developers need to start honing their skills, start attempting to bring a ROM to the public that they built from the ground up, that includes a kernel build from the ground up too. Doing this eliminates such a large collection of ROMs that are all essentially the same, and because of the open source nature of Android it brings new technological advances to the public faster. It also raises the bar, the standard. The public will begin to expect more out of Android, and this in turn creates more motivation for a newer, better Android.
I think some developers have lost sight of the purpose and nature of open source information and products. Instead of hijacking someone's source code, and using it as a base for a new ROM with a new name, and small amount of new features, development should be done that conforms to the original intent and purpose of open source. Work together with a developer that has created a ROM [from the ground up] that is most similar to the product you want to create. Improve the ROM as a team, make bug fixes and enhancement to the existing ROM. That is what open source was meant to do. This will prevent a forum list of 32 half assed roms, and replace it with 10 really good yet unique roms.
If you can't find an existing ROM, a Dev team that has different ideas of what make a ROM good, or there is no ROM that exists that is similar enough to your vision of the product then, and only then should you develop something new.
I realize my views aren't going to match up with everyone else, but I am sure a happy medium could be found that produces a situation better than what we have now. Thanks for letting me rant, and for reading my thoughts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or learn to code yourself and create roms from the ground up. Most devs do what they do for themselves first, and allow us to ride on their coattails. Not a bad ride if your like me and have no coding skills. Otherwise, I doubt your plea is going to convince a dev to do anything more or less then they do now, unless it interest them personally.
I do agree with you though. I'm coming from Android on the Touch Pro 2 where a small group of devs are building EVERYTHING from scratch. From the modems to the light sensor. It's a huge job done out of love for the hardware, for fun, and a passion for coding.
knowledge561 said:
Link please. Ive been hunting it.
Temari x Shikamaru
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
he links only via twitter posts and in his IRC, send him a tweet. iirc still in beta, but he does some nice ROMs
Serren said:
Or learn to code yourself and create roms from the ground up. Most devs do what they do for themselves first, and allow us to ride on their coattails. Not a bad ride if your like me and have no coding skills. Otherwise, I doubt your plea is going to convince a dev to do anything more or less then they do now, unless it interest them personally.
I do agree with you though. I'm coming from Android on the Touch Pro 2 where a small group of devs are building EVERYTHING from scratch. From the modems to the light sensor. It's a huge job done out of love for the hardware, for fun, and a passion for coding.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your comment and support. I don't disagree with you. If you steal a loaf of bread to feed yourself, is it any less of a crime than to steal a loaf of bread to feed you and your family and friends? Or is it the same or worse?
I think either way it isn't ethical. People need to think less about themselves I think. I must reiterate and clarify so I am not misunderstood. I don't think it is inherently bad to be using a ROM as your base, but it is wrong to then close the source of a previously open piece of work and/or not maintain the original license, and give credit in every spot it should be given in. That would include its distribution, the license, the source code itself, and any where else that you put your own version, app info, and copyright notice. Am I wrong?
Sad Panda said:
I fully understand your frustration. I am a software engineer too so I know what you are going through. I have not yet begun developing for Android, but will. There is a little bit of a problem here that could easily be solved, and the community has a responsibility to protect the intellectual property rights that you and every other developer like you is entitled to. In fact it is a right that is protected by the integrity of the constitution of the united states, and many other countries and law enforcement around the world. This is a failure that not just developers, mods, and admins have, but a responsibility and failure that every user at xda shares no matter who they are.
First off; not to offend any MIUI developers that may be watching, but if you are developing for Android you need to be using a license that is open, and your source needs to be open too. This is especially true if you are using xda as a distribution medium, but sadly while xda has said they encourage, and want every development to be open source they are not forcing the matter. This is a failure I think. It also makes MIUI look suspicious too, as there isn't a way to verify if their source is uniquely theirs'. I personally believe xda should not allow software that is not open source to be distributed. If google didn't keep the open source principle when they acquired Android roms like MIUI would NOT exist! It is highly unethical to take the base ROM from google because it is open source, and then close the source. That is wrong wrong wrong! It is also illegal! You can not redistribute the Android OS even if you have made changes and then close the source and not maintain the software license google has on place.
