Related
http://www.androidpolice.com/2010/1...3-gingerbread-being-pushed-to-aosp-right-now/
go, go, go! )
These are very good news
I already see my Hero running CM 7
:happy face:
Excellent News Lets see who get's their GingerBread ROM out first
Sweet, if the hero really will be supported!
Cooooooooooooooool man very nice go go go go gooooooooooooooogle
Tchuup-tchuup! Hotness train is leaving the stations
ummm...
yea. will be interesting to watch... if it works on hero it will be fun... I don't expect devs will take the time on the hero any more like they used to but if someone out there has the know how and time and dedication then it's probably possible.
dkelley said:
ummm...
yea. will be interesting to watch... if it works on hero it will be fun... I don't expect devs will take the time on the hero any more like they used to but if someone out there has the know how and time and dedication then it's probably possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Feeyo...
Good news
Sent from my HTC Hero
C0mpu13rFr34k said:
Feeyo...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
should be interesting to watch his progress
I wish the technical know-how would be something well documented.
What I mean is, ive seen lox/benocharm (sp?) progress in the last year in terms of Android knowledge, almost from the start. Ive seen one of these two guys post about initial questions about how things work, then edit his own post to do a mini-FAQ on ROM cooking. Now today it would look like they would kick some major ass at doing it if they were still able to give time for this, because they know the Hero hardware by heart; they know the usual glitch when porting (ie: how to make camera/bluetooth work, etc), all the minor details that makes a ROM usable or not for a day-to-day ROM! However, this kind of knowledge seems not so well documented.
What i'm basically saying is if a developer bails out the documentation about how to rebuild a custom ROM does too. It looks like (from a non-cooker point of view) that there is no centralized Wiki or webpage about the usual generic steps or roadblocks when porting from another device or when starting from AOSP to build FOR an Htc Hero (or any device, too).
Personally i know enough about linux in general, ive build a few updates.zip for my own knowledge's sake (nothing fancy though, removed/added apks ), but I have my questions on how to properly make something not built specifically for an Hero work with all the hardware functioning. I'm sure many others are in the same boat (plenty of tech knowledge but lack of Android ROM resources). For example, the question I had in mind were in the form of:
Does specific hardware components (gps, wifi, bt) relies on linux kernel modules? Does it need some kind of special APKS or Jars to make it work along with the framework, or just kernel modules are enough once loaded?
Following up on the point above: would copying modules from another device specific ROM would be sufficient? (I guess not), what about Android release versions (Eclair, Froyo, Gingerbread, etc)? Can modules work regardless of the Android version being run on?
ETC...
Well its pretty much a long rant, but since i'm stuck with a 3 year contract on Telus with an HTC Hero, I wouldnt mind giving a bit of my free time to make a working ROM out of it. However I am/was under the impression that the Hero ROM development scene went to a stop once Cyanogen started supporting Hero (seems to me there are only two *major* roms out there, CM and VillainRom), and due to that ROM cookers stoped caring about the Hero since it was well enough supported as it is (with CM on board).
Thanks for listening, doctor
I'm actually in the process of setting up an Ubuntu virtual box to dive right in, when I saw the AOSP sources getting pushed I thought why wait? Why not try it myself?
Don't expect anything soon. First of all I am just going to build off the Cyanogen tree and see if I can make a working ROM, then I will look into the deep dark hell that is porting software to HTC's proprietory-drivered-up-the-ass Hero
l0st.prophet said:
I'm actually in the process of setting up an Ubuntu virtual box to dive right in, when I saw the AOSP sources getting pushed I thought why wait? Why not try it myself?
Don't expect anything soon. First of all I am just going to build off the Cyanogen tree and see if I can make a working ROM, then I will look into the deep dark hell that is porting software to HTC's proprietory-drivered-up-the-ass Hero
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any luck with it? I had the same idea, reading now a lot of information about building a rom.
