yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Huawei Ideos X5 U8800] paulo_andre:
Ok, let's startby the first question.

If you have the stock froyo version, it's completely safe to change everything, as long as you follow the guides. The pink screen allows you to change files fast and safely.

If you have the stock GB version, it's a little harder and there is a little risk, but again if you follow the guides, there should be no problem.

MIUI and CM (cyanogenmod) are the most famous custom roms for android. usually CM is faster but many (like me) say miui is more beautiful and better.

unrooting is possible (just install the stock version again), theoretically the warranty is void as soon as you start messing with rooting and custom roms, but if you restore to the custom, there is no proof of that, so you keep your warranty.

about the app, yes there are quite a few to do that. in fact, I dare to say that, in android just like in apple devices, no matter what you want, there's an app for that.
[Huawei Ideos X5 U8800] husen4u:
Is Thr Any Tutorial To Root Android GB.
[Huawei Ideos X5 U8800] Tmp341:
Here :

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1420728

First message has all info you'll need.Follow the instructions step by step ;)
[General Questions and Answers] akshatjn:
Hello Guys can someone teach me to make my own android app
[General Questions and Answers] f4vr:
Start here

http://developer.android.com/guide/basics/what-is-android.html
[Acer Iconia A500] mtmerrick:
Precedent has been set - GPL breaking software is not allowed on XDA, specifically in the a500 forum. This primarily refers to kernels. Software that breaks GPL is considered "warez" - aka illegally distributed software.

Recently there has been an unofficial leak of an early version of Android 4.0 for the a500 tablet. This software contained a Linux kernel. The source code for this kernel has not been released, even though Linux kernels are required to have the sources posted to be GPL compliant. This makes the a500 ICS leak "warez" which are not allowed on XDA. There are also custom ROMs containing the leaked kernel, posted in the development forum. Since this kernel may differ from the final version, there is a possibility the source for it may never be released, setting it status as "illegal" software in stone.

According to XDA policies, and set precedent, the creators of the offending software (the custom ROMs) must provide the kernel source code, or have their offemding work, as well as their user accounts, banned from XDA. All other re-postings of the offending software (all sources of the ICS leak) must also be removed, per XDA policy and set precedent.
[Acer Iconia A500] FloatingFatMan:
Just to clarify, Acer did NOT leak this ROM, it was leaked completely unofficially. Acer will release their kernel source code once they officially release the ROM.
[Acer Iconia A500] mtmerrick:
Very good point. However, that emphasize my point even further - since this is an unofficial early leak, source code for this kernel may change before the final version is released, meaning there is a possibility that we will NEVER get the source code for this specific kernel. According to XDA rules and precedent, that makes it guarenteed "warez"
[Acer Iconia A500] dongimin2:
this shows how bureaucracy kills. this is hilarious.
[Acer Iconia A500] mtmerrick:
updated OP with clarification. Thanks to floating fat man
[Acer Iconia A500] Somairotevoli:
yes the hypocrisy is rampant, the irony, tasty as ics;)
[Acer Iconia A500] teflontactics:
Lol.

How can you hold acer responsible for violating GPL when they didn't release the ROM?

That's like someone winning a PS3 the day before it was released and then suing the guys that held the contest for breaking street date.

Good luck with that.
[Acer Iconia A500] Somairotevoli:
no one's blaming Acer. the posting of the leak violates the rules of this forum, just as the posting of Thor's roms, even links to his site, are a violation of the forum rules.
[Acer Iconia A500] mtmerrick:
Correct! And the makers of ROMs that include this kernel are even more in trouble. That is, if the mods follow their own rules, which they seem to take very seriously.....
[Acer Iconia A500] wolverine423:
I think having the source and not releasing it (Thor) is different than not having the source and not releasing it (leak based rom devs).

There were plenty of gingerbread roms running around the inspire 4g forum that were up BEFORE HTC actually released the source code for the kernel. So were the devs of the roms running the kernel in violation of the GPL or was it HTC since it was their kernel and therefore was their source code to release?

The problem is that Acer is not required to release the source for that kernel, since it is a leak and wasn't supposed to be publicly released.