Second; I believe as a user of xda it is your duty to maintain the integrity of the principles of xda, and Android. Don't support closed source works, voice your disgust so that xda sees the will of its users, that the over whelming majority wants things to remain open source. Tattle your ass off if someone has broke the copyright law and used someone's work without permission and credit.
It is important to keep both xda and Android running on the same principles it started with. Don't let this keep happening guys! This is very serious, a lot of developers are breaking the law doing what they are doing!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let me preface this by saying that I agree with you..
However android is meant to be open source, the license that they use (Apache) does not require it.. The reason they chose the Apache license was to give people the freedom to choose (their words). So technically people like miui don't have to post source for anything other than kernel (which is GPL).
This link has some good info on it.
http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html
But even CM doesn't have to provide source, which in recent history they haven't while starting builds.. We can't demand source, when the licensing doesn't demand, but that doesn't mean we still can't prove direct kang. The reason I have android over anything else is the freedom it gives and the open nature of it.
Edit: and you should always credit someone if you are using their work, and also have their permission. I was referring to general source from android itself, not from each other.
_______________________
No d3rp left behind - ranger61878
The problem is, nobody wants to start a ROM from the ground up, and the people that do are already involved into team projects (CM/MIUI). It takes a long time to create a ROM from the ground up that utilizes all of a phone's hardware properly. Look how long it took CM to get 4G onto the EVO 4G, and that was a team of highly skilled individuals practically reverse engineering code to do it.
Now imagine all of the copy and paste kitchen users here trying to accomplish that. It just won't happen lol.
That's why we have pretty much the same thing in different colors. It kind of sucks, but hey, HTC did the majority of the work, and if something already works good enough, the average person will be fine with and use that.
Yeah, it does slow down the evolution and innovation of Android as a whole, but you have to put some of the blame on OEMs for pushing out 45 different phones a year. Nobody is going to be encouraged to create something from the ground up for a phone that will be replaced and obsolete by the time they're finished.
The G1 is the prime example of a great phone that got tons of developer support, tons of new things, and tons of unique ROMs. But that was the beginning, and I doubt that's ever going to happen again.
HTC all but pushed this EVO 3D out, and forgot about it. They've released a good 19 phones since then at the rate they're going, most of us will have moved on to the next one in a few months. Sad but true.
That is why I have stuck with and will probably continue to use a Stock ROM, modified to my liking and stripped. There isn't much else you can hope for. 3D has failed to really take off like HTC and the rest of us wanted. There is no motivation for any of the teams out there to focus on reverse engineering their ROMs to use 3D. MIUI to this day hasn't bothered with WiMAX and with good reason. Sprint all about blatantly announced its slow death in favor of LTE. It would have been a waste of time for the MIUI team to implement it. Kudos to Team Win and CM for gracing us with it on the EVO 4G. But, hindsight has probably made people mad that all of their time and energy went into something that's getting canned.
Alot of good points freeza. These are paragraphs I like to read.
Temari x Shikamaru
This article appeared today on the main page of XDA and I feel that it's a very important lesson for any/all new ROM devs.
Sage Advice from Cyanogen Still Valid Today
http://www.xda-developers.com/android/sage-advice-from-cyanogen-still-valid-today/
Excerpt:
He had this advice to offer for those looking to make their own Android ROMs:
Stop. Write an app or two first, learn how the system works from a developer standpoint. Learn some Java. Read the developer documentation. Learn how to use Git. Then learn how to build AOSP from source. Read the porting guides, and learn how the build system works….. Now try to put your new found skills to work on enhancing the platform by writing code or making theme overlays. And share! And put that s**t on your resume. There is a *ton* of information out there but any kind of “step-by-step rom cooking guide” is going to be a complete fail- it’s too broad of a subject.As XDA has grown right along with the meteoric rise of Android, so has a desire of users to create their own ROMs, kernels, themes, and so on. Much of this work classifies as “original development,” but there’s been a growing trend to what many are calling “derivative development.” This category covers most of ROMs based on stock releases from the manufacturers, applying patches and scripts aimed at optimization, theming and/or removing stock applications, and using “kitchens” that run a stock release through a list of scripts and then repackage as a recovery-flashable update.zip. This is what Cyanogen was expressing frustration about—shortcuts being taken to achieve a product that differs only slightly from stock (derived) and pushed out instead of building from source and delving into the core of Android and making something truly original.
