Related
Hey folks,
This is a very basic DL17 rom. It has been debloated, debinged, rooted, deodexed, and zipaligned. Does NOT include radio or kernel.
Download link:
http://www.mediafire.com/?wdv53fbgl18988i
This should serve as a decent base for folks to build their future roms.
Credit to bubby323 for providing me the DL17 system dump.
credit to Logan302 for testing in IRC.
Patch
------
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2056318/update-template/email_continuum.zip This should fix email issues.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2056318/update-template/social_apps.zip Social apps.
use at your own risk. I am not responsible for anything you do to your device!
DD
Tested it, and it worked absolutely perfectly my market its even working again xP bonus
Thank you so much for your time and effort! xD
Thanks for sorting out the issues with the syslinks.
Sent from my SCH-I400 using XDA App
Flashed this, This morning and it works awesome. I also flashed the test kernal you provided a week or so ago and its working great together.
Thanks for this.
Well just noticed some sort of bug on my phone at least.
When i try to add a facebook account to my ticker it fails and when i click on adding an email to my ticker it locks up my phone and i have to pull my battery. It doesnt even get me to a enter email and password screen.
Honestly to me its not a big deal im not a big facebook or email guy so it doesnt bother me.
Also i was wondering if you knew if any of the themes for the fasinate will work for this? I doubt it just wondering.
Fascinate themes must be ported. I'll look into the facebook and email issue fi possible.
Patch added for email.
adrynalyne said:
Fascinate themes must be ported. I'll look into the facebook and email issue fi possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any idea how i would go about porting them?
There are theme porters out there. I'll get some input from others.
CrazyKnight122 said:
Any idea how i would go about porting them?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
adrynalyne said:
There are theme porters out there. I'll get some input from others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=932856
the theme porters that are out there...well they most just copy images with the same (or very similar) file names over one another...the post i linked above is my horribly incomplete but still useful attempt at helping people get into themes for the fascinate.
all the tools neccessary are linked in the posts there.
since the fascinate dj05/dl09 update appears very similar to dl17 porting our themes shouldnt be difficult image wise...however there are several xml changes that must be made (especially for black menus)
if anyone is really interested in starting to theme for the continuum look through the above thread and feel free to pm me here with questions or hop into the fascinate irc...im usually in there during the week throughout the day...or others im sure can help too
i had briefly thought about throwing a theme together for the continuum for fun right before dl30 (froyo) leaked...but now i have too much on my plate reporting stuff
While posting an Android ROM, can you guys PLEASE mention what Android version it is? Is this Eclair or Froyo? 2.1, 2.2, 2.2.1...which version? DL17 might explain everything to a developer but not to a user who just wants to flash a ROM on his system and needs to know what Android version it is before actually flashing it.
With all due respect, if you aren't familiar with the naming convention, i.e. don't know what DL17 means, you have no business flashing a rom (until you do). You are gonna end up breaking your device.
2.1Update-1 is the only OS currently available for this device. So.. labeling is a bit redundant right now.
Hey, you guys made the news...
http://www.androidcentral.com/samsung-continuum-sees-its-first-custom-rom
Sent from my SCH-I400 using XDA App
adrynalyne said:
With all due respect, if you aren't familiar with the naming convention, i.e. don't know what DL17 means, you have no business flashing a rom (until you do). You are gonna end up breaking your device.
2.1Update-1 is the only OS currently available for this device. So.. labeling is a bit redundant right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your response and the clarification and with all due respect, the standard naming convention for Android operating systems is in the format of Android <version number> <dessert codename>. I have been flashing ROMs to several devices before there was any Android and have been doing so on a dozen or so Android devices that I have for the past 6 months as well as guiding others in doing so by writing about it - I write about these for a living.
