Re: About android-x86-4.2-20130228.iso on Acer 1825ptz (what works, what does not, and questions to the developers)
499 views
Skip to first unread message
Chih-Wei Huang
Jun 11, 2013, 12:05:46 AM6/11/13
to Android-x86
If the owner of the image could contribute it back,
I'm glad to add it.
Otherwise I have no Acer devices to test and verify it.
2013/6/10 Игорь Грицык <apace...@gmail.com>:
> The overall impression - excellent!
> From what I was able to check out all the work. From the obvious drawback -
> a very small number of supported applications in the market. But the main
> thing - OS does not respond to the accelerometer. As if it does not exist!
> Dear developers, is it possible to include in new image, the driver
> accelerometer with another image?
> The image from this forum: http://www.ceh-photo.de/blog/?p=562 accelerometer
> worked just fine. It would be great to put a driver out of it in new image.
> Is this possible?
>
> Аnd support ARM emulation would be just great!
--
Chih-Wei
Android-x86 project
http://www.android-x86.org
I'm glad to add it.
Otherwise I have no Acer devices to test and verify it.
2013/6/10 Игорь Грицык <apace...@gmail.com>:
> The overall impression - excellent!
> From what I was able to check out all the work. From the obvious drawback -
> a very small number of supported applications in the market. But the main
> thing - OS does not respond to the accelerometer. As if it does not exist!
> Dear developers, is it possible to include in new image, the driver
> accelerometer with another image?
> The image from this forum: http://www.ceh-photo.de/blog/?p=562 accelerometer
> worked just fine. It would be great to put a driver out of it in new image.
> Is this possible?
>
> Аnd support ARM emulation would be just great!
--
Chih-Wei
Android-x86 project
http://www.android-x86.org
Игорь Грицык
Jun 11, 2013, 10:25:12 AM6/11/13
to andro...@googlegroups.com
So you need the source of thet image to add the driver of the accelerometer in new image?
вторник, 11 июня 2013 г., 7:05:46 UTC+3 пользователь Chih-Wei Huang написал:
вторник, 11 июня 2013 г., 7:05:46 UTC+3 пользователь Chih-Wei Huang написал:
Ooop Yooo
Jun 13, 2013, 11:58:27 PM6/13/13
to andro...@googlegroups.com
Don't expect any Android 4.1.x or 4.2.x updates for this Touch PC before a Looong time... ^^ ;)
The latest owner of the project (Christopher) is pretty busy and very far away : Malaysia !!!--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android-x86" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-x86...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to andro...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-x86?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Chih-Wei Huang
Jun 14, 2013, 12:23:56 AM6/14/13
to Android-x86
2013/6/14 Ooop Yooo <ooop...@gmail.com>:
The logic is the boot script (/system/etc/init.sh)
will try to detect the hardware (by DMI or something else)
to set the appropriate HAL to be loaded.
So the steps are
* add the source of libsensors of Acer to jb-x86,
modify the module name if necessary
* change init.sh to detect and load it
> The main driver is included in the kernel, but the libsensors "driver" must
> probably be changed for Jelly Bean and thus is NOT included in the
> Android-x86 project.
It's not because of Jelly Bean.
As said, the owner of Acer libsensors didn't send it back.
>
> Since Android-x86 jelly Bean has a single generic target, it'll take some
> time to understand the logic to create a derived target !
It's not that hard.
> Since Android-x86 jelly Bean has a single generic target, it'll take some
> time to understand the logic to create a derived target !
The logic is the boot script (/system/etc/init.sh)
will try to detect the hardware (by DMI or something else)
to set the appropriate HAL to be loaded.
So the steps are
* add the source of libsensors of Acer to jb-x86,
modify the module name if necessary
* change init.sh to detect and load it
> The main driver is included in the kernel, but the libsensors "driver" must
> probably be changed for Jelly Bean and thus is NOT included in the
> Android-x86 project.