XDA-Developers exists first and foremost for developers. It’s at the core of who we are; it’s in our blood; and it’s in the air we breathe. There is a place for derivative works—they provide an entry to the scene which can help to introduce people to the wonders of Android. But let’s not stop there. Don’t be satisfied with just creating yet another derivative of someone else’s work. Instead, follow Cyanogen’s sage advice and learn about Android from the ground up, and create something truly original and innovative.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Guess I should continue with this hello world app... haha
Op just explained 99% of our roms lol
Repackage, rename, reskin and ask for donations. Rinse lather and repeat. Now your a dev!
Ha.
True software developers understand the wisdom of code reuse.
So ,in my opinion, if a fledgling developer takes a set of code and applies addons, makes a few setting changes then calls it a ROM and provides users benefit...then they are on the path.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using Tapatalk 2
andrawer said:
Ha.
True software developers understand the wisdom of code reuse.
So ,in my opinion, if a fledgling developer takes a set of code and applies addons, makes a few setting changes then calls it a ROM and provides users benefit...then they are on the path.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even if they fail to write a single line of original code?
I'm with cyanogen on this one...
saddly alll this is sementic
if the world of android was perfect then this would be true .by perfect i mean everything being open source ...
but if everything was open source we woudlnt have things like arc touchwizz blurr or sense , it is my opinion and shared by many others that android would be very boring if we only had aosp .
what does a coder brings to touchwiz sense or blurr device ?
the market is filled with cool apps and launcher .. 99% of them coders will make apps for android and wont bother with anything else
that brings me to my next point . building from source means on top of aosp , or in my terms vanilla android .. many devs love vanilla and its fine but what about those who dont ?
99% of the rom on xda are just that : either source compiled with apps added or stock deodex rom with a theme and apps added ..
here is the but , and before i say it i wanna say everyone is entitled to his opinion and im not bashing anyone ,
without guys like me who just hack the code and spend countless hours looking at what the code is actually doing and port the nice stuff from sense to TW or form CM to TW and RE (reverse engineer all these nice codes) 99% percent of the android devices would be boring because lets face it there is only one aosp device / year..
so from what Cyanogen is saying we should all buy a gnex and stop supporting those that make android close source,
but wait without them , many things woudlnt be in CM in the first place , what is cm without all these kangs? a glorified aosp ?
ok maybe im pushing but you get my drift...
how many true innovations by Cyanogen vs them Proprietary UI ?
fun fact the head (or ex ) of Cyanoen now works at samsung and help make touchwiz better (close source)
what about miui , they have so many innovations , and they dont share any of there code ..
so as I said there is no black or white here
thats what android is all about make your own thing play with it call it yours and make it a hobby , and maybe just maybe others will like it ...
I have seen way to many devs get god like status on xda for deodexing a rom and injecting voodoo in there kernel (for example)
i ve seen crazy talented themers have there work taken by others be ignored by the community and then vanished , and everyday we see a kik ass true developper on here and treat him like hes a nobody , because he doesnt have or because we havent heard of his rom .....
i completely understand where cm is coming form but my opinion differs slightly ..
@op kik ass thread (as I never read the front page)
Hard to build an i717 ROM from scratch with all of the proprietary bits, Samsung framework, etc, as most of that is proprietary as DAGr8 says. AOSP/AOKP works, but lacking some SPen functions and still relying heavily on a binary kernel as there are no kernel sources for ICS yet.
Hopefully the kernel situation changes, and we're back to the normal business of everything except the proprietary blobs that have to get copied from a stock ROM......