Maybe we can post some useful links or tutorials about building ROMs in this thread so that we can kind of collaborate?
That would be a great idea, i really like the idea of building my own rom. or at least try to build one.
Here you can find how to setup your own machine to build android roms
http://source.android.com/source/download.html
if you have problems with installing sun-java5-jdk follow the instructions on this page:
http://blog.enea.com/Blog/bid/32050/Ubuntu-9-10-Java-5-and-the-Android-Open-Source-Project
Also checkout Cyanogen's wiki, they really did an excellent job there:
http://wiki.cyanogenmod.com/index.php?title=Compile_CyanogenMod_for_Hero
I'm progressing... slowly. Downloading Ubuntu 10.10 iso, 200MB of updates, the SDK, Eclipse, the ADT plugin, all the platform updates and GIT is taking a while on < 2Mb connection...
Especially the repo syncing... that just takes ages ;
krispijn_s said:
Especially the repo syncing... that just takes ages ;
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gives me time to read I spose! I totally understand how to build off Cyanogen's code, that sounds simple, but I get a little lost when it comes to syncing with AOSP or branching Cyanogen to make changes... but I got hours of dowloading yet so I can read up about it then!
Make sure you download the x64 version of Ubuntu. Since 2.2.1 you need a 64-bit system to compile the Android OS project.
Also don't expect to get it compiling right away, I reckon somekind of cpu-profile is missing (could be named different). Third I heard that the sound and camera (again) systems got changed, could be buggers to get those working.
Just my two cents
I have seen a number of threads comparing and analyzing the different ROMs. I have extensively used two of the leading contenders for "best GB ROM" - Deck's GB ROM (1.2 stable released yesterday) and Vaelpak 0.2.1 (released a few days ago). Here is a list of pros and cons that I noticed - I may have missed some so please jump in and add to the list in this thread. Maybe we can put together a comprehensive list of differences (knowing, of course, that it is always a moving target).
Please note that I ran both ROMs with Tiamat 4.0.5-sbc kernel. Results may be different with different kernels.
Also, by no means am I saying that these are the best ROMs out there. These are just the two that I have extensively used and can therefore compare/contrast first hand.
So here goes ...
Deck's GB ROM v1.2
1. Minimalist and lightweight ROM - default Android Launcher.
2. Minimalist themes, no special wallpapers, fonts, icons, etc.
3. GPS works out of the box (was a problem with earlier versions of the ROM).
4. Wifi, BT and 4G work without issues, except ...
5. Wireless tethering works, but sometimes stops playing well with 4G. i.e. you will be tethered, and even with 4G on you will be getting 3G speeds. This is not consistent behavior - sometimes tethering works great with 4G.
6. I have not experienced any wakelock issues.
7. About 10% more battery life with Tiamat kernal than Vaelpak.
8. ROM is very stable - very few app FCs, practically no reboots.
9. Netflix works.
Vaelpak 0.2.1
1. Comes packaged with Go Launcher.
2. More inbuilt themes, wallpapers, fonts, widgets.
3. GPS, Wifi, BT, 4G and tethering work without any issues.
4. Less stable than Deck's ROM (Note - the developer does explicitly state that this is a work-in-progress, so things should improve on this front). There are some random reboots, wakelock issues.
5. Comes packaged with CPU profiles and undervolting scripts. You can underclock/overclock and undervolt without SetCPU or vipermod scripts. A big plus. (Note - it is possible to do all of this on Deck's ROM, just needs a few additional steps by the user).
6. Comes packaged with DT apps2sd. Again, a big convenience removing the need to do this manually.
7. Packaged email app does not support "Select All". Had to point this out since it is a rather big negative for me. (Note - this is in the dev's list of planned enhancements).
8. No packaged FM radio app.
9. Netflix works.
So in essence, as of today the Deck ROM is more stable and "safer", but Vaelpak has enough packed in features to make it quite formidable.
Default launcher in Decks is ADW (free), I believe.
