yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[SuperSU] calisro:
Thanks for clogging the thread and being super sweet. But you said

ANY

notifications from apps . If you want people to understand your question and how it actually relates to the current thread, then feel free to articulate your question with what you mean. If you are really referring to ANY

ANY

notification then this isn't the forum. If your referring to just notifications from supersu, there is an option in the settings.

---------- Post added at 01:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:18 PM ----------

Mr. Polobunny, beat me to it. Thanks. Sorry for the double info then.
[SuperSU] boyheadkick:
can you point me to the QnA section :confused: cant seem to find it

btw my question was gonna be about the version..supersu shows that i have 1.25, but when i check with rootchecker it says that su found on system/xbin has V1.15 SUPERSU..
[SuperSU] Pons:
That's probably the su binary version, as opposed to the SuperSU app version. When he upgrades the app, he doesn't always update the binary. As long as SuperSU reports its correct app version and doesn't ask you to update the binary, you're good. I asked in this thread if Chainfire could put in a su binary information section to minimize these kind of questions, but he hasn't responded.
[SuperSU] boyheadkick:
well when i first updated through play store it prompted me to update the binaries and it took so long to the point that the app suddenly closed..so reverted to my nandroid backup and flashed the zip package in the OP and thats when i found the details in rootchecker after reboot..thanks for clarifying though :good:
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
I have responded to that question several times throughout this thread. The answer is no.
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
I have responded to that question several times throughout this thread. The answer is no, it doesn't make any sense.
[SuperSU] :
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

I simply LOVE super su. I have bought all your programs CF. I flash the zip over CM.. I don't care they have a built in su now...your is better...
[SuperSU] cmahendra:
HUGE THANKS.

Flashable ZIP of UPDATE-SuperSU-v1.25.zip worked perfectly well on 4.1.2 JellyBean rom on...

LG Optimus L9 P760

LG Optimus L9 P765

Devices are with Unlocked Bootloader. CWM should be pushed in fastboot mode, before flashing this zip file.

Thanks again .... :good:
[SuperSU] miloytyn:
I'm having interesting problem with SuperSU. If I fix permissions using TWRP the phone becomes extremely unstable and slow. Additionally it crashes or freezes shortly after booting. It can do this for hours until it manages to stay up and running long enough. This is indicated by SuperSU logging root request for apps, before that no root permissions are granted to any app. Once this happens the phone is stable until I fix permissions again.

There are two things that seem to affect this. First, not inserting SIM seems to fix things and phone behaves normally. Reinserting SIM seems to break things again.

Second, if I set default behavior as grant instead of prompt seems to fix this right away. I just need to keep default behavior as grant until SuperSU grants permission to apps that run after the boot and after that I can again set default behavior as prompt. I'm not sure but it might be that phone reboots itself once before things are fixed. I'll have to test a bit more to be sure about that.

SuperSU is installed as system app and I have that backup script installed. Trust system user setting does not have any effect to this as is not the logging setting. Survival mode is not set. Any idea what might cause this behavior? I can provide logs if needed, just tell me what and how to take them.

My phone in Galaxy S plus (I9001) and I'm currently using TWRP 2.4.4.0 and CM10.
[SuperSU] DirkStorck:
Hi. I have a big problem...Allmost each time an app request root access and the pop up dialog shows up my phone ends up in a hot reboot. I have flashed the UPDATE-SuperSU-v1.25.zip but still the same problem...

Any help please! :)

EDIT: Have restored an older backup and everything is fine now...but I still have no idead why that happened.
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
Seems sort of obvious that "fix permissions" is the problem, and rather than fixing permissions, it messes them up.
[SuperSU] miloytyn:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

Yes I'll agree that the fix permissions is the one causing problems. What I don't know if that is actually needed or not, but anyhow that what is usually listed in the installation instructions.

Additionally what I'm interested in is what that fix permissions is doing that causes this behavior.
[SuperSU] polobunny:
Never found exactly why it broke SuperSU did you? :/
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
Actually, I believed I had fixed that, but it seems that is not the case ...

Not exactly sure which permission where TWRP changes that is the problem, either.
[SuperSU] polobunny:
The fix perms script seems like a pretty big one to analyze, to add to the annoyance. I cannot say I've had this issue popup again for me, but I don't think i've ran the script either. Won't take the chance. :p
[SuperSU] vashta:
Hi sir..sorry for noobish question.