As said, the owner of Acer libsensors didn't send it back.
Ooop Yooo
Jun 15, 2013, 3:13:31 PM6/15/13
to andro...@googlegroups.com
2013/6/14 Ooop Yooo <ooop...@gmail.com>:
>It's not that hard.
> Since Android-x86 jelly Bean has a single generic target, it'll take some
> time to understand the logic to create a derived target !
The logic is the boot script (/system/etc/init.sh)
will try to detect the hardware (by DMI or something else)
to set the appropriate HAL to be loaded.
So the steps are
* add the source of libsensors of Acer to jb-x86,
modify the module name if necessary
* change init.sh to detect and load it
Thanks for the explanations but why isn't there any derived project as with previous versions ???
Then
1) my main problem was the repetitive syncing issues (probably due to master AOSP ?)
2) Then as already mentioned, I don't own this Tablet PC anymore, so I can't test anything and I don't like to release anything I didn't test myself...
It's not because of Jelly Bean.
> The main driver is included in the kernel, but the libsensors "driver" must
> probably be changed for Jelly Bean and thus is NOT included in the
> Android-x86 project.
As said, the owner of Acer libsensors didn't send it back.
It's not because of the "owner" as whenever "we" sent you a patch or a driver you never included then in the source code such as the Ethernet patches with ICS 4.0.x, but not only (I know, you said the Ethernet patches were not elegant enough in your point of view as you prefer an HAL solution, but that's not always possible...)... ^^ :p
Second problem is that you never mention who created them or who is the initiator... The reason they mostly keep them on hold with their own project outside of Android-x86... ^^ ;)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android-x86" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to android-x86...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to andro...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-x86.
Ooop Yooo
Jun 15, 2013, 3:18:36 PM6/15/13
to andro...@googlegroups.com
@ Chih-Wei Huang
Forgot to ask : have you watched at the wl_cfg80211.c bug in kernel 3.8 ???Chih-Wei Huang
Jun 15, 2013, 4:00:58 PM6/15/13
to Android-x86
2013/6/16 Ooop Yooo <ooop...@gmail.com>:
into our repository since the project started.
If you have ever read the git log or follow the list closely,
you will clearly know that. As an example,
the libsensor of s103t has been merged very long time ago.
What you said is totally not true.
* I don't want to explain the Ethernet patch again, and
you already know the answer. What I want to tell you is,
developers in open source projects always reject patches
due to many reasons. This is very common.
When you submit a patch, you should know it could be rejected.
DO NOT complain about that.
On the other hand, if you didn't submit the patch,
you will never know it will be accepted or not.
* In the acer libsensor case, it's because it is not submitted,
not because I reject it. And I have ALREADY SAID
if it's submitted, I'm glad to add it
(unless it's very buggy or broken)
This is a VERY CLEAR FACT.
Don't try to confuse other people.
> Second problem is that you never mention who created them or who is the
> initiator... The reason they mostly keep them on hold with their own project
> outside of Android-x86... ^^ ;)
This is a very biased and unfair point.
What did you mean "mention"?
If you read the git log, you will know the commit
are always named by the contributors.
And I always say thanks to the contributors
public in the list.
To me this is usually enough.
Besides, I've already given commit privilege to
several real contributors so he can maintain
his part directly.
So far no contributors complains about that.
If a contributor need a "special thanks",
he could request and I'll consider.
>> It's not because of Jelly Bean.
>> As said, the owner of Acer libsensors didn't send it back.
>
> It's not because of the "owner" as whenever "we" sent you a patch or a
> driver you never included then in the source code such as the Ethernet
> patches with ICS 4.0.x, but not only (I know, you said the Ethernet patches
> were not elegant enough in your point of view as you prefer an HAL solution,
> but that's not always possible...)... ^^ :p
* First of all, there are many contributed patches been merged
>> As said, the owner of Acer libsensors didn't send it back.