However, one can't be expected to know all about these non-standard or manufacturer-specific ROM naming conventions for all the Android devices out there and unfortunately, I do not have every single device available to test the ROMs on before I write about them. That is why just a few words by the developer in the OP mentioning what Android version it is make things a lot easier for many of us, plus there are several users who are just starting at the flashing business and it makes things more clear to them as well on what they are getting into. Simply saying that if one doesn't know about these non-standard conventions, one shouldn't be trying these things out is similar to saying if one doesn't know how to swim, one shouldn't be getting into the swimming pool. No offense intended. =)
All that being said, keep up the good work - I really appreciate all the hard work you guys put into what you do. Please don't take my comments as a flame - they are just my views on how things can be improved for a lot of us just by a tiny bit of effort from you guys. =)
It is well known that the continuum only has 2.1. Therefore unless there was a 2.2 leak for it (which would be noted) it can be assume by any reasonable person that its a 2.1 rom.
nitsuj17 said:
It is well known that the continuum only has 2.1. Therefore unless there was a 2.2 leak for it (which would be noted) it can be assume by any reasonable person that its a 2.1 rom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed but 'well known' can be relative =) What's well-known to the developer community for a particular device might not be well-known to many who are coming across the flashing scene for the device in question for the first time, despite their prior experience with other Android devices. And as leaks are not out of the question either, just adding two words about the Android version just makes things a bit more clear for everyone, that's all I meant to say.
Coverage
Here's some more coverage for you:
http://www.addictivetips.com/mobile/install-clockworkmod-recovery-on-samsung-continuum/
&
http://www.addictivetips.com/mobile/install-dl17-clean-rooted-android-2-1-rom-on-samsung-continuum/
HQRaja said:
Agreed but 'well known' can be relative =) What's well-known to the developer community for a particular device might not be well-known to many who are coming across the flashing scene for the device in question for the first time, despite their prior experience with other Android devices. And as leaks are not out of the question either, just adding two words about the Android version just makes things a bit more clear for everyone, that's all I meant to say.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That goes back to this:
adrynalyne said:
With all due respect, if you aren't familiar with the naming convention, i.e. don't know what DL17 means, you have no business flashing a rom (until you do). You are gonna end up breaking your device.
2.1Update-1 is the only OS currently available for this device. So.. labeling is a bit redundant right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you don't know what OS your phone is already running, or how they're doing the naming convention, you are likely going to cause yourself massive problems soon. If someone can't figure out About Phone to compare build versions, they likely can't figure out how to get CWM on their phone to even flash this, so it doesn't matter if the OS version is in the title. Once Froyo drops, then it may be different, but until then, you have a very thin argument at best, regardless of how many ROMs you may or may not have flashed in the past.
imnuts said:
That goes back to this:
If you don't know what OS your phone is already running, or how they're doing the naming convention, you are likely going to cause yourself massive problems soon. If someone can't figure out About Phone to compare build versions, they likely can't figure out how to get CWM on their phone to even flash this, so it doesn't matter if the OS version is in the title. Once Froyo drops, then it may be different, but until then, you have a very thin argument at best, regardless of how many ROMs you may or may not have flashed in the past.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In my experience, not knowing the device-specific naming conventions has never bricked any of the dozens of devices I have flashed, as long as I have known that it is a ROM meant for the particular device in question. However, knowing what Android version the ROM is based on without having to ask only makes sense. This isn't about this one device in particular - the Android scene isn't similar to the iPhone scene where there is just one developer (Apple) rolling out just one OS for all the devices on the market. Android is quite fragmented and I believe simply mentioning the Android version with the ROM regardless of whether any other version is out *yet* or not only makes sense as one never knows when a newer version or a leak might be available.
It is all for the purpose of keeping things as clear to someone at first glance, as possible. Now I do know that no other version but this one has been out for the Continuum but that has been after this discussion. All I am requesting is that the OPs should consider mentioning it with the post so that even a newbie wouldn't have to ask for information as basic as this.
What I fail to see here is why this simple, rather humble request should be seen as such a debatable topic by you guys, when it doesn't even require much effort. Heck, all it requires is typing 'Android' followed by the version number. Is it asking for too much?
Okay, this is getting really off-topic and degenerating fast. There are plenty of other threads saying what DL17 is so just hopping out to the Android Development forum would have answered your question. That said, Android ROMs do often include the version, but not always.
It's not that big of a deal. Let it go.
Sent from my SCH-I400 using XDA App
Its a very popular model, it has tons of power (specially the 4GB/64 version) and can be easily unlocked, so why so few ROMs to choose from?
Honest question, I thought this thing would be the phone for custom ROMs, but we don't even have an official CM image.
What seems to be the problem here?
MGREX said:
Its a very popular model, it has tons of power (specially the 4GB/64 version) and can be easily unlocked, so why so few ROMs to choose from?
Honest question, I thought this thing would be the phone for custom ROMs, but we don't even have an official CM image.