Prugor said:
Default launcher in Decks is ADW (free), I believe.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The default launcher in Decks is Launcher 2.
I tried out Vaelpack preview last week and it was really nice but lacks a few things i enjoy. Deck as striped the rom to the point that you have to install a lot more then desired. Both are great roms hand down. I'm just going to wait for VP to get a more stable beta going and once he adds the theme chooser i might just jump ship
i would have to say deck because he updates his thread alot and always adds new things.
im not 100% on this but when was the last time Vaelek put out a new rom or updates his previous work?
Joey_UFC said:
i would have to say deck because he updates his thread alot and always adds new things.
im not 100% on this but when was the last time Vaelek put out a new rom or updates his previous work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually Vaelek's GB ROM (Vaelpak4 v0.2) was released on May 31, and v0.2.1 was released June 20. He is also very active on his forum, and maintains a public list of items/fixes that he is currently working on. Very informative, and will give you a great picture of what is coming soon.
Having not used either, but being familiar with both Dev's ROMs, I can say right now Decks, because it's been out longer and had more testing, etc.
I didn't know Vaelpak was putting a GB ROM together, but I promise you, when he get's it finalized, it will be amazing.
His Senseless ROM was a daily driver for me for a long time. Every detail gets paid attention to in his ROMs.
peterpunn said:
Actually Vaelek's GB ROM (Vaelpak4 v0.2) was released on May 31, and v0.2.1 was released June 20. He is also very active on his forum, and maintains a public list of items/fixes that he is currently working on. Very informative, and will give you a great picture of what is coming soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
on XDA?
10char
HipKat said:
Having not used either, but being familiar with both Dev's ROMs, I can say right now Decks, because it's been out longer and had more testing, etc.
I didn't know Vaelpak was putting a GB ROM together, but I promise you, when he get's it finalized, it will be amazing.
His Senseless ROM was a daily driver for me for a long time. Every detail gets paid attention to in his ROMs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i would have to agree with this but i was more of a KushDeck user for a long time lol
I tried 1 of Vaeleks roms and i can't think of any issues but it was a long time ago.
Joey_UFC said:
on XDA?
10char
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://vaelek.com/index.php?/forum/47-vaelpak-gingerbread-aosp/
peterpunn said:
http://vaelek.com/index.php?/forum/47-vaelpak-gingerbread-aosp/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats why i haven't seen it. he is no longer posting on xda
VP hands down
many vpgb .2.1 preview (not even beta yet) users like myself, who read and ask for solutions find them simply and as a result find this current version of the preview to be very stable and very quick, plus it looks great. i can't wait til it actually hits the beta stage because right now it is more final than a lot of final roms i've used.
ropodope
Vaelpak! Any arguments that the developer hasn't updated or anything like that are mostly incorrect. He just hasn't updated anything on XDA, because he's not on XDA anymore. He runs his own site and his own forum, and he's very active there.
Heck, try them both for a few days and see which YOU like best. They're free.
you didn't? any look at his official forum would have told you this some time ago. come on over, get involved. http://www.vaelek.com
ropodope
SilverZero said:
Vaelpak! Any arguments that the developer hasn't updated or anything like that are mostly incorrect. He just hasn't updated anything on XDA, because he's not on XDA anymore. He runs his own site and his own forum, and he's very active there.
Heck, try them both for a few days and see which YOU like best. They're free.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah i didn't know that. because xda has a community of 4 million people. virus and other devs have their own sites but still post on here. so i thought if your not on xda then your not doing work anymore lol obviously i was wrong.
i will try out Vaelek new work when i get the chance. im loving the alliance rom right now
ropodope said:
you didn't? any look at his official forum would have told you this some time ago. come on over, get involved. http://www.vaelek.com
ropodope
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but will i get infected
I used Deck's for a while and later switched to Vaelpak's. I like Vaelpak's much more because of its features and community. Even though it's in its preview stage, it is VERY stable. The community is so responsive and helpful. Another thing is that Deck finished his ROM, Vaelpak started just like 2 months ago and already has a beast of a ROM.