>
> It's not because of the "owner" as whenever "we" sent you a patch or a
> driver you never included then in the source code such as the Ethernet
> patches with ICS 4.0.x, but not only (I know, you said the Ethernet patches
> were not elegant enough in your point of view as you prefer an HAL solution,
> but that's not always possible...)... ^^ :p
into our repository since the project started.
If you have ever read the git log or follow the list closely,
you will clearly know that. As an example,
the libsensor of s103t has been merged very long time ago.
What you said is totally not true.
* I don't want to explain the Ethernet patch again, and
you already know the answer. What I want to tell you is,
developers in open source projects always reject patches
due to many reasons. This is very common.
When you submit a patch, you should know it could be rejected.
DO NOT complain about that.
On the other hand, if you didn't submit the patch,
you will never know it will be accepted or not.
* In the acer libsensor case, it's because it is not submitted,
not because I reject it. And I have ALREADY SAID
if it's submitted, I'm glad to add it
(unless it's very buggy or broken)
This is a VERY CLEAR FACT.
Don't try to confuse other people.
> Second problem is that you never mention who created them or who is the
> initiator... The reason they mostly keep them on hold with their own project
> outside of Android-x86... ^^ ;)
What did you mean "mention"?
If you read the git log, you will know the commit
are always named by the contributors.
And I always say thanks to the contributors
public in the list.
To me this is usually enough.
Besides, I've already given commit privilege to
several real contributors so he can maintain
his part directly.
So far no contributors complains about that.
If a contributor need a "special thanks",
he could request and I'll consider.
Ooop Yooo
Jun 15, 2013, 5:26:52 PM6/15/13
to andro...@googlegroups.com
I'm NOT complaining about anything. I'm just explaining some FACTS and why there are so many complains from USERS about missing drivers such as wireless as an example and more specifically about Ethernet...
You were able to separate the Android-x86 project from Master AOSP in the past, so I don't understand why since ICS it's not possible anymore...
I'm either not trying to confuse anyone, just to expose the reasons Android-x86 isn't more successful and why this project isn't more adopted.
I don't post very often, but I read almost every posts and I see the same users complains days after days, years after years and as their issues are still unsolved till now...
I'd like to help more than I'm doing right now, but you decided about a choice I can't against. It's YOUR choice, so both of us should assume it... ^^
> Second problem is that you never mention who created them or who is theThis is a very biased and unfair point.
> initiator... The reason they mostly keep them on hold with their own project
> outside of Android-x86... ^^ ;)
What did you mean "mention"?
If you read the git log, you will know the commit
are always named by the contributors.
And I always say thanks to the contributors
public in the list.
To me this is usually enough.
Besides, I've already given commit privilege to
several real contributors so he can maintain
his part directly.
So far no contributors complains about that.
If a contributor need a "special thanks",
he could request and I'll consider.
Who cares about the commits or the logs ??? Certainly not the USERS...
I'm talking more about the iso files in the download page : most of them if not all are "mentioned" as your own : sparta, tx2500, s103t, thinkpad, viewpad, etc... ^^
Why don't you mention the owners project instead of just putting your name because you built the iso file ??? ^^ :p
I know you won't like this part of my "positive criticism", but this had to be said...
There isn't much complains from the contributors, but as time pass by don't you see there is less and less active contributors when there are more and more complains/criticisms from users ???
The fact "you" consider "the thanks to the contributors in the list is usually enough" is different from how they can feel it... ^^
I also know you don't like your project being compared with CyanogenMod, but watch on how their website is managed just as with XDA...
Each project has his own thread managed by its author...
It's probably too late to restructure Android-x86 website/Android-x86 google groups, but at least : give to Caesar what is Caesar's.
This is just my own contribution, and take it as it is worth...
Good luck to all of you.
Chih-Wei Huang
Jun 22, 2013, 2:12:55 PM6/22/13
to Android-x86
2013/6/16 Ooop Yooo <ooop...@gmail.com>:
> I'm either not trying to confuse anyone, just to expose the reasons
> Android-x86 isn't more successful and why this project isn't more adopted.