It'd be nice if all required code was released, but for some reason such things tend to be considered proprietary. Oh well.
Thanks OP. I also don't read the frontpage near often enough.
I like what Cyanogen is saying, and agree with his points from his developer point of view. I also agree with DAGr8 and his points. The fact is that Android gives us so many choices and has so many options for exploration. I think that's why so many of us have moved to the Android ecosystem. There is enough room for everyone. Android is the most prevalent mobile OS in the world for a reason. We can all have our opinions. We can all have what we want on our devices. And there are more and more people willing and able to jump in and try to build. Call them developers, or hackers, or derivators. It doesn't matter to me. They all add value to Android.
Yes yes, you may think that I'm crazy for attempting to compile AOSP, but in fact im just obsessed with getting AOSP to work (on my previous device I spent a full year on it without success), thanks to the experience I know much more know about the environment.
I've done several pure aosp builds so far, and they result in a ~280mb system folder, which is kinda the size of aosp I guess (atleast for xxhdpi)
But they end with errors of course, anyways. I used the devices specs with updated overlays,and added dependencies (such as hardware) to the environment.
But since the aosp environment is very mean to new devices its once again a real struggle. as expected, but I like the challenge.
Anyways, Im currently trying out this hybrid-ish environment. which contains the items listed above but with several elements of the AOKP environment added (only the essential ones for compatibility).
Compiling goes so far so good. hope I will get a working build. (don't expect this to happen tho)
Oh and since samsung is releasing the S4 Google Edition (AOSP) soon it must be possible. (the google edition is the qualcomm varian afaik)
More info soon!
I'm going to drop this here for now until I have time to mess with it more.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/android-building/_F67iLDcVzQ
Note: This leads me back to my previous question as to how we are supposed to build with this.
At face value it seems we're only getting fairly close to what we were with other OSRC releases.
Going to look at more later tonight.
Skilled devs can get pure aosp to work properly. It was done for sprints gs3 without using CM code.
Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 2
You don't necessarily need proprietary binaries to be released to build AOSP, although it does make it much easier. Sometimes you have to resort to trial and error and debug tools.
drewX2 said:
You don't necessarily need proprietary binaries to be released to build AOSP, although it does make it much easier. Sometimes you have to resort to trial and error and debug tools.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I disagree completely. Without the prop' libraries and drivers that the OEM has built to manage the board you can most certainly expect the related hardware to fail or be only partially functional at best. Some other 3rd party generic driver would still be required if this example were true. In the good old AOSP days (maguro for example) had roughly a dozen proprietary files required for the device tree to build. With more and more OEMs making different hardware configs and spin-off APIs trying to lock down a lead in the game it has inflated that number greatly. In this instance, for example, S4 requires roughly 165 proprietary files in the vendor/ and device/ tree. Furthermore, with many of those stacks being required to pass for a successful boot complete (audio for example) there is little chance for even semi-functional usage without the required libraries and drivers.
broodplank1337 said:
(edit)...I'm crazy for attempting to compile AOSP...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We're compiling pure AOSP already for this board. I'm not sure what your repo structure looks like but if you are based off a CM or AOKP base clone then you got some work cut out for you. The CM tree compiles completely different than AOSP. All EaglesBlood builds are compiled from our same main branch, which consists entirely of only pure AOSP + our own EB coding. There is no CM codeblock nor anything else polluting (no pun). Since CM and others have some custom hybrid APIs and such you may run into issues that are difficult to resolve or even identify. If you aren't the one committing those patches then it is difficult to know at a glance of what has been heavily CM-ified vs closer to native code; or unless you're very in-tune with CM, gerrit and GIT.
We'll be releasing AOSP 4.2.2 as soon as we get the kernel config where we want it to be. Stay tuned. http://www.eaglesblood.com
oOo B0XeR oOo said:
I disagree completely. Without the prop' libraries and drivers that the OEM has built to manage the board you can most certainly expect the related hardware to fail or be only partially functional at best. Some other 3rd party generic driver would still be required if this example were true. In the good old AOSP days (maguro for example) had roughly a dozen proprietary files required for the device tree to build. With more and more OEMs making different hardware configs and spin-off APIs trying to lock down a lead in the game it has inflated that number greatly. In this instance, for example, S4 requires roughly 165 proprietary files in the vendor/ and device/ tree. Furthermore, with many of those stacks being required to pass for a successful boot complete (audio for example) there is little chance for even semi-functional usage without the required libraries and drivers.