Just to chime in here...
XDA does have a massive user base yes. But with that, comes a massive idiot base, over-inflated egos, and too many people that can't be bothered to read an OP in its entirety.. I do come back to post here when there is something worth posting about. The users at my forum are MUCH more well mannered and helpful overall. If you want to be told to search, RTFM, stop being a noob, read through 300 pages to find the answer, then XDA is the place to be. The main reason there is no post for my GB preview here is because as of right now there is no public source available and I don't need the XDA police breathing down my neck or editing my posts because of it.
On another note, thanks for the props to those that have been giving them to my preview
VP is the best. Jim you are the best in my book
vaelek said:
Just to chime in here...
XDA does have a massive user base yes. But with that, comes a massive idiot base, over-inflated egos, and too many people that can't be bothered to read an OP in its entirety.. I do come back to post here when there is something worth posting about. The users at my forum are MUCH more well mannered and helpful overall. If you want to be told to search, RTFM, stop being a noob, read through 300 pages to find the answer, then XDA is the place to be. The main reason there is no post for my GB preview here is because as of right now there is no public source available and I don't need the XDA police breathing down my neck or editing my posts because of it.
On another note, thanks for the props to those that have been giving them to my preview
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THIS
Head over to Vaelek's forums if there was doubt in if his work is supported and ongoing. Extremely responsive on his forums, you would be hard pressed to find any lengthy span of days where Vaelek hasn't answered questions or posted fixes to issues brought up in the forums on his site. The guy is machine constantly helping out his user base.
Now for the roms, I actually originally suggested to vaelek using Decks rom as base for his work (but there is no public source). Decks rom is great but the added features and amazing dev support is what keeps me going back to Vaelpak roms.
I would be greatful for someone to help me with getting honeycomb on the Kindle Fire. I Have access to all types of machines, so just any how-to's would be awesome.
Why do you want honeycomb? any reason?
We have an almost fully working copy of ICS. Is there a reason you want honeycomb instead of ICS?
I second this request I personally like honey comb better and also it nice to have options I have a little know how and would love to help
Sent from my RubiX ICS Infused using Tapatalk
im no developer, but as far as i know, i understand that honeycomb and ics are similar as far as kernels go and how the os works so this is just a shot in the dark, if what i hear is correct. you could, hypothetically back port everything from ics to honeycomb, except for hardware acceleration, because we have to have a custom kernel to get that to work, and our devs are hard at work with no luck as of yet. it shouldn't be too hard.
just my .02cents, i could be completely wrong, some one correct me if i am.
thrasherht said:
Why do you want honeycomb? any reason?
We have an almost fully working copy of ICS. Is there a reason you want honeycomb instead of ICS?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just have never had a honeycomb device to be honest. I think it would be neat to port the rom.
Sent from my myTouch_4G_Slide using XDA App
Yes, I think it would be great if devs bring honeycomb to kindle fire. In fact I like the looking more than ICS and because there are a lot of tablets with honeycom out there it should be easy to port
One major problem; honeycomb was never opensourced by the AOSP team (they are still catching flack for it but moving on...) because of that there is no source tree to build from (you never wondered why cm8 was skipped?) the only way to get honeycomb on the fire is to port it in binary form from a similar device (this is not something I know how to do or intent on researching, sorry) I'm not providing this information to discourage but merely for the information (honeycomb would be cool lol) if someone with more binary porting experience wants to do this I'd say go for it and good luck.
If I'm not mistaken, wasn't the Honeycomb source released with the ICS source? Ill do some searching, but I'm fairly positive it was. And honestly, if they were released at the same time, I understand why the CM team would go with CM9 instead since ICS is the newer OS and is in higher demand. More options would be nice though.