What seems to be the problem here?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope this is a joke, gosh I hope it is. We have plenty of ROMs to choose from on here. Are you not satisfied?
Sent from my ASUS_Z008 using XDA Free mobile app
There's quite a bit on here... but if you were complaining because a specific ROM hasn't been released it would probably be because of the Intel CPUs, which are not prevalent in cell phone manufacturing. You can't just do a direct port.
troy5890 said:
I hope this is a joke, gosh I hope it is. We have plenty of ROMs to choose from on here. Are you not satisfied?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not saying we got no ROMs at all, but the selection its lets be honest a bit lacking. Dunno maybe I was expecting too much, my bad.
azthemansays said:
it would probably be because of the Intel CPUs, which are not prevalent in cell phone manufacturing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was fearing this, though given android's flexibility and intel's investments I thought it wasn't that big of a problem anymore.
The latest zenfone variant is back to ARM but packing a low-end chip...
MGREX said:
I'm not saying we got no ROMs at all, but the selection its lets be honest a bit lacking. Dunno maybe I was expecting too much, my bad.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The selection is actually really good for the Z00A users. The Z008 users on the other hand have just a small limit. There are other ROMs for the Z008 that aren't on XDA, but I won't go into that since I don't wants to make him mad
Sent from my ASUS_Z008 using XDA Free mobile app
troy5890 said:
The selection is actually really good for the Z00A users. The Z008 users on the other hand have just a small limit. There are other ROMs for the Z008 that aren't on XDA, but I won't go into that since I don't wants to make him mad
Sent from my ASUS_Z008 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you are evading the direct question. and that's is expected. Nobody has answered tha real question: why isn't an official CM version of the ROM yet?
you see? plain and simple, so now, anyone can answer that?
fenixx1 said:
you are evading the direct question. and that's is expected. Nobody has answered tha real question: why isn't an official CM version of the ROM yet?
you see? plain and simple, so now, anyone can answer that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We don't have an official CM version due to bugs still existing in are unofficial build. Plus the developers stated that once the bugs are ironed out, then they will try to make it official
Sent from my ASUS_Z008 using XDA Free mobile app
I think the lack of an official unlock tool from the beginning was a huge roadblock which was inevitably rectified first by third parties not Asus/Intel. The phone is also different being x86 not ARM. Taking and expanding upon existing works (CM by and large) make up most of what you call roms or communities on XDA and other sites. Take into account almost all 2015 flagships across all brands with some exceptions are all ARM and the same chipset like 808/810. It casts a larger net of humanity overall than one device with multiple variants from one company on completely different architecture.
Community seems pretty healthy for roms in my opinion. It won't approach what you seem to deem as plentiful or the like until CM is stable and people freely make derivative works based on that. It hasn't really been that long that things started rolling along and trying to gather steam last I checked.
For context, I am a software developer but my Android experience is limited to writing a few apps, so I'm hoping to learn a bit more before diving in and breaking things.
Initially, I'm wondering what would be the realistic chances of bricking a Mi 5s if I dropped a OnePlus 3T (or other SD 821 based) ROM straight on to it. I understand that, say, the camera and fingerprint reader wouldn't work out of the box, but with the same SoC I would expect the kernel to retain compatibility between the two devices. Or am I being naïve? Are there bootloader issues that I'm not even considering here?
For that matter, what failure modes are likely to prevent me from getting back to TWRP and just putting the stock ROM back if the experiment doesn't work?
Assuming I could get something bootable without my shiny new Mi 5s irrevocably bricking/imploding/catching fire/gaining sentience and instigating a robot uprising, I feel like there would be plenty to learn from tweaking parameters and generally getting towards something usable - but I'm aware that unlike a PC I don't have the worst-case fallback of pulling the hard drive and wiping it in another machine if things go too far wrong.
MoonBuggy said:
For context, I am a software developer but my Android experience is limited to writing a few apps, so I'm hoping to learn a bit more before diving in and breaking things.
Initially, I'm wondering what would be the realistic chances of bricking a Mi 5s if I dropped a OnePlus 3T (or other SD 821 based) ROM straight on to it. I understand that, say, the camera and fingerprint reader wouldn't work out of the box, but with the same SoC I would expect the kernel to retain compatibility between the two devices. Or am I being naïve? Are there bootloader issues that I'm not even considering here?
For that matter, what failure modes are likely to prevent me from getting back to TWRP and just putting the stock ROM back if the experiment doesn't work?
Assuming I could get something bootable without my shiny new Mi 5s irrevocably bricking/imploding/catching fire/gaining sentience and instigating a robot uprising, I feel like there would be plenty to learn from tweaking parameters and generally getting towards something usable - but I'm aware that unlike a PC I don't have the worst-case fallback of pulling the hard drive and wiping it in another machine if things go too far wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You would most likely be able to get back into recovery, but it will never boot this ROM, when Xiaomi release sources for this device we might be able to get CM working..
Interesting, thanks for the reply - do you know why it wouldn't work at all? Is it just drivers, or more complex than that?
Weidas said:
Software developer asking such questions? Sorry but lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, yeah... I don't see what's wrong with asking questions to learn about something I'm not familiar with.
Everythings different, its a different device, different blobs, kernel, partitions and so on. It will never work. And no one will be able to port until kernel sources are released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And this is what I'm trying to understand: it has the same architecture, same ARMv8-A instruction set, even an identical SoC. In my experience, it's only necessary to recompile a binary from source when changing to a different instruction set; sure, drivers on the components that differ will likely be a problem, but the core components are the same. If it won't work at all, I was hoping to learn why.
MoonBuggy said:
Well, yeah... I don't see what's wrong with asking questions to learn about something I'm not familiar with.
And this is what I'm trying to understand: it has the same architecture, same ARMv8-A instruction set, even an identical SoC. In my experience, it's only necessary to recompile a binary from source when changing to a different instruction set; sure, drivers on the components that differ will likely be a problem, but the core components are the same. If it won't work at all, I was hoping to learn why.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Different OEM's, different implementations, although it may be easier to port it once we have the blobs and device tree. That's one of the first things we need to build a ROM from scratch.
Is there any ETA for when the sources will be released?
Weidas said:
Software developer asking such questions? Sorry but lol. Everythings different, its a different device, different blobs, kernel, partitions and so on. It will never work. And no one will be able to port until kernel sources are released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Get ur snobbery out if here seriously this guy is just trying to learn and good on him for making the effort. It's not like u were born preinstalled with all of your knowledge so don't put people down just to boost ur own ego it isn't pleasant and it has no place on this website. At XDA we should work together as family.
bozy09 said:
Get ur snobbery out if here seriously this guy is just trying to learn and good on him for making the effort. It's not like u were born preinstalled with all of your knowledge so don't put people down just to boost ur own ego it isn't pleasant and it has no place on this website. At XDA we should work together as family.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 :good::good:
Anything can become obvious when you know the solution!
Usually when a New J series is out, our community of great developers are all over it finding ways to root and making rooms. Since the J4 has been out for a few months there hasn't been any sort of news or updates. Are there any teams working on it?
I'm afraid that the possibility is slim, since the J4 is not widely released (do correct me if I'm wrong) in the US, UK, or other big-market countries, but rather released in smaller-market countries in Africa, Asia, etc, and even so released rather quietly w/out major press releases. So unless the phone is widely released (relative to other Galaxy phones out there), I'm inclined to believe that such teams would have little to no access to the J4, and thus no development to progress for it.
(Believe me, I'm remaining optimistic that at least an unofficial recovery might be on the works, but there won't be much progress unless the J4 is more widely used/picked-up)
Or, you can learn how to do it yourself.
Not the TWRP porting, but you can definitely MOD your stock ROM to add features Samsung annoyingly disable for not being a "premium" device.
You don't need to know much of coding, you can learn as you go. When the J2 Prime was released (and even to this day) there aren't any custom ROMs so I had to teach myself and I've accomplished great things
Just wait for TWRP and then the doors will open, you'll see
;77491224 said:
Or, you can learn how to do it yourself.
Not the TWRP porting, but you can definitely MOD your stock ROM to add features Samsung annoyingly disable for not being a "premium" device.
You don't need to know much of coding, you can learn as you go. When the J2 Prime was released (and even to this day) there aren't any custom ROMs so I had to teach myself and I've accomplished great things
Just wait for TWRP and then the doors will open, you'll see
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh, that's interesting; I'll surely take a look.
Could you further elaborate on the "features" that Samsung disabled? (I don't use a lot of Samsung G's built-in features, so I'm not too knowledgeable on such; tried Google-searching, only came up w/ disabling apps, so that didn't really help...)