I think you misunderstood what I said. First of all, I am speaking from *experience*. I have ported AOSP to devices without RELEASED proprietary binaries and I have handled every step in porting; from display, audio, to calling, wifi, bt, etc. Released means the manufacturer provides a nice little package for you. I had to in many cases, figure out which libs from a stock rom were needed. Additionally, you can utilize libs from completely different devices as a temporary patch. I am very comfortable with kernel development and the android framework. If you were too, you would know what I am saying is true. Here is one tip, nearly every board is like another (within the same class; eg. MSM8960, APQ8064) with only slight variations (e.g. modem). Once you understand that, it becomes easier.
We're compiling pure AOSP already for this board. I'm not sure what your repo structure looks like but if you are based off a CM or AOKP base clone then you got some work cut out for you. The CM tree compiles completely different than AOSP. All EaglesBlood builds are compiled from our same main branch, which consists entirely of only pure AOSP + our own EB coding. There is no CM codeblock nor anything else polluting (no pun). Since CM and others have some custom hybrid APIs and such you may run into issues that are difficult to resolve or even identify. If you aren't the one committing those patches then it is difficult to know at a glance of what has been heavily CM-ified vs closer to native code; or unless you're very in-tune with CM, gerrit and GIT.
We'll be releasing AOSP 4.2.2 as soon as we get the kernel config where we want it to be. Stay tuned. http://www.eaglesblood.com
I agree with you on some points about CM code, however, you're group has been porting devices that were working or nearly working with base android code. Talk about an easy route. I can see you haven't had to do any hard work yet. Going from 4.1 -> 4.2 on a non google AOSP supported device or a device that has no CM build available for it is a whole different story. How do I know? I've done it. I was the first to build CM for HTC DNA and both CM/AOSP for Oppo Find 5. Next time before you "completely disagree," make sure you know what you're talking about.
Lastly, although I agree with you on some points about CM code, you should give them credit because your stuff is probably based on their stuff more then you lead others to believe; like nearly every other "dev group" out there. And by no means, am I some CM lover (I've had my quarrels with them), but you should give respect and credit to those who make what you do possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See Above.
drewX2 said:
I think you misunderstood what I said. First of all, I am speaking from *experience*. I have ported AOSP to devices without RELEASED proprietary binaries...
...How do I know? I've done it. I was the first to build CM for HTC DNA and both CM/AOSP for Oppo Find 5. Next time before you "completely disagree," make sure you know what you're talking about.
[/QUOTE
Great, hi-five to you, but before making bold assumptions...
http://www.xda-developers.com/android/aosp-jellybean-build-for-the-t-mobile-g2x/
drewX2 said:
...(CM) you should give them credit because your stuff is probably based on their stuff more then you lead others to believe; like nearly every other "dev group" out there. And by no means, am I some CM lover (I've had my quarrels with them),....
See Above.
[/QUOTE
I never suggested anything about CM, they are top-notch. I said we dont use their base code like "every other dev". Sorry you have had quarrels; and there is nothing "probably based off them" as I just told you our repo is straight AOSP & EB.
Likewise you should "know what you're talking about", prior to making assumptions and speculations.
^read above
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im currently working on this as well...anyone have anymore success? Im currently fighting my way through compile errors...but I would love to be able to atleast get a bootable pure aosp from source...ill keep at it...but if anyone has gotten it yet please help speed up my process and enlighten me on what you did to compile a working aosp
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
I guess we all are I'm working on one too. Lots of research on correcting errors
Cm10.2 anyone??
Sent from my GT-I9505G using Tapatalk 2
deleted
Wrong post
I did it successfully with help of some external repos
forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2397511