yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] b_randon14:
If you know anything about using version control systems and patches and the such its not always just as easy as saying git revert crappy upstream change I don't like. Just saying. I agree with pulser that cm is going in a questionable direction. I mean come on they are talking about private signing keys for ROMs and apps for user builds.

You should be thankful for pulser even wanting to build for the note 2 since cm itself is not showing much in street in one of the best selling phones. I mean the s3 has nightlies (same CPU, marginally different board) and the note 2 lte's get love (same CPU same platform board, addition of lte radios).
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Mazda:
Your'e right! I should be soooo thankful for someone compiling CM.......I mean, God knows that's one of the hardest things to do! hahaha

Hell, it takes real skill to repo sync and then compile from source.....RIGHT?

Also, let's not even begin to talk about git reverting commits...........MY GOD!! We all know that's extreme right there!

I hear you got to go to college for 4 years and even then, you can only begin to understand how to git revert something lol

NOW seriously, I know you guys are mad because CM is the doing the unthinkable and actually taking control of their ROM but do you guys read what you're typing?

Nobody in the last 10 pages or so, has actually come up with an alternative to this "problem". Pulser did nothing but throw CM under the bus then argue about how they're going down the wrong path. All his co-signers just tagged on to what he said.

If you guys are really upset about this then why not push for pulser to roll his sleeves up, fork CM and you guys can demand what you want from him!

BUT that would make too much sense huh?

Is easier to complain and call CM names and turn this into a us versus them type of thing, right?

Also this is the last time I'm posting here so go ahead and reply to get the last word but I'm done beating a dead horse here!
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] b_randon14:
Wow really? And I'm sure you are the go to guy when it comes to java right. Like you got your masters in computer engineering from MIT. And I guess you have never built nor maintained an unofficial ROM before because its obviously not just repo sync and the build. I mean yeah most of the work on the n7100 has been done but that doesn't mean pulser is just setting back with his bash script to repo sync then build the n7100 ROM. I love how your post gets a bunch of likes for trying to make a mockery of what I said. Birds of a feather right?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] mrjayviper:
his suggestion for the fork seems the best idea if pulser_g2 is not liking the direction the ROM base is going to? it is still their ROM and no one is paying them to maintain it.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Lupe Fiasco:
Basically what he's trying to say is, Instead of complaining to CM why don't you just ask Pulser to do something instead.

Also, from looking at his threads I can say he prob knows his stuff, at least more than you from the look of it.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] b_randon14:
I never said I knew more than anyone. All I see is a bunch of people hating on pulser and I was trying to defend him.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Lupe Fiasco:
People aren't hating on Pulser, they just saying that he should quit complaining and fix it.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] mrjayviper:
why don't you encourage pulser_g2 to fork CM instead if he truly feels it's not going the same way he's comfortable with? o.O

all the source is there for him to play with
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] astoncheah:
ya, why none of the moderators came here to tell us to stop those unrelated arguments and focus on the development things? (including mine):p
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] jcrompton:
I too have this issue. Seems to be same with couple other Android 4.3 Roms, and very intermittent so it had been impossible for me to get a logcat
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] crypta:
Nice, how the haters always say the same, thank themself, so they don't feel so alone, ignore glitches and paradox messages within their own words, reducing the whole concept of doing thing to "just run the scripts".

Who of you CM defender fanboys invested some time in best practise CI? Who invested some time in history and current politics? Social and human behavior?

The discussion already stopped, if you want to exchange the thank counters, use your older posts. Everything is said and it won't change anything to write it the 4th time down.

Go, play somewhere else!
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] lu1gj3s:
Why on earth is this thread still open? Get it deleted [MENTION=2178960]pulser_g2[/MENTION] and stop whining like a little girl. [MENTION=4386816]Kashamalaga[/MENTION] has picked up where you've left it on the 10th. His thread deserves the attention this one is getting.

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2383961
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] pulser_g2:
I have a number of solutions to these problems, and am working on them :)

I've justified why they are going down the wrong path, and a huge number of people agree. Anyway that's over, I will seek to address the issue of direction, so that you have choice here between a ROM that is clearly intended to be for the "masses" (and thus comply with every whim of Google, like "no writing to external storage"), and a ROM that is intended for the power user.

I've never agreed with the CM philosophy of "someone might use this feature and make something unintended happen" - custom ROMs are for power users. While CM want to make their ROM for the mainstream, I have no intention to. A power user has enough basic knowledge to enable something, and if he doesn't like it, disable it... If it causes issues, he'll disable it and remember "OK, that wasn't what I wanted"

There's no reason to remove the freedom of choice from the end user.