>
> I don't post very often, but I read almost every posts and I see the same
> users complains days after days, years after years and as their issues are
> still unsolved till now...
>
> I'd like to help more than I'm doing right now, but you decided about a
> choice I can't against. It's YOUR choice, so both of us should assume it...
> ^^
I'm really tired and lazy to mention it.
But let's say again.
This is an Open Source Project.
Anyone can take any actions on it
(provided you didn't violate the OSS license)
If you found some drivers are missed,
take actions to fix it.
If you found an issue bothering you,
take actions to fix it.
If you don't take any action, it won't be improved.
>> This is a very biased and unfair point.
>> What did you mean "mention"?
>> If you read the git log, you will know the commit
>> are always named by the contributors.
>> And I always say thanks to the contributors
>> public in the list.
>> To me this is usually enough.
>> Besides, I've already given commit privilege to
>> several real contributors so he can maintain
>> his part directly.
>> So far no contributors complains about that.
>> If a contributor need a "special thanks",
>> he could request and I'll consider.
>
> Who cares about the commits or the logs ??? Certainly not the USERS...
The development history are the most important way to recognize
the contributions of developers. That's exactly what developers care.
About the USERS, on the other hand, why should they
care about who contribute which targets?
> I'm talking more about the iso files in the download page : most of them if
> not all are "mentioned" as your own : sparta, tx2500, s103t, thinkpad,
> viewpad, etc... ^^
>
> Why don't you mention the owners project instead of just putting your name
> because you built the iso file ??? ^^ :p
>
> I know you won't like this part of my "positive criticism", but this had to
> be said...
You didn't do "positive criticism" because you didn't talk about facts.
You just try to confuse people by incorrect and biased points.
The fact is, all the downloads are not "mentioned" by any developer
including me. They are just mentioned by this project -- android-x86.org.
The fact is, most open source projects just follow this convention.
The fact is, AOSP didn't mention developers for each target
like maguro, toto, ... in its download page. Ref
https://developers.google.com/android/nexus/images
The fact is, Cyanogenmod didn't mention any developer in the download
page, either. Ref: http://get.cm/
If adding developer's names to download page is really helpful
to this project, I'm happy to do it.
I'm afraid it is not.
> There isn't much complains from the contributors, but as time pass by don't
> you see there is less and less active contributors when there are more and
> more complains/criticisms from users ???
>
> The fact "you" consider "the thanks to the contributors in the list is
> usually enough" is different from how they can feel it... ^^
How can you tell what they feel?
The more facts are, all contributors who have android-x86.org accounts
can upload files to the download page or modify webpages
of android-x86.org. If they hope to put their names, that's fine.
I won't be against it.
> I also know you don't like your project being compared with CyanogenMod, but
> watch on how their website is managed just as with XDA...
>
> Each project has his own thread managed by its author...
>
> It's probably too late to restructure Android-x86 website/Android-x86 google
> groups, but at least : give to Caesar what is Caesar's.
I agree the Android-x86 website is not good or well-maintained.
I am never a good webpage designer.
After 8-10 hours working my daily job and 3-4 hours
in developing android-x86, how you can expect I still spend time
on the webpage?
I won't mind to restructure the whole android-x86 website.
If someone want to do it, just take actions.
> This is just my own contribution, and take it as it is worth...
> Good luck to all of you.
Some of the issues you mentioned are true.
But the reasons are just not like what you think about.
Anyway, if someone think he/she can manage
these issues better than me, just raise your hand.
I'm glad to transfer this project to you.
I really mean it.
>
> I'm NOT complaining about anything. I'm just explaining some FACTS and why
> there are so many complains from USERS about missing drivers such as
> wireless as an example and more specifically about Ethernet...
>
> You were able to separate the Android-x86 project from Master AOSP in the
> past, so I don't understand why since ICS it's not possible anymore...