Debstup said:
Huh, that's interesting; I'll surely take a look.
Could you further elaborate on the "features" that Samsung disabled? (I don't use a lot of Samsung G's built-in features, so I'm not too knowledgeable on such; tried Google-searching, only came up w/ disabling apps, so that didn't really help...)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For starters, things like edge screen or scroll capture (things that I use a heck of a lot)
I found it funny is that all it took as to change a bit of code here and there, add the right apps and edge screen was working perfectly on the J2 Prime (a very low-end phone).
Samsung went out of their way to delete this feature which is pretty ridiculous if you ask me.
Themes were also disabled for this device, but after reading a few guides I was able to implement a ROM control that allows the user to change the color to their liking
The dev community is always willing to lend a hand, just as long as you're not lazy and expect everything to be put out for you.
I feel the J4 can make a dev out of someone looking to add more functionality to their device (the J2 Prime made a dev out of me )
Ok, so the TWRPBuilder's experimental TWRP build (huge thanks to @yshalsager for this miracle) is on TWRPBuilder's site: twrpbuilder.github.io/downloads/twrp/
Like any TWRP builds, there is ABSOLUTELY zero guarantee that it would work (I tried the first one & it didn't work, haven't had the chance to test the latest one yet)
---------- Post added at 02:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:46 PM ----------
Ok, so the TWRPBuilder's experimental TWRP build (huge thanks to @yshalsager for this miracle) is on TWRPBuilder's site: twrpbuilder.github.io/downloads/twrp/
Like any TWRP builds, there is ABSOLUTELY zero guarantee that it would work (I tried the first one & it didn't work, haven't had the chance to test the latest one yet)
The J4 uses identical chipset as the J5 prime G570F/M/DS.
I have both and they are great phones for their segment.
Sadly neither are well supported by ROM developers, due to the Exynos chip, I think.
missioner said:
The J4 uses identical chipset as the J5 prime G570F/M/DS.
I have both and they are great phones for their segment.
Sadly neither are well supported by ROM developers, due to the Exynos chip, I think.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@yshalsager did a test custom recovery for J4 (via TWRPBuilder): https://twrpbuilder.github.io/downloads/twrp/
Have been unable to test it atm (stuck in 7-day jail); if you want to have a go at it & let him know the results, go right ahead!
but first we have to unlock oem.but the problem is no oem unlock in the settings
brownstyle said:
but first we have to unlock oem.but the problem is no oem unlock in the settings
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah that's the 7-day "jail" I was talking about - theoretically you have to leave your phone on non-stop (no reboots, no shutdowns) for 7 whole days straight, then the OEM Unlock option should become available in Dev Settings (it's a confusing security measure by Samsung on Oreo devices)
any update guys? im really bored with this phone now
up
guys can we root our device j4 using magisk?
#push
#push
#push
#push
Do not spam, if you don't get an answer then that means that nobody is working on it
up
brownstyle said:
up
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude
Wassup Guys,
First of all, I wanna thank every developer in this forum here for providing us with free custom roms and mods for our device. I got a G986B by myself, but I neither rooted my device, nor did I install a custom rom. I wanted to install the latest stock debloated by hmy65, sadly my device type is not supported yet.
This brings me to the question, why there are so less projects in comparison to the amount of people being active here? Besides the reason, that Samsung is not providing every source tree or similar, I am wondering why there are so less custom roms currently ...is it because of massive amount of variety between the model itself? I am a developer too, sadly I am not a pro regarding building custom roms... although I gotta admit that I am interested in learning it. Well, what do you say? I mean like the S8,S9,S10 had plenty roms avaible at that time (speaking about the passed time since the device's release).
Could be worse, you could have a snapdragon with zero development.
digitaljeff said:
Could be worse, you could have a snapdragon with zero development.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I was gonna say, the Snapdragon model has literally zero. I could be mistaken, but I thought SD always had more development in the past..
digitaljeff said:
Could be worse, you could have a snapdragon with zero development.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
X04D said:
Yeah, I was gonna say, the Snapdragon model has literally zero. I could be mistaken, but I thought SD always had more development in the past..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, that's true. But I guess I speak for the majority, when I say that Samsung and Snapdragon is not always a perfect combination. Well, I'd actually build something by myself but I doubt that someone can learn that fast ??