Also, you seem way too excited about potentially killing the recent spark in development that has taken place around here recently. If the mods need to remove them, they will and they will handle it how they see fit.

This thread = garbage.
[Acer Iconia A500] Somairotevoli:
just playing devils advocate here. so if one was to share their private kernel with a few friends and one of those friends chose to "leak" it here, it would be acceptable?
[Acer Iconia A500] mtmerrick:
Actually, not only were they at fault for using illegal software in their ROM, every android user who has a non-GPL compliant kernel is breaking the law - they are in possession of illegally distributed software.

Kinda shows how stupid the XDA rule is, doesn't it? That's what I'm trying to do, which most everyone else in the thread has understood; showing how rediculous using GPL compliance as a forum weapon is
[Acer Iconia A500] FloatingFatMan:
On this, there can be little argument.
[Acer Iconia A500] wolverine423:
Actually no, using examples of how the GPL applies to users in no way shows me how stupid the xda rule is.

NOTE: I have not stated whether or not I agree or disagree with the rule.
[Acer Iconia A500] BrianDigital:
This is taking it out of hand. Wonder how many phones here have custom stock roms with out the manufacturers source.....
[Acer Iconia A500] Psichi:
nevermind. The post in dev is for the A200 kernel.
[Acer Iconia A500] haag498:
Just for fun:

I'm no lawyer, but vache doesn't have the sourcecode, so... I'll let everyone come to their own conclusions, as this is a rather technical problem.

In the end, only Acer can fix this problem -- and they probably will once they release the final version of the ROM.

Other than that, the Acer ROM was never supposed to be public, so I doubt Acer can be held accountable for the leak. If anything, vache's source has made himself liable under copyright law.
[Acer Iconia A500] h_10:
the self righteous gpl nazis sure are quiet.
[Acer Iconia A500] BrianDigital:
Well Vache is not the author of the code. Perhaps you should switch your sites at Acer and ask why there is no kernel source....

Even if Thor was operating in the gpl his website requires a sign in to get his work. Again against XDA rules.

The OP is a complete moron....if he wants to further cripple this community go ahead, seeing as Vache is selling his A500, which will most likely leave us with one less Dev. I suggest we all do since this community is head strong about ruining it for everyone, while trolling other users
[Acer Iconia A500] jm77:
This thread brings up an interesting point.

I'm not entirely convinced that the kernel source being unreleased qualifies the Acer ICS ROM as "warez" (I'm fairly confident we'll eventually get the source for the kernel from Acer).

What could potentially be construed as warez are the Acer-specific applications, assuming they're licensed/paid for by Acer for inclusion in their ROM.

Back in the day, Motorola send out C&Ds to sites hosting a leaked 2.2 ROM for DX because it included Swype (IIRC).

In any case, it's a good point to consider.
[Acer Iconia A500] vache:
Ilarious thread (or not...).

Kernel sources are here : http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1518014

Ok it's come from A200, but support also A500, A100 and coming vanhgog2 (A110 ?).
[Acer Iconia A500] Psichi:
Except that he isn't because he is bringing up a valid point. In the strictest interpretation of the rules set forth, the roms based on the ICS leak are in violation of the rules here. Yes, the source for the kernel is not available to anyone outside of Acer right now, but the rules do not take that in to account.

It seems to me that that OP is using this issue to urge the moderators to look at the rules set and see if they are

a) truly enforcing what they are intended to enforce

b) conductive to furthering development

To me, the goal behind the rules around the GPL for this site are based on intent. If I have source code licensed under the GPL available to me, use it in work I create, and actively refuse to comply with the GPL be denying people access to that source, then that is an issue and my work should be removed from the site.

If I am working on something that uses GPL licensed code and do not have that source code available to me (which is where the ICS leak roms fall), that is something that is currently a violation of the rules here but should it be?

-----

As for the argument that the current builds may never have the source for their kernel released and will always be breaking the GPL rule:

Common sense dictates that once the official ICS build is released and Acer makes the source for the kernel available, the leak builds will be depreciated and work will transition over to the official builds. This application of the rule is really only an issue while we are in this nebulous period between the unofficial leak and the official release.

---------- Post added at 12:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:02 PM ----------

I had mentioned that earlier, but went and saw it was for the A200 so I edited my post out.

If that is the kernel everyone is using on the leaked builds than this whole issue is moot. :D
[Acer Iconia A500] dr mcknight:
just a thought.....

if there is no kernel being posted by accer yet and we use it, to me we are not the ones breaking rules.

if acer releases a different kernel when the official release comes out then..... they must be removed! if it is the same when they release it then we are arguing over a mute point.

why argue over something that cant really be resolved without assuming something. never assume anything and just wait to see if the argument is even worth it.

i would think with the way this forum operates the mods would have been freaking out the second it was leaked.
[Acer Iconia A500] bahurd:
Just adding my opinion (yup, you know you want it....).

Most of these forums on XDA get way out of hand with people arguing a legal point that most of us aren't able to argue in a truly legal sense. Sounds odd but the laws aren't as clear as they seem...

I think XDA should have a 'private' forum with the express purpose of resolving these things 'behind closed doors' so to speak.

I understand what the OP is trying to do but frankly, other than being highly entertaining to read through everyone's opinions they are nothing more than opinions (yes, I read the GPL and the Apache license many times through the various iterations).

In my opinion, whomever leaked the ROM is the person who's liable. Not the DEV nor the USER. If it was released software then it moves into the GPL/Apache licensing and source for the kernel would be required under he license if being offered to anyone (use for one's private use is permitted without release of source.).

Sorry for taking up your time....
[Acer Iconia A500] Euclid's Brother:
I thought you were only required to supply your source of you've you've made modifications to it? And then only required to post your changes.

Though if xda is going enforce this, there are dozens of other forms to look at too. All of the various sgsii ics leaks are in the same situation. And xda has been promoting them on the front page. In fact, don't I remember a front page solve article about the a500 I've leak?
[Acer Iconia A500] mtmerrick:
I just feel necessary to say, I am not blaming acer. In fact the word "Acer" is not even IN the OP.

According to XDA rules and precedent, those who posted the kernel, and those who use it in their ROMs are fault for distributing illegal software.

According to the law, everyone who uses this kernel is in possession of illegal property.

Actually, the kernel is guarenteed to be different from the ORIGINAL Linux kernex, that was placed under the GPL, but a deviation thereof. This means that, regardless of who is legally responsible, the kernel is technically illegal goods.

And yes, you have noticed that the a500 forum's stance on the rule is a bit different than the rest of the site's, and you're correct. However, in the a500 sections, the mods have made very clear how the GPL will be enforced in this part of the site.
[Acer Iconia A500] conantroutman:
The lack of comprehension here is truly staggering.....

OP please think before typing, do you realise how many leaked kernels there are without sources?

Are you seriously comparing Warez to a leaked kernel?

I nearly laughed so hard that I pissed myself reading this.

Thanks :D
[Acer Iconia A500] dr mcknight:
YESSS!!!!!
[Acer Iconia A500] daveid:
But, please leave the thread open (unless it gets ugly), as it is at least amusing to follow the banter... and maybe someone can learn from it.
[Acer Iconia A500] Moscow Desire:
An interesting paradox.

If one modifies a kernel, which is what falls under GPL, not the rom, which I believe falls under apache, and considering the original source of the kernel has not officially been released, then, we probably have intellectual copyright thievery to add to it.

Having taken said kernel, without permission, and modifying it and distributing it, constitutes piracy. Regardless whether the modified source was published or not. After the fact....

Blow me down and call me shorty. Anybody who has also installed the recent ICS leaked rom, in original or permutated version of it, can all be sent to prison. And those who offered advice... aiding and abetting...

XDA let's this crime persist.... So they'll join everybody in the slammer for promoting such actions.

Lets hope RIAA doesn't get involved.

(MD heads to the siberian mountains.....)
[Acer Iconia A500] boborone:
i swear you two are connected at the hip
[Acer Iconia A500] M_T_M:
say Shorty...COOL STORY BRAH!! ;)
[Acer Iconia A500] Moscow Desire:
;) Gotta add a little humor around here sometimes!