I don't get what you talked about.
> I'm NOT complaining about anything. I'm just explaining some FACTS and why
> there are so many complains from USERS about missing drivers such as
> wireless as an example and more specifically about Ethernet...
>
> You were able to separate the Android-x86 project from Master AOSP in the
> past, so I don't understand why since ICS it's not possible anymore...
> I'm either not trying to confuse anyone, just to expose the reasons
> Android-x86 isn't more successful and why this project isn't more adopted.
>
> I don't post very often, but I read almost every posts and I see the same
> users complains days after days, years after years and as their issues are
> still unsolved till now...
>
> I'd like to help more than I'm doing right now, but you decided about a
> choice I can't against. It's YOUR choice, so both of us should assume it...
> ^^
But let's say again.
This is an Open Source Project.
Anyone can take any actions on it
(provided you didn't violate the OSS license)
If you found some drivers are missed,
take actions to fix it.
If you found an issue bothering you,
take actions to fix it.
If you don't take any action, it won't be improved.
>> This is a very biased and unfair point.
>> What did you mean "mention"?
>> If you read the git log, you will know the commit
>> are always named by the contributors.
>> And I always say thanks to the contributors
>> public in the list.
>> To me this is usually enough.
>> Besides, I've already given commit privilege to
>> several real contributors so he can maintain
>> his part directly.
>> So far no contributors complains about that.
>> If a contributor need a "special thanks",
>> he could request and I'll consider.
>
> Who cares about the commits or the logs ??? Certainly not the USERS...
the contributions of developers. That's exactly what developers care.
About the USERS, on the other hand, why should they
care about who contribute which targets?
> I'm talking more about the iso files in the download page : most of them if
> not all are "mentioned" as your own : sparta, tx2500, s103t, thinkpad,
> viewpad, etc... ^^
>
> Why don't you mention the owners project instead of just putting your name
> because you built the iso file ??? ^^ :p
>
> I know you won't like this part of my "positive criticism", but this had to
> be said...
You just try to confuse people by incorrect and biased points.
The fact is, all the downloads are not "mentioned" by any developer
including me. They are just mentioned by this project -- android-x86.org.
The fact is, most open source projects just follow this convention.
The fact is, AOSP didn't mention developers for each target
like maguro, toto, ... in its download page. Ref
https://developers.google.com/android/nexus/images
The fact is, Cyanogenmod didn't mention any developer in the download
page, either. Ref: http://get.cm/
If adding developer's names to download page is really helpful
to this project, I'm happy to do it.
I'm afraid it is not.
> There isn't much complains from the contributors, but as time pass by don't
> you see there is less and less active contributors when there are more and
> more complains/criticisms from users ???
>
> The fact "you" consider "the thanks to the contributors in the list is
> usually enough" is different from how they can feel it... ^^
The more facts are, all contributors who have android-x86.org accounts
can upload files to the download page or modify webpages
of android-x86.org. If they hope to put their names, that's fine.
I won't be against it.
> I also know you don't like your project being compared with CyanogenMod, but
> watch on how their website is managed just as with XDA...
>
> Each project has his own thread managed by its author...
>
> It's probably too late to restructure Android-x86 website/Android-x86 google
> groups, but at least : give to Caesar what is Caesar's.
I am never a good webpage designer.
After 8-10 hours working my daily job and 3-4 hours
in developing android-x86, how you can expect I still spend time
on the webpage?
I won't mind to restructure the whole android-x86 website.
If someone want to do it, just take actions.
> This is just my own contribution, and take it as it is worth...
> Good luck to all of you.
But the reasons are just not like what you think about.
Anyway, if someone think he/she can manage
these issues better than me, just raise your hand.
I'm glad to transfer this project to you.
I really mean it.
Ben de Boer
Jul 1, 2013, 5:59:42 AM7/1/13
to andro...@googlegroups.com
No support anymore on x86 its 4 months now since the last version...
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages