yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Defy General] hackergnome:
$ cat /sys/class/power_supply/battery/uevent

POWER_SUPPLY_NAME=battery

POWER_SUPPLY_TYPE=Battery

POWER_SUPPLY_STATUS=Discharging

POWER_SUPPLY_HEALTH=Good

POWER_SUPPLY_PRESENT=1

POWER_SUPPLY_TECHNOLOGY=Li-ion

POWER_SUPPLY_CAPACITY=90

POWER_SUPPLY_VOLTAGE_NOW=3985000

POWER_SUPPLY_TEMP=340

POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_FULL_DESIGN=1500

POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_COUNTER=89

Original Defy Battery

cm7.2 Defy+ nightly
[Defy General] Passa91:
Wait, are you running an original Defy battery in a Defy+? Or just the Defy+ version of CM7 on an original Defy?

Either way, it's interesting you're getting 1500 reported with a Gingerbread kernel... (Defy+)
[Defy General] blackwing182:
i think the battery have a chip or somthing that comunicates with the kernel and power unit, or a internal chip in the board pr-programed IDK
[Defy General] vanyas:
Yes, I think so. Capacity of battery is stored on chip in a battery.
[Defy General] flunk03:
Defy running cm 7.1.0-11

POWER_SUPPLY_NAME=battery

POWER_SUPPLY_TYPE=Battery

POWER_SUPPLY_STATUS=Discharging

POWER_SUPPLY_HEALTH=Good

POWER_SUPPLY_PRESENT=1

POWER_SUPPLY_TECHNOLOGY=Li-ion

POWER_SUPPLY_CAPACITY=90

POWER_SUPPLY_VOLTAGE_NOW=4012000

POWER_SUPPLY_TEMP=290

POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_FULL_DESIGN=1500

POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_COUNTER=89
[Defy General] wizwin:
Battery/Cell Specification

Here is some more info on Defy's original battery (BF5X).

I purchased my phone from UK and its battery is originated and finished in China. I peeled the cover wrapped over the cell and these are the details I found inside:

The part number is ICP494261SRU (Li-Ion, 3.7V, 1500 mAh). So the cell is possibly manufactured by Maxell.

There is a small circuit board attached to the cell terminals (just below the contacts).

The details of the cell itself can be found in this link. The specification documentation is also attached to this post for reference.
[Defy General] hackergnome:
Y will anyone put defy battery in Defy+

Defy with Defy's Battery running cm7.2 Defy+ build...
[Defy General] vanyas:
This photo of Defy+ battery part number
[Defy General] Passa91:
http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1320330

Could this patch have anything to do with solving the problem?

(Presumably at this point, we can assume it is a problem with the circuitry on aftermarket batteries themselves, needing an overwrite from the software).
[Defy General] KissMate:
I've installed CM9 (111223-Defy+) on my Defy+ over a stock Gingerbread ROM, and it hadn't charged my battery over 80%, so I replaced the battd, and now it does, and works properly, so battery compatibility is definitely coded in battd. (And it might have something to do with the kernel too.)
[Defy General] MichoCZ:
I flashed MS2Ginger 4.0 beta and kernel 2.6.32.9 (2.3.6) and i stop at 83% (4167mV). After i use new battd, wipe battery stats i CW mode, Defy+ stop always at 83%. Any next idea?
[Android Apps and Games] chasmanian:
I've searched the market and this forum fairly extensively. I'm looking for a hands free app that reads google voice sms. Is there a reason no one does this?
[Android Apps and Games] DaWeav:
As for Google Voice text message alerts, the new version of the Google Voice app has a feature in the settings under 'sync and notifications' for 'receive text messages' which when I set it to 'also via messaging app' which makes the received Google Voice text messages work with the third party apps that I have installed which are SMS Popup and Tasker. So, I have Tasker speaking out load the text message if it is from certain contacts. Seems like the Google Voice app now has native integration using this setting.
[Android Apps and Games] chasmanian:
Verizon must be weird, because if I check that setting, I get charged for each text coming in through google voice.
[General Questions and Answers] Shibblet:
I was trying to install Cognition 4.5.3 on my Samsung GalaxyS Captivate i897. I followed the instructions up to the point of installing ClockworkMod Rom Manager.