As the late Heath Ledger said "why so serious?"
[Acer Iconia A500] conantroutman:
I swear he's stalking me... :eek:

Sent From My Fingers To Your Face.....
[Acer Iconia A500] femmyade2001:
....waste of resources. This thread should be closed.
[Acer Iconia A500] erica_renee:
I wanna jail cell with cable tv internet and a hot chic for room mate.no MD you can not come to visit my cell block.

Great replies all

Open thank you for keeping me amused while waiting at doc office.
[Acer Iconia A500] Euclid's Brother:
Except the kernel in the custom roms IS the same kernel that was in the stock leak, with the exception of one string contained within (/system) which was publicly disclosed in the forums as a change. Nothing else in the "kernel" was altered. The boot.img has additional alternations, but that's not GPL. Only the kernel.

But I do agree with Moscow Desire. It's not so much a GPL issue as it is a piracy issue. Can I bunk with you Erica?
[Acer Iconia A500] Moscow Desire:
Ever notice how these "leaks" appear? Is it by chance? Magical incarnation? Insider information?

Not.

Acer can't just openly publish "Beta" testing. Too many issues for them to deal with, and could be a PR nightmare for them. So what do they do? Invent a "leaked" rom.

Let us be the lab rats. See what works and what has issues. And also, to see if their new security works.

Problem is, our devs are better than theirs ;)

---------- Post added at 12:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:52 AM ----------

WOW, you guys take this to a different forum..... please.... ;)
[Acer Iconia A500] vache:
That's not something give Acer to me. I'm pretty sure that thay are still searching from where it came =)
[Acer Iconia A500] erica_renee:
So true MD .also they. Can test to see if there security patches can be over come. Another win for developers.
[Acer Iconia A500] Moscow Desire:
Sorry, I'm happily married, with a baby on the way, and besides, I like "au natural".

KJY has some room in his Dev lab. And Euclid's Brother seems to need your expertise, so maybe you all could discuss the finer points of copyright...violation.
[Acer Iconia A500] apapousek:
You forgot *giggles* I'm a blonde, let's let everyone know if every post!
[Acer Iconia A500] Aaron Camp:
Seems we need to modify the rules for XDA with an addendum for the Acer sub-forum:

If at any time users point out hypocrisy or inconsistent enforcement of any XDA rules (NOTE: ESPECIALLY if they may in fact be construed as "pro Thor"**) those users will be ignored, or responses from moderators will NOT address the issue.

** A post is considered "pro Thor" if it does NOT meet at least 1 of the following requirements:

1. Post must clearly denigrate Thor or his work

2. Post must state that Thor is related or has had relations with a socially defined "evil" mythos or character. Examples of acceptable "evil" are: Devil, Anti-christ, Hitler, Teletubies, Barny,etc.

3. Post must clearly state that the poster finds Thor and/or his work to be reprehensible and should not be used due to its soiled nature.
[Acer Iconia A500] Psichi:
Straw man argument is made of straw.
[Acer Iconia A500] FloatingFatMan:
Actually, I happen to know that this is NOT something Acer "leaked" to get a free beta test out of people. It's a genuine leak and they have no idea how it keeps happening.

They're quite likely keeping an eye on this forum though, so don't be surprised if any of the bootloader bypass or root methods fail when this ROM goes OTA...
[Acer Iconia A500] erica_renee:
Trolls are so much fun

GIGGLES.

You can mind your own post. and stop trolling everything i post. If you do not like what i have to say Just add me to your ignore list.

im asking you nicely for the VERY LAST TIME. Sorry all. i have just had enough .

GO AWAY TROLL......
[Acer Iconia A500] themono:
I'm concerned as to the lack of understanding as to what the GPL does and does not provide for, especially from the person who began this thread.

People using non-gpl compliant kernels are not breaking the law. The GPL expressly does not cover the end user who is not modifying, distributing or copying the software.

People who use Thor's work are not breaking the GPL - Thor and Digetx most definitely are, as they are modifying, copying and distributing. I'd appreciate it if the OP would stop using phrases like "every android user who has a non-GPL compliant kernel is breaking the law", as that's demonstrably incorrect.

If people are going to enforce the GPL, please try to have some basic knowledge as to its provisions.
[Acer Iconia A500] conantroutman:
And there we have it. The root of the issue....