Yeah, this was the first result I got from a search. The source is out there...
forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1346829
Sent from my SGH-I727 using xda premium
Sully6789 said:
If I'm not mistaken, wasn't the Honeycomb source released with the ICS source? Ill do some searching, but I'm fairly positive it was. And honestly, if they were released at the same time, I understand why the CM team would go with CM9 instead since ICS is the newer OS and is in higher demand. More options would be nice though.
Yeah, this was the first result I got from a search. The source is out there...
forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1346829
Sent from my SGH-I727 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that's news to me lol; if I get bored I might actually have a look at that (I have nothing to test it on atm lol)
In all practicality it would make more sense to try to update the system ui for cm9 with the options wanted from honeycomb that were not in ics, reason being we still have no cm8 to port so anything built from honeycomb would be vanilla and not cm (not necessarily a bad thing). If you have a read it looks like they did not provide any revision tags for honeycomb however; which means if I'm not mistaken I will have to clone the entire history without choosing a branch to look lol.
Edit: I was mistaken, not choosing a branch (as I should have obviously realized) gits from master, durr lol. However I did definitely get bored so here I sit trying to figure out the best way to sync honeycomb.
So I cloned a single repo and ran git branch -a : as you can clearly see by the following branch list there is no honeycomb branch tag:
remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master
remotes/origin/donut-release
remotes/origin/donut-release2
remotes/origin/eclair-passion-release
remotes/origin/eclair-release
remotes/origin/eclair-sholes-release
remotes/origin/eclair-sholes-release2
remotes/origin/froyo
remotes/origin/froyo-release
remotes/origin/gingerbread
remotes/origin/gingerbread-mr4-release
remotes/origin/gingerbread-release
remotes/origin/ics-factoryrom-2-release
remotes/origin/ics-mr0
remotes/origin/ics-mr0-release
remotes/origin/ics-mr1
remotes/origin/ics-mr1-release
remotes/origin/master
The source is in there in the commit history but the only way you can get to it that I can think of is to clone each repo and revert the commits back one at a time (I'm far too lazy for this).
Brings me back to one of my earlier points; porting the elements wanted into the existing roms or porting a binary from a similar device (for which you would want to start by finding something with a similar omap cpu, I'm sure a google sure would yield some results for those wanting to look into porting a binary)
From what I have read Google has publicly admitted to not releasing Honeycomb because it was rushed and is below Google's normal standards and that they would be rather embarrassed to have put out sloppy work. With that said I would still like to see Honeycomb as an option on the Kindle. The more the merrier is pretty much the way I look at it.
I don't understand why you would want Honeycomb if you have ICS. ICS is basically the same as Honeycomb with more features.
Honeycomb was integrated into ICS. There is no real Honeycomb branch. Yes, google was embarrassed with how bad honeycomb came out since it was so rushed. Thats the main reason they didn't want to release it. After all, it was sloppy code. ICS has the tablet interface built into it.
Honeycomb might happen on the kindle fire eventually, but ICS should be the priority.
As everyone has said, honeycomb is harder to build, less feature filled, and older than Ice cream.
Until ICS it's flawless, I wouldn't keep your hopes up.
Without the source or a similar device to port from, there isn't a good place to start.
My recommendation: Get ICS and put a HC theme on it. It'll run better, sooner and go longer before it's depreciated. Plus Google Chrome only works in ICS.
I'm not a dev, but would it be easier to get hwa with honeycomb than ics? just asking!
No...
Only way to get Honeycomb would be a similar device that already has it.
therefore you cant edit the source code of the files. So you wont get HWA
death2all110 said:
No...
Only way to get Honeycomb would be a similar device that already has it.
therefore you cant edit the source code of the files. So you wont get HWA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, that's not true. The source is there, it's just not clear where honeycomb ends and ics starts. I've looked a bit into the source code, i saw some default.xml files with should checkout the right commits for 3.0, 3.1 or 3.2. When i saw that i was happy as i thought it was easy, but i tried them out and it failed at building inside frameworks/base. It looks that the commit-sha1's inside these default.xml's are only relevant for the GPL components. The next thing i did was to revert every .git to 2011-08-30 (the release date of 3.2.2, i've looked into the version history of framworks/base and it looks like the first reference of ics starts after that):
Code:
SOURCE=/path/to/source
while read line
do cd $SOURCE/$line
echo $line
git checkout `git rev-list -n 1 --before="2011-08-30 23:59" HEAD`
done <.repo/project.list.revert
where .repo/project.list.revert is the list of projects to revert. I've still got a lot of compile errors, fixed some but now i hang with some problems with clang. But maybe it could work when you only take the projects of these base-for-3.?-gpl.xml files from ics and revert them. The lists of projects change a lot between 3.0<->4.0.
The good thing about honeycomb would be that it's based on the 2.6.36 kernel so it think it still uses the old renderer for video acceleration. (Did not saw any reference of rpmsg in regard to honeycomb)
my 2 cents on honeycomb
As an Acer a500 iconia owner, I simply love honeycomb. I've been an avid android user since the T-Mobile g1 and android had become second nature to me by the time I got my hands on honeycomb. Ics is very similar but I do have my gripes. 1st being I don't like the way they swapped the confirmation screens "OK" and "cancel" buttons...not such a big deal but it was never an issue before, so y fix what ain't broke? 2nd, i cant ever recall a time where i installed an app on hc and had it act all funky the way i have it happen on ics builds for the several devices that i own that do run ics. With that said, I'd love hc on my fire, as I've grown very accustomed to it on my iconia tab. Maybe once all these HWA issues are ironed out we may start seeing some hc builds. Thanks to all the devs and all their hard work for making everyone of our kindles better than amazon ever could
---------- Post added at 08:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:19 AM ----------
Even with my a500 running ics, I get all kinds of fc's and a lot of apps just fail to run what so ever, so I can see where the OP is coming from, so much so, that I'm back running 3.2 on my iconia
ICS is to Honeycomb what Win 7 was to Vista. Both are what their forerunners should have been in the first place, and are really only a more finished version.
Having run Honeycomb on a couple of Tegra 2 devices for a while, and then playing around with ICS, I can't honestly imagine why any dev would waste his time with Honeycomb, unless you're doing it for the "just because" factor. But if that's the case, why not port Froyo or AOSP Gingerbread or Tap n' Tap too?
Screw Win98 and XP. Give me WinME.
jmcoffey said:
I would be greatful for someone to help me with getting honeycomb on the Kindle Fire. I Have access to all types of machines, so just any how-to's would be awesome.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would try starting with any ROM you can find from the Toshiba AT200, it apparently has the same processor and therefore a similar if not the same Kernel. Then try and get the drivers for the Kindle Fire to make sure that the screen and everything else is compatible. Stop back and let us know how it goes!
Sorry for not being able to be more specific in the title, but my question is this: What exactly is the outcome of this kernel ****storm? With the CM team doing something which makes it hard for kernel developers to adapt?
Let's say one flashes CM9 and some custom kernel which has an app for controlling its settings, say GLaDOS, Trinity or Franco. Now, using these three kernels takes away the ability to modify kernel settings through the CM menus, but if one is using said kernel control app, then what difference does it make if the settings aren't available in the CM menus?
Also, I get it that no nug reports are accepted if one is using this mix, but since when did the CM team ever accept bug reports for nightly builds? I don't think I've ever had a single problem running a custom kernel with CM9 seeing as how I've always utilized some sort of kernel control app (and a few bucks for it isn't much of a hassle)
Can anyone shed some light on this? What are your experiences?
I would love to hear some answers on this as well. I kind-of have a love affair with franco.Kernel right now.
Its the same as carriers do it "If you dont use the software they gave you, you get no warranty". They don't know what you did with the phone, or what you flashed, or what could possibly be broken in the rom, so if you don't have the software the way they intended, they can't/won't help you.
Same applies with CM9, if you don't use the kernel they made/gave you, then they don't know if the issues you might have are because of a bug in the rom, or a bug in th kernel. Its hard work as it is to develop roms, tracking down bugs due to user choice/error is far harder and time consuming.
Basically, if you want to submit bug reports/make sure all the features of CM9 (any custom rom really), then use what you are given. No one forces you to use their rom, nor use a different kernel. With freedom of use, come other restrictions.
theking_13 said:
Its the same as carriers do it "If you dont use the software they gave you, you get no warranty". They don't know what you did with the phone, or what you flashed, or what could possibly be broken in the rom, so if you don't have the software the way they intended, they can't/won't help you.
Same applies with CM9, if you don't use the kernel they made/gave you, then they don't know if the issues you might have are because of a bug in the rom, or a bug in th kernel. Its hard work as it is to develop roms, tracking down bugs due to user choice/error is far harder and time consuming.
Basically, if you want to submit bug reports/make sure all the features of CM9 (any custom rom really), then use what you are given. No one forces you to use their rom, nor use a different kernel. With freedom of use, come other restrictions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, but that doesn't really answer my question.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=26457711
Ezekeel brought it to everyone's attention with this thread.
i am a super omega ultimate noob lv. -99. i am wondering how to check on the latest status of the GSIII stable roms. i would like to know if/when CM will get the roms first or if xda gets them first. i like stable roms because i am a noob. my noobness knows no bounds. please help. i do dontate. thank you.
Right now, CM10 nightly 25 is working great
26 has exhibited a few irritating bugs but I haven't had any problems with nightly 25
Give it a run, it's phenomenal IMO
o-k said:
i am a super omega ultimate noob lv. -99. i am wondering how to check on the latest status of the GSIII stable roms. i would like to know if/when CM will get the roms first or if xda gets them first. i like stable roms because i am a noob. my noobness knows no bounds. please help. i do dontate. thank you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Xda is just an outlet where people choose to post roms.
To check on the latest status of roms, you need to open the threads and read the OP. You also need to spend at least ten minutes reading each thread, That will tell you how stable each rom is and what kind of results people are having.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda premium
Is there a place for specific roms that we can see a list of all known bugs? I've been trying to check on, for example, CM10, paranoid android, and AOKP in particular and havent been able to find any bug trackers at all. Without knowing what bugs there are and what will/wont affect me, I'm too hesitant to try any of the roms and have been suffering through t-mobile's dual "update ready" and "update needed" constant un-clearable notifications. I cant even apply the stock updates because I debloated and applying the update fails because I dont have the apps that the update is attempting to update. Updating would involve doing a full factory reset back to stock and THEN updating, which means i'm probably better off simply waiting for samsung's official JB update to roll out in the first place
shrimants said:
Is there a place for specific roms that we can see a list of all known bugs? I've been trying to check on, for example, CM10, paranoid android, and AOKP in particular and havent been able to find any bug trackers at all. Without knowing what bugs there are and what will/wont affect me, I'm too hesitant to try any of the roms and have been suffering through t-mobile's dual "update ready" and "update needed" constant un-clearable notifications. I cant even apply the stock updates because I debloated and applying the update fails because I dont have the apps that the update is attempting to update. Updating would involve doing a full factory reset back to stock and THEN updating, which means i'm probably better off simply waiting for samsung's official JB update to roll out in the first place
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually that would be a great idea. It would help out the entire community.
Right now the way things exist, you pretty much have to read through an entire rom thread to determine the benefits/bugs of any given rom.
You could, for example, start a list for any particular rom.. read the entire thread, then make your own thread detailing current known bugs and post it in the same forum. Then the OP of the rom thread could post your link in the first post making it easy for everyone to find.
That would serve two purposes - you would learn the information you're seeking and also become an instantly appreciated contributor to the site.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda premium
I'm surprised the rom developers dont already have a system in place, though. The scope of the projects are presumably gargantuan collaborative works. i kind of assumed that they must have some sort of a bug tracking thing that they use between them. That bug tracking thing is what i've been venturing to find. There are a ton of user-specific bugs that I have no problem digging through the forums and figuring out myself, but what i'd love to see with roms is a list of "this is what we know isnt working yet. dont talk to us about this. we are working on it." or at the very least, "when you flash this rom, if you would like to help, run this command and upload the output HERE so we can fix some bugs we know about".
I'm coming from a linux world and it is very disconcerting to me to flash a rom, encounter a bug/error, and not be able to look at any sort of an error message or do anything to fix the problem except reboot/wipe/reflash and hope for the best. thats a very windows-y mentality to the whole thing, and i feel like if we're running linux on the phones we should be able to get a bit more involved in fixing our own problems a bit better too.
I guess what i'm trying to say is, i'd like to help and i have no clue where to even begin. with archlinux theres a beginners guide but with these roms its more of a "watch this youtube video and follow this tutorial but god help you if anyone thinks you are complaining about what people are doing for you for FREE".
EDIT: I found CM10's issue tracker, but there isnt anything specific for the GS3 there. The flicker and picasa sync issues arent even mentioned. Obviously Paranoid Android and Kang will have the same bugs as CM10, but im assuming that they'll have their own bugs introduced after they add in their own features and such.
ok.
ingenious247 said:
Right now, CM10 nightly 25 is working great
26 has exhibited a few irritating bugs but I haven't had any problems with nightly 25
Give it a run, it's phenomenal IMO
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks! will it be on the CM website or here?
o-k said:
thanks! will it be on the CM website or here?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Two things - one, if you're going to do a lot of flashing, and especially with CM10, you will want to install ROM Manager from the Google Play Store. It will make managing your updates/downloads easier
Two, there is a dedicated thread to CM10 in the "T-Mobile Galaxy S III Original Android Development" forum here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1778217
Read a lot first - before you do anything.. unless you are a very experienced user.
If you have specific questions I will be happy to help
i have a question
ingenious247 said:
Two things - one, if you're going to do a lot of flashing, and especially with CM10, you will want to install ROM Manager from the Google Play Store. It will make managing your updates/downloads easier
Two, there is a dedicated thread to CM10 in the "T-Mobile Galaxy S III Original Android Development" forum here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1778217
Read a lot first - before you do anything.. unless you are a very experienced user.
If you have specific questions I will be happy to help
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i've downloaded the CWM pro and the TB pro. i was wondering what exact ROMS i can use. There is also the difficulty of understanding which rom is exactly which. Is there a way to view the Change log? i'm a super noob. i'm really sorry.
Changelogs won't do you much good.
I recommend flashing everything through CWM (make sure you have 6.0.1.2 Touch - in my signature if not). I wouldn't use ROM Manager at all. Having automated tools is great, but learning how to do it yourself is even better. Plus, if you break something, knowning what you are doing makes it easier to fix. Automated tools hurt more than they help.
As for roms, your options pretty much are as follows:
CyanogenMod: AOSP, the closest thing we have to the stock Google firmware.
AOKP: Pretty much CyanogenMod with some extra options. Nothing extraordinary about those extra options, just some nice things like center clock, swagger toggles, and unicorns.
MIUI: iPhone look for Android.
ParanoidAndroid: Scalable - for tablets (imo).
Then you have the neverending amount of customized stock (TouchWiz) roms.
They are all under constant development. If you want "stable", stay on your stock firmware. All of the roms listed above are stable enough to use as a daily driver. They all have threads in the two Dev forums. But if you don't know what to pick, use CyanogenMod.
I still think ROM Manager is a great tool, it's how I started years ago and I still managed to learn what I needed to over time flashing manually
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda premium