I re-flashed back to Android 2.1 (Elcair), and ClockworkMod Rom Manager is not in the marketplace. I did the Samsung Kies Update to 2.2, and then all of a sudden ClockworkMod Rom Manager is available.

Well, I had to re-root the phone with SuperOneClick, and then installed the ClockworkMod Rom Manager, and continued to follow the instructions.

I told ClockworkMod Rom Manager that I had a Samsung GalaxyS Captivate, and then to Install Rom from SD Card. When it rebooted, I went to "reinstall packages" and it crashes with

E:failed to verify whole-file signature

e:signature verification failed

Installation aborted.

Any ideas?
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] Juanone:
Anyone want to help me develope the best app on the market
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] gromdroid:
I can maybe help you, send me a pm with your idea. Okay?
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] sea_salt:
hi there,

I'm aware that the CF-root-kernel is used a thousand-times by many people but this makes this question even more important: has it been completely reviewed by other developers in fact because the source is open?

don't get me wrong, I really don't want to allege anything to chainfire, but since it's the kernel, the core of the system, this component should be fully reviewed and proofed as clean and safe. otherwise no droidwall can ever detect e.g. silent data transmissions (sent on kernel-level) or spy-attack etc....

so if the whole CF-Root-Code is released e.g. on github I think things like that could be revealed/proofed. if it's completely closed it's just a question of trust...

unfortuanately it's seems like it's kept secret... because https://github.com/Chainfire says "Chainfire doesn’t have any public repositories yet"...

does chainfire keep his CF-Root-Source closed and secret and due to that could theoretically put some secret kits in there?

so I'd like to know if the CF-Kernel (made by chainfire) is open source or alternatively chainfire released his source code, and this code could and has been reviewed by others (e.g. experienced senior members)?

btw: if it's closed sourced and due to this potentially "unsafe"... are there any other fine root-kernels with cwm which are open source and due to can be fully trusted?
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] AJ.Rockwell:
Hullo.

Well some developers like to have their hard work protected from stealing so they are using closed source approach. You should not fear using a kernel or ROM when it's downloaded from the official site, even better with md5 checksum.

Sent from outer space by aliens on tapatalk using SGS2
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] sea_salt:
it doesn't provide any security if "it's downloaded from the official site" when the source of the "official site" has never / could never been reviewed. neither does a md5 checksum... if CF-Root is really closed source it's like blind faith and I think when in comes to kernels, the core of your phone... blind faith isn't a good idea...
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] HellcatDroid:
CF-Root has no patches to the actual kernel, it's "only" the initramfs that is edited to give you everything you ask from his kernel.

Open a terminal, type "cd /" and off you go inspecting everything.

OpenSource would give you not a single bit of more "secure feeling" - what if the backdoor is simply not included in the source, but built into the binary release?

May I ask what exactely you are afraid of?

And on a sidenote:

Yes, I did a rather deep "walk through" the files of CF's kernel and you have no reason to believe and trust me more than CF himself, but let me state it anyways:

It's totally cool, save, no backdoors, everything is A-OK!

Hope that helped a bit ;)
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] AJ.Rockwell:
A thought about why would well known kernel/ROM devs place backdoors in their products is way beyond me. There surely is a botnet full of siyahkernel users haha jk... Just take it easy, CIQ is more of an issue lately..

Sent from outer space by aliens on tapatalk using SGS2
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] HellcatDroid:
*LOL*

That one really made me laugh XD
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] sea_salt:
at first, thank you for your reply!

ok, but how can this be checked? how can it be proofed, that is the original kernel? can I proof it in anyway for my self? and maked shure that there is no backdoor in it?

because I want to learn more... what is "initramfs" in particular?

sorry that I ask so silly, but what will this command reveal, other than the content of the actual folder? how does this help to inspect the kernel in detail?

yeah, there you're right, what brings me to the question (see above) how the compiled files can be checked/verified/proofed?

just like you mentioned... something like backdoors, secret data transmissions which can be revealed because they happen on kernel-level...

hehe, thats right, I don't know neither you nor chainfire... although I appreciate you posting.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] sea_salt:
so I think it's no so odd to ask about the trustworthiness of CF-Kernel as well, isn't it? especially if it's kept secret by cf... no one should blind faith, when it comes to kernels...
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] HellcatDroid:
In loose order of your questions above:

*

You can grab one of the kernel initramfs (see answer to what that is below) dumpers, most of them split the zImage into the actual kernel (code) and said initramfs.