I've googling but cannot find answer.

Just wanna know of this line of your updater script.

ui_print("- Disabling OTA survival");
package_extract_dir("tools", "/system");
run_program("/system/chattr", "-i", "/system/bin/.ext/.su");
delete("/system/chattr");

Isn't the folder 'tools' not exist in the UPDATE-SuperSU-v1.25.zip file ?

So my question is.. is that part of command really work ?

Thx.
[SuperSU] YMatrix:
Heya!

Is it possible for the prompt message to not have the "Ask me in.." checkbox default be ticked?

In previous versions it wasn't ticked by default, now it is ticked by default for every app.

Tried searching the settings, but had no luck in finding a setting for that. :silly:
[SuperSU] GJMX:
Upgrade to pro?

Hi, I'm currently using superSU v 1.10 and it is working as it should. I would like to upgrade to the pro version but do not want to upgrade to 1.25 at this time. As pro is a key only I'm assuming this can be done without issue. Looking for a confirmation that this assumption is correct.
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
I think you may be right and this is an error of mine.

Yeah just install Pro, then reboot. Reboot isn't always necessary but just do it to be sure.
[SuperSU] Eric_Eric_Eric:
In SuperSU, I would like to know how you have the selection for an "invisible" launcher icon (no launcher icon).

Is it:

PackageManager p = getPackageManager();

p.setComponentEnabledSetting(new ComponentName("com.blah.blah", "com.blah.blah.Blah"), PackageManager.COMPONENT_ENABLED_STATE_DISABLED, PackageManager.DONT_KILL_APP);

?

That is the only way I know how to do it, but, if you have a different way, I would really like to know. Thanks, and keep up the excellent work!
[SuperSU] a1exus:
so I just completely reset of my phone and i already did oem unlock, how do I install this UPDATE-SuperSU-v1.25.zip / how do i root it?
[SuperSU] Pkt_Lnt:
I highly recommend this guide. Beware of toolkits!

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1529058
[SuperSU] a1exus:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

I don't have Windows handy for me to follow that guide..
[SuperSU] bolero:
Not enough memory, remove some apps

I have rooted my galaxy S2 plus following http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2168700

Rooting is working but ....... after flash UPDATE-SuperSU-v1.25.zip and installing any app i get the message: Not enough memory, remove some apps.

Tested it flashing several times.

Flashing and not installing Superuser app with CWMtouch: I can install apps so much I want.

Flashing and then installing Superuser app with CWMtouch: After installing two ore three apps's I get the message: Not enough memory, remove some apps

Can you help?
[SuperSU] GermanyGSG:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

I have a question. Can i uninstall the SuperUser from my phone after install this one? Would it affects the root's work? Please answer me fast. I'm in a hurry, thanks :)
[SuperSU] shaggyskunk:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

You could just flash the zip & the other su will disappear & you won't lose root - or you could download it from the store, update the binary & you won't lose root. there isn't any real reason to uninstall the other su.
[SuperSU] rl421403:
I found one issue. I am using SuperSU 1.25 and from last couple of days, checkbox (allow access for 15 mins) in SuperSU popup is by default checked.

Is there a way to disable that.
[SuperSU] Ricky Divjakovski:
uncheck it?
[SuperSU] calisro:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

he meant to not make it the default.
[SuperSU] My1xT:
yes normally uncheck it, and then allow/deny and the next popup has it unchecked.

for me this worked...
[SuperSU] Ricky Divjakovski:
He is right^
[SuperSU] YMatrix:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

Didn't work for me.
[SuperSU] rl421403:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

Yep didn't work for me either. I always have to uncheck the checkbox and than click ok. It's annoying and i want to know a solution to choose default settings for me.
[SuperSU] miloytyn:
Do you have SuperSU Pro bought? Could it be related to that, since for me it is also working correctly?
[SuperSU] LoganMcClay:
Hi,

SuperSU Pro user here, same issue as them. Anytime an app got updated and asks again for root access, the checkbox is ticked...

SuperSU 1.25 on SGS III International.
[SuperSU] YMatrix:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

So it's not pro related.