Yes we have rules about members complying with the gpl when they modify a kernel.

Yes we allow kernels leaked with no source yet available to be posted. Wouldn't be much of a development forum if we didn't would it?

That's how it is and its been that way since long before this Thor character was asked to comply with the rules.

No amount of whining will change that.

Don't like it?

Other development forums are available.

Have a nice day. :)

Sent From My Fingers To Your Face.....
[Acer Iconia A500] KingDavid63:
What are you talking about and why?
[Acer Iconia A500] ProTekk:
I'll just sit here and wait to see how many Sense based ROM's get pulled...
[Acer Iconia A500] wolverine423:
Don't flame....

Looks like most people agree that this thread is garbage. Can we get a lock?
[Acer Iconia A500] Entropy512:
Agree. Manufacturer leaks have always been a grey area here on XDA.

The basic rule of the GPL is - if you provide a binary based on source, you must provide source to anyone you provide the binary to.

So anyone building from source and releasing here - they MUST release source.

However, manufacturer leaks are an odd corner case - The manufacturer is "providing" binaries to other people, and they get intercepted in various manners by people to whom the binaries were never "provided".

So those "stolen" binaries live in a legal grey area.

In my experience - binaries of leaks are allowed due to this grey area. However, in any situation where a developer builds from source and provides binaries without providing source, this is strictly not permitted.
[Acer Iconia A500] Hacre:
You call that a flame? What fluffy cotton wooled corner of the internet have you been hanging around in?

It isn't a grey area. Acer compiled that kernel, it is up to them to provide the source for it. People are no more obliged to provide source code for a kernel that came from a leak than they are for a kernel that came with an official release.

The creator of the binary is responsible for the distribution of the source code that created it. The OP deserves a ban for a thread started with such epic thickery.
[Acer Iconia A500] Entropy512:
When I say grey area, I refer to when the binary winds up reaching those whom it wasn't intended for. E.g. if I were to build a binary, and then emailed you the binary but sent a CD of the source or (as allowable with the GPL), an offer to provide you the source - but someone grabbed my binary by sniffing my WLAN, followed by posting that binary on XDA - Things get messy. I complied with the GPL, but the guy who snarfed my binary who was not an intended recipient didn't. Obviously this is a hypothetical situation since in reality, I'd just link you to github. ;)

I believe this is the situation with many Samsung leaks - as I understand it (I could be wrong), some of the leaks are found by polling Samsung's update servers. Encrypted releases are found, and people have figured out how to break the encryption - so with such releases, Samsung clearly intended for their test community to receive binaries, and those people received offers for source - but someone intercepted the transmission and distributed the binary.

That puts the binary into a legal grey area. Well, technically it is illegal, but it has generally been allowed here as long as the binary's history is given.

See, for example, initramfs repacks such as CF-Root and my hexedit hack of the I9100 XXLPH leak kernel - http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=23005998&postcount=204
[Acer Iconia A500] Hacre:
Well the GPL responsibilities still lie with the creator. Any GPL claim against, say, Samsung, is easily rebutted by them with the simple statement of the code being stolen and wasn't actually distributed to the people that have it. Since, under the GPL, Samsung only have to provide source upon distribution, the changes they have made are their's, we already have the source for the rest of the kernel...Samsung are pretty much indemnified.

There's no GPL case against XDA for those reasons. XDA only need worry if Samsung or in this case, Acer, drop the owner of the domain an email asking wtf they think they're doing.

Since leaks tend to provide free beta testing for the manufacturer, I don't foresee any such uppity email being sent any time soon.

Oh and hexediting/hacking zImages doesn't breach any licenses. You don't have the source and you're not modifying the source, so you have no source to redistribute. If you did have all the source, as per GPL, you wouldn't be hexediting the zImage. ;)

This thread is still retarded.
[Acer Iconia A500] Krendelrus:
**** like this is killing the XDA forums
[Acer Iconia A500] RileyGrant:
This is absolute bull****. Congrats on losing another member. This isn't even a dev site anymore just a bunch of kids who don't know how to properly moderate a forum. Might as well starting pulling Sense Roms as well.
[Acer Iconia A500] boborone:
I love your signature

trololollololol