The kernel (code) image should be almost 100% identical (almost due to some headers and those things that might be different due to the edited initramfs).

*

When the kernel is started, there is nothing - like on god's first day during creation (don't laugh, I kinda mean it like that! ;))

There is no system (that's still sitting somehwere on the flash or HDD or wherever) and nothing.

But the kernel needs a place to start booting up the system and to load additional kernel (driver) modules from that are not statically compiled into the kernelcode itself.

So the zImage has an image of a small, base filesystem that is placed into a RAM disc just before the kernel code is started (usually done by the bootloader).

This filesystem is the "initramfs" (short for "initial RAM-disk filesystem").

In the SGS2 case (or Android in general) /system and /data (and some others) are mounted into this so the system can finally be booted up by the kernel.

*

with "cd /" you change to the uppermost, "root" directory of the system, it's where everything starts in Unix/Linux world and where the mentioned initramfs is.

So by browsing the folders in there (except for additionally mounted in one's like /syste, /data, /efs, /tmp and some more) you are exploring the contents of the initramfs - it's not really secret.

Though, it can be made more secret, of course.

*

there is about one bazillion tools and apps that can compare files
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] postfatal:
CF Root is the most vanilla out of all the Kernels. It is just the Samsung stock Kernel + root. It has been tried by thousands of people without a problem and is 100% clean, safe and open source.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] ngokula:
if in doubt

chainfire specifically mentioned that his kernel is taken from the stock samsung firmware, modified to get "root", CWM and busybox. he didn't mention of any specific tweaks (to make it better than stock).

so when in doubt, after rooting (and used up all the goodies of CF-root kernel), flash back to stock kernel. he included in his post how to do it.

have you reviewed the stock kernel's source? is it safe?
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] MistahBungle:
Paranoid much ? I'd be more worried about crap (Carrier IQ, etc) your telco has put on their particularly branded phone (particularly if you have a US variant of the SGS2) than anything Chainfire might do.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] NZed:
if youre so afraid, stay stock

oh and on a side note, theres this website called Google (go to www.google.com)

and search for answers.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] mrabcx:
Any app you download from the Market may have backdoors in them. Any app with network access may potentially connect back to the developer and send all sorts of information, or even files, back.

So, if you want to be "safe", you have no choice but to stick to the base stock software. But then ... maybe Samsung could have placed stuff in your phone doing stuff you may not be happy with.

And we can't forget Windows OS either, how many time may that connect and send info and files back, and have various backdooes we don't know about ?

As it has been pointed out, simply having "open source" doesn't guarantee you anything, unless you compile that yourself as well as.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] alferret:
Break out the tin-foil hats :D
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] androidkid311:
Once u hear its chainfire... its safe. Good dev.

looks like an iphone but powered by android baby!!!!
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Lennyz1988:
It's a legitimate question. We are flashing modified software to our phones made by others. It can be a security risk, anyone could modify a rom and let it send privacy information to his server. It is someting we should consider everytime we flash a rom. That we always presume that the roms on XDA are safe, does not rule out the possibility that it will happen in the future. Smartphones are getting more interesting for people with bad intentions.

As mentioned above, it's the same with installing apps from unknown sources and even the Android Market.

But if there is any developer I would trust, it is Chainfire. He has done more for XDA then most of us ever will.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] sea_salt:
Thanks for all the replies!

Yes, I'd agreed that thousands of people use it without even think about it. I know / read that it's a very common and known root-kernel. but I think precisely because the latest scandals with spysoftware... it's important to look into these CF-Kernels. unfortunately I'm not able to review it myself, because I'm not that into Unix-Coding. What makes you so shure about it's really "Samsung stock Kernel + root"?

Yeah, anyone can say anything he wants, like "chainfire specifically mentioned that...". yeah he might have mentioned it, but if his kernels aren't reviewed before they're used by thousands of people... hmm... as I mentioned I really don't want to allege anything to chainfire. I think he's doing a great job. I just wanted to ask, if there could be something in it, or if there are reviewd and proofed, not only used with blind faith...