Any way to fix this? Secret setting maybe?! :p
[SuperSU] bolero:
Nobody?
[SuperSU] shaggyskunk:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

Did you try a full wipe - data - system - cache - dalvik and what about giving TWRP a try (awesome recovery) and start from scratch.
[SuperSU] rl421403:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

Yes. I am a supersu pro user but i do'nt think this has anything to do with pro version because pro is never updated. And I faced this issue from last couple of days.

Specially after new update.

---------- Post added at 05:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:24 PM ----------

Yes that's right. But i am missing settings for this. There should be setting for this behaviour in app. It might come in future version.
[SuperSU] calisro:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

um. The pro version and the free version are the same. One just has a separate apk to enable features in the free one.
[SuperSU] rl421403:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

Actually pro version is just key to enable some features in free version. So this has nothing to do pro key IMHO.
[SuperSU] calisro:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

yep. that's what I meant.
[SuperSU] bolero:
Yes everal times.

After, everytime, I install the UPDATE-SuperSU-v1.25.zip trough CWMTouch and then try to install an app i get the memory message.

Without UPDATE-SuperSU-v1.25.zip i can install what I want.

Memory is 340 from 804 used. So there is space enough.
[SuperSU] shaggyskunk:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

You're saying that you only have 340 available - or you've got 804 available?

if you've only got 340 available - try reducing the number of running apps - I think that might fix your problem.
[SuperSU] calisro:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

Where are you getting that number? the android storage screens do not count your cwm/twrp storage in its figures. cleanup your backups and try again.
[SuperSU] miloytyn:
Of course it could have had something to do with this. Obviously now it hasn't but it could have been set that in non-pro the default selection does not stick for one reason or another, since as you mentioned pro key enables features in the app.
[SuperSU] bolero:
Samsung GT-I9105P Galaxy S2 Plus

■Android 4.1.2 Jellybean

■TouchWiz Nature UX interface

■1,2 GHz dualcore Broadcom BC28155 processor

■4,3 inch Super Amoled Plus scherm, 480 x 800 pixels

■8 megapixel camera achter, 2 megapixel voor

■1080p Full HD video opnemen

■1 GB RAM, 8 GB opslagcapaciteit, micro-SD slot (tot 64 GB)

■GPS/Glonass

■WiFi, Bluetooth 3.0, USB 2.0, NFC (optioneel)

There is 340 used from the 1 GB.

Rom is I9105PXXAMC2_I9105POXXAMB5_NEE.zip

I did wipe dalvik, wipe cache, wipe data and then even full wipe to be sure there is nothing left.

Then with odin 3.07 i flash CWMtouch-i9105_chotu.tar.md5

On my sd card(32GB class 6) there is only the UPDATE-SuperSU-v1.25.zip

If i do not install UPDATE-SuperSU-v1.25.zip there is nothing the matter. I can install any app i want.

Do I use the UPDATE-SuperSU-v1.25.zip then after installing one or two apps there is the memory warning and i can not installing anymore.

I did look for the TWRP but i think there is not a version for the I9105P
[SuperSU] calisro:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

.0002% probability. But you're right! There is a itsy bitsy tiny chance it could.
[SuperSU] polobunny:
1GB ram and 1GB system partition are two different things, really.

Have you tried installing from Play Store?
[SuperSU] bolero:
Do you mean the Ext4 partition on the sd card. I have made that 10 Gb.

I did try to install apss by Play store but the same memory message.

I am going to flash again, wiping everything again and afterwards installing superuser by Play store.

I will let you know if this works.

Thanks for you patience :)
[SuperSU] rl421403:
Re: [03.03.2013] SuperSU v1.25

I have been using pro version from last 6 months and this was not how it worked. This is recent development and facing this from last week only.
[SuperSU] 78Staff:
My Rom dev has recently switched to SuperUser (I think b/c it is opensource?), anyway so I am installing SuperSU now every couple of days as the rom get's updated. The checkmark has always been unchecked in the past, however on the most recent install the checkmark is checked, as others have mentioned. However, that was on a dirty flash of the rom - I encountered a few issues not SU related so wound up doing a full wipe and install of the ROM, and this time the checkmark behavior is back to normal, that is unchecked. May be coincidence, though.
[SuperSU] :
Hi everyone,

I run CM10.1 nightlies on my GNex. I would like to know if there is a way to prevent SuperSU from getting replaced by the SuperUser that comes built in, or do I have to install the SuperSU binaries every time I flash?

Thanks, and sorry if this has already been asked.
[SuperSU] polobunny:
That's the simplest way. Flash nightly, flash SuperSU, flash any kernel you would like, reboot.
[SuperSU] :
Thanks, just wanted to know if there was an option to preserve SuperSu. But it's ease enough.
[SuperSU] K2adir:
Is there anyway to manually grant access to some apps?

I have been looking through settings page for around 10 minutes and couldn't find it. I'm not familiar with SuperSU

SuperSu blocks some apps by default for security reasons, I guess.

But i need access to 2 blocked apps for a project.

Whenever i run them, SuperSU force closes them (without asking for permission)

Can somebody help me?
[SuperSU] polobunny:
I don't think SuperSU does that. It does not secretly enforce you to not use or use certain apps.

Any action requesting su credentials will make SuperSU pop-up. If you have denied su access in the past for that app you will be able to see it in the app list by opening SuperSU from the drawer.
[SuperSU] :
I think it does, If I remember correctly there was a cheat app for games, that SuperSu blocked because of how it was implemented. I could be wrong.

Edit: Found the app I'm referring to http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=38621554&postcount=2540
[SuperSU] polobunny:
GameGuardian? The software isn't purposely blocked. It's trying to pass itself as another, usually allowed app that normally comes on Android systems and SuperSU prevents that.

The ball is in the camp of said software developer.

http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=38621554&postcount=2540

Now, nothing says your app(s) is/are in the same boat, unless it's GameGuardian.

Edit: Didn't see your edit until I hit submit. I hope you get the gist of it though, because that's what's important. No software whatsoever should try to pass itself as another. That's a serious security risk.
[SuperSU] Pons:
Have you tried, in SuperSU settings, install tro /system and install back up script?
[SuperSU] :
Honestly haven't tried it, I'll test this with tomorrow's nightly and report back.

Not sure if it will work since the problem really is not maintaining the app, I could install it to /data and not loose it is seeing if the su binary also survives.

But there is only one way to find out :sly:

Thanks
[SuperSU] mark manning:
Thread cleaned...
[SuperSU] My1xT:
the main purpose is the Backup script which has been made for the CM Updates,so it should work...
[SuperSU] YMatrix:
Anyone find a fix for this?
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
Sorry, but you really do not understand what you are talking about. This has nothing at all to do with which apps I like or do not like, nor does it have anything to do with you being super user or not. And SuperSU certainly does not force kill apps.

You really don't realize the idea behind this at all - you're making assumptions disconnected from reality. The point is these apps are saying they're A while they're actually B, and SuperSU denies access because these apps are actively trying to lie to it. If SuperSU would allow this, the following scenario would happen:

- You install Titanium Backup and grant it root access

- You install something that contains SuperMalware 2000

- SuperMalware 2000 requests root access, and tries to pass itself off as Titanium Backup

- SuperSU grants it access because hey, it's Titanium Backup right ?

- All your data gets stolen, your nudies are posted to facebook, and your phone gets hardbricked

If I go to your bank and tell them I'm you, while I'm obviously not, should they give me your money ?

You might as well *not* use superuser rights management app if this is the behavior you want. Just use the "cleanup for reinstall from market" option in settings, you will end up with just the su binary and no UI, and this will allow all apps superuser access, regardless of who they are and what they want.

This is perfectly fixable by non-malware authors. GameGuardian for example has had a patch out that fixes this for months now.

If you still disagree with all this and/or don't understand why this is necessary and any su app that doesn't do this is faulty, that's fine - I'm even open to debate (you won't change my mind though). However, you come in here again, lose your temper, shout at people, and accuse me of all sorts of wrongdoing, you can be certain I will have you forcibly removed. To quote yourself: "Are you freaking insane? This isnt the point of XDA i believe."
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
It should only do this for apps it doesn't know yet - or reauthenticated apps (apps just updated). Is that the actualy problem, or are you seeing it at other times ? If so, are you sure SuperSU is operating correctly ? Does it even remember settings you've changed inside the UI ?
[SuperSU] YMatrix:
I have a feeling you coded it like this, so I will try to elaborate:

When a new/upgraded app is installed that requires root access you receive the notification of the app trying to get root access (since my settings are configured to prompt). The timed option is default ticked, so if I want to always grant this app root access I need to uncheck the tick.

After doing that, I never again see the prompt till app upgrades...

My "problem" which might also be your intention, is that the timed is default ticked for new/upgraded apps. I want the prompt to be default without it ticked, but there isn't a setting for that (only option to change between prompt, Grant and deny).

Is there a way to get the prompt message default without the timed ticked? Since I almost never use that feature, I find it more useful being default unchecked.
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
That is indeed the new default. Just so we're clear nothing else fishy is going on ;)

I'll put it on my to-do list to make this configurable.
[SuperSU] andrei1015:
I've seen something weird. I was wondering why so much. Even on wi-fi.. What is up with that? Sorry if it's been asked before.

Sent from my Google Nexus S
[SuperSU] calisro:
I think its just the calculation. if you have network stuff happening after su, supersu might get the blame even though the calling program was actually doing the work in a su session.

Edit: that being said, none if those apps are root apps...
[SuperSU] Pons:
Carbon is a root app....potentially.
[SuperSU] :
Did you flash a ROM and restore the amount of data you had already used?
[SuperSU] andrei1015:
Yup. I always do that. You think that might be the cause? Still a lot of megs o.o

Sent from my Google Nexus S
[SuperSU] YMatrix:
LOL! :D

Thanks for the response and looking forward for the new version!

Keep up the good work!
[SuperSU] :
Yes, thats the problem. Some of this data monitoring apps, when you restore a previous amount of data consumed (i.e. 7 GB) what they do is prorate that data based on the actual amount used. So even is you used 3MB (current)in total and SuperSU accounted for 300kb, it will say that SuperSU used a 10%. If you said the amount of data previously consumed was 7GB then SuperSu will have 700MB assigned.
[SuperSU] polobunny:
That's good to know. I've seen weird things happen with different stats through Android, even more so when restoring stuff.

For example wakelocks of an app that got killed/uninstalled will still appear but without the app name, which makes for very weird reports in apps such as BetterBatteryStats.
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
Stats app are worthless unless you are looking for "copmlete totals".

Wakelock stats apps are the worst, as they usually try to tie battery usage to wakelocks. Thing is, these things are only loosely related.

For a fun example, let's say I make WTFWakelock, a new and awesome tool that acquires a cpu-only wakelock when the screen comes on, and releases it when the screen goes off, nothing more, nothing less. This will make no difference at all to your battery usage, but most if not all battery usage apps will tell you that WTFWakelock is the cause for all your battery woes.

Extreme example ? Not really. I'm not sure if creating a wakelock in the screen off event is reliable these days, but it certainly wasn't in the past. So if you want to do some very short processing at screen off event, you needed to hold the wakelock before the event occurred. As such, it was not uncommon to create the wakelock in the screen on event instead - as this doesn't cost anything because the CPU will remain on until screen off anyways.

I'm sure there are quite a few apps that still do that, and even if not, apps request wakelocks for a myriad of reasons all the time, and if it's a smart app this does not necessarily contribute to your battery usage at all.

Same goes for wifi and/or multicast wakelocks, data usage, etc etc. Most stats apps do not actually track the right things to give you meaningful information, and for a lot of things this wouldn't even be possible without root/kernelmodules/etc.

/rant!
[SuperSU] polobunny:
Completely agree with you Chainfire. Nothing wrong with a wakelock in itself, obviously. Everything wrong with not releasing them when done though, and it's sad how many apps don't know how to do that properly. One must analyze battery stats with very great caution, otherwise you'll just blame the game you were playing for 2 hours as your battery eater. Duh. :p
[SuperSU] calisro:
better bat stats excludes wake locks during screen on time. Obviously if the screen is on, its using battery... It does a decent job at identifying what's waking your phone which will in turn use more battery. Its not perfect but helps.
[SuperSU] polobunny:
It should, but it doesn't all the time.

A good example is if you check your wakelocks you can see audio_out2 or similar sometimes, which is the audio output and shows even when you play a game (you need the screen on for that), and you can clearly see the wakelock time perfectly matches your game time.