Touché! The stock kernel could be unsafe as well. but the included "stock" kernel is not from samsung directly, but from chainfire as well... so it's the same source... that doesn't make it any better...

yeah, you're right there. but wouldn't it be better if there's at least nothing added even more?

yeah I have the same "feeling" about this, but this is just blind faith on my side. is is blind faith on your side, too, or do you have any hard proofs about this?

thanks for your approval. and I agree on you, too. I think only a few people even have a slight thought about what they flash there on their phone... I think this should always be peer-reviewed by professional devs, before its possible to download such files...
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] pulser_g2:
I personally would rather see people question things like this. People should NOT download crap from nobodies... :)

So to answer your question about CF-Root, here's why it's safe...

1) CF-Root is NOT a recompiled kernel. It's the 100% totally stock kernel. You can split the zImage into ramdisk and kernel image, and compare the kernel image SHA1 with that of the split stock zImage. If it's the KL1 CF-Root, compare to the KL1 stock. You'll find the two match identically.

2) CF-Root is a modified initramfs, to give functionality such as auto rooting, and much more. If you take your stock initramfs, and compare it to the CF-Root one, you can see the changes for yourself. It's shell scripts (bash), so it's plaintext.

You'll see binaries added to the initramfs - busybox for example... So go compare that to the generally available busybox and you'll see it's fine :)

In short? Yeah it's fine. In long? It's fine for the reasons above :)
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] sea_salt:
thank you very much! this is a well formulated and consistent answer! so chainfaire doesn't have to release his source, cause it's completely plain text... If that's true, it could be reviewed (and was I think), and that's fine.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] sea_salt:
another question would be, if intratech's "stock-roms" and "stock-kernels" really are stock? where does he get his "original" stock-roms from, that he provides? does samsung have them officially released? if so, where to download? or does he do some sort of "leaking" from stock phones?

thank you very much!
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] androidkid311:
In scared to give you an answer becausebu might produce another questiin loool :-/

looks like an iphone but powered by android baby!!!!
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] HellcatDroid:
Are you now going to question each and everything ever published/released here?

I'd suggest you do not download anything.

Only update via KIES and hope for Samsung not have added anything malicious into KIES or the updates it downloads and installs - but then again, you can't be sure about that either.

There is nothing bad at a certain level of being suspicious and aware, but this crossed the threshold to paranoia long ago IMHO.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] sea_salt:
@androidkid311: okay, probably you're right... sorry for going too far! I just want to understand!

@hellcat: I'm just learning through this! I just want to UNDERSTAND how this CF-rooting works. you helped me, and I'm thankful. and sorry when I crossed a boarder here. that wasn't my intention!

hehe :-) I promise this will be the last one :-) and dudes no offence, I really don't assuming anything bad here...

I'm really just curious where they come from... as long as I couldn't find any official sources provided by samsung I'm just wondering how e.g. infratech gets them...

this has nothing to do with not trusting... i'm just curious.
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] peachpuff:
You're afraid of a kernel? There are worse things out there to be afraid of... like the boogyman. Have you looked under your bed or in the closet lately? Be afraid, be very afraid!
[Galaxy S II Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] HellcatDroid:
Well, he has his ways, contacts and sources where he gets that stuff from.

And yes, they actually ARE (or at least "going to be") all officially released Samsung stock ROMs.

For what it's worth, my phone has always and (apart from some trips to AOSP land) ever been on ROMs from Intratech's thread - never ever bothered updating via KIES *lol* and I never found anything suspecious (and I "walk through" the system files for various reasons rather often).

There's tool (forgot the name) that allows the average user to pull the ROMs from Sammy's server as well, but Intratech has even more sources, I think.

And I for my part are very thankfull for that.
[Desire HD Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] bombhead23:
Hiya, this has probably been posted a million times......I've just tried to root my phone using the Avanced Hack tool but all my phone does know is constantly loop on the HTC boot screen ?

Help !!!!
[Desire HD Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] trh1341:
Do you have recovery installed?

Can you connect to adb?

Sent from my HTC Inspire "4G" using Ice Cream Sandwich
[Desire HD Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] bombhead23:
I couldn't do either. I've now managed to get it back up by removing the battery but I'm not so sure about rooting it now.What are the advantages ?
[Desire HD Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] samy_88:
try this out :)

Hello, you can try this steps to revive your Ace:D :

1) Google : how to make android goldcard.

2) Download the official ruu rom (preferred to be the latest version, because downgrade is not allowed if your device is S-On), then extract the image from ruu (rom.zip) located in c:/users/(User Name)/appdata/local/temp .

3) Rename the rom.zip to PD98IMG

3) Move the image to the root of your sd-card.

4) Put the card in your phone , then boot into boot-loader by pressing vol-down + power at the same time .

5) Cross your fingers, and wait for the magic;) .

GOOD LUCK
[HTC EVO 3D] secondskin:
Coming from an Evo 4G the reception is definitely not as good on the 3d.

So is it that the physical radio is crappier or is it software related?
[HTC EVO 3D] THEGAMEPLAY94:
It's because those geniuses put the antennae at the bottom of the phone where your hand ....drives me !
[HTC EVO 3D] hitman4274:
Yea just a bad hardware set up, the antenna should be towards the top always lol

Shot from my sharp shooter in 3d

cleanrom2.9.5
[HTC EVO 3D] secondskin:
Well hopefully they fix the design on the next Evo/successor. I'm not used to upgrading technology and seeing my reception get worse. Usually it's always been at least a little better with every time I upgrade.
[HTC EVO 3D] twiztidninja:
its sprint not your phone i get mad signal; with the verizon prl 4-6 bars always
[HTC EVO 3D] xeper:
I'm of the opinion Sprint or HTC screwed this one up. I flashed the a3 of Joelz' ICS yesterday and I've never had better reception. Another thing that blew me away is that my streaming services NEVER cut out since moving to ICS. Before, I'd be able to listen to MAYBE 5 minutes of a stream before it would inevitably drop and try to rebuffer or simply fail out to a lost-data message. Not once has a stream dropped since I imaged to the ICS ROM.
[HTC EVO 3D] THEGAMEPLAY94:
The reason you see more bars with that prl is because when roaming on Verizon our phones use the 800mhz band rather than 1900. and 800 penetrates better. If you had the original evo and 3d both on that prl and held both the 3d would have a lower signal
[HTC EVO 3D] secondskin:
So I'm guessing this means og Evo had better hardware in terms if radio then?
[HTC EVO 3D] secondskin:
I will eventually try it once it's a little farther along. Thanks for the info.
[HTC EVO 3D] THEGAMEPLAY94:
It had the antennae placed where common sense would tell you to place it, at the top away from where you hold it
[Galaxy Tab 10.1 General] kenyu73:
Anyone know if this is device specific or google account specific? I have quite a few Android devices and I still cant figure out if it syncs all my devices (apps and settings) into one big lump of data or if its keyed of the device id.
[Galaxy Tab 10.1 General] AmesCell:
Good question. Seems like it just does what it wants.
[Galaxy Tab 10.1 General] jawedzebra:
I think the first time you register the device, it downloads as many apps as it can. But when you reset or wipe the device, it still keeps the id and downloads the apps you used to have.

Sent from my Galaxy Tab 10.1
[HTC Amaze 4G] brolic925t:
I need this to put live wallpapers on sen:(seless. Please help
[HTC Amaze 4G] TheSneakerWhore:
Could you be a bit more specific? Not too sure what you are asking.
[HTC Amaze 4G] death2verizon:
im pretty sure that wont work

no sense=no "personalize.apk"

try this instead, just uploaded it for someone else too.

not sure if it'll work, but u can try
[Motorola Droid RAZR] JDunc:
Just purchased this app for its audio profiles but can't seem to figure out how to create new profiles. So far all I can do is edit the two default profile. Please help if you know anything! Thanks!
[Motorola Droid RAZR] ug87:
You set the volume levels to what you want then click on the floppy disk icon in the top right corner. You can rename it to whatever you want and have it create an icon on the home screen if you want. I have four profiles that I use frequently on one of my screens.
[Motorola Droid RAZR] opensourcefan:
Love this app, been using it since day one, keeps getting better and better.
[Motorola Droid RAZR] JDunc:
Appreciate the responses fellas.