And finally to those saying "shut up, stop complaining", I will quote a user on reddit;

Transparency is key. CM have responded to the claims, and have declined to "deny" them on each occasion, giving PR-style responses. It's not hard to deny them and say "that's nonsense, we'd never do that", but then when they do, all hell shall break loose.

In the meantime, I advise against using CM Accounts until they are subject to more review (as CM themselves say), as I believe there to be a number of issues with the design of the system, which could put a user at risk if his/her phone were stole (given it's intended partly as an anti-theft wipe tool)
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
So... Here are my conclusions. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

1. Pulser is a good guy, he's no terrorist, whiny little girl, bomber.

2. CM is not a terrorist organisation.

3. It's 21st century and people still say "you're" instead of "your".
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Slagathor:
JUST STOP!! X(

Please open separate thread for this discussion or change the title. I really am annoyed with this. I don't care about the rumors about CM! When I open this thread I want to read about Pulsers Rom and his (in my opinion) brilliant progress, nothing else.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] nitrous²:
I just nulled point 3.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
Actually, with that post, I was trying to draw a line to that issue.

Meaning... full stop on the "oh you, CM" thing. Do we all agree? And let [MENTION=2178960]pulser_g2[/MENTION] get on with what he wants to implement in his builds and... provide us with CM10.2 goodies :)

In other words : back on (initial) topic...
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] hicks:
Posting in general after reading back several pages, not at anyone specifically, although less specifically at some than others.

If OP's post on licensing code for commercial use is true, it is alarming.

Cyanogen have been the original modders rom since the G1. We all know this. Hell, I installed G1 based builds on my HTC Kaiser. You'll see that although my post count is low, I have been here since original winmob days.

Although I am not involved in this area of development, merely a user, I am involved in other open source areas. The familiar call of "if you don't agree with it, then why don't you do it" is no stranger to me. Criticism of critics in this way is generally used against people who don't know what they're talking about. It's quite clear that pulser_g2 cannot be accused of this.

Calling a long standing senior XDA developer and admin out and telling them that a normal member would have been censured for the same post is ludicrous. With responsibility comes a voice. Same goes for suggesting that this forum has secret forums that not every user can access. No ****. Show me a forum that doesn't.

For what it's worth, I scratched my head as to why the advanced menu was missing on my n7100, at first assuming it was down to an early build, with missing support - not using this 4.3 build, by the way, another CM based one. I thought I'd done something wrong! Much googling ensued.

A deliberate decision to remove this seems strange. I mean - specifically removing a feature that makes the experience on Samsung phones really nasty? Samsung, the minor OEM? Justification for this particular removal is hard to imagine. Samsung phones without mDNIe just look nasty, like a TV with colour saturation turned up full. This is a major reason for me, personally, to flash stock off. Why remove it? Don't like it - fine - don't use it. More likely - don't notice - you're probably still on stock.

Could *I* code a replacement? No, I certainly could not. Am I sad to see a senior XDA dev and admin singling one CM dev out like yet? Yes, I am. Do I underestimate the significance of that post? No, I do not.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] pnsdhrn:
Nothing seems productive and progressing here except extra long discussions without any constructive results!
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] FUSIONdev:
Quoted from a post on the PA thread:

http://malideveloper.arm.com/develo...source-mali-gpus-linux-kernel-device-drivers/

Seems to be the solution to our graphic glitches...
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] FUSIONdev:
Ehm...

http://get.cm/?device=n7100

http://changelog.bbqdroid.org/#/n7100/next

First "official" build... :good:

Thanks [MENTION=2178960]pulser_g2[/MENTION] for the work on device tree and its commits!
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] anoneemooz:
What's with the sudden jump in size?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] FUSIONdev:
What do you mean? The jump of commits curve?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] anoneemooz:
The experimental build is 194.98 mb while all previous ones were around 160-ish mb. Even the other 4.3 ROMs are around 160-170 only..not complaining, but just curious :o
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
[MENTION=2178960]pulser_g2[/MENTION]

Could this help provide a fix to the graphical issues we are currently facing?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] anoneemooz:
I linked that in some other threads and kashmalaga seemed optimistic about it. :)
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] fatihaktas1988:
I can t see a official edition
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
"official" =/= official

Sent from hyperspace
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] FUSIONdev:
My post was meant for 10.2 version that now is built as experimental.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] pulser_g2:
No idea about the size jump tbh. But that seems a large jump.

Not looked at them as I've been working on something else pretty much constantly to try to get it ready.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] CMNein:
Glad to hear you boys have the build back on track.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] paarkhi:
We are patiently waiting for what you have for us (that something else you are working on), we'd always prefer your builds to flash. Thanks for the continuous support for the device.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] shap08:
An update has been pushed. 10.2-20130826-nightly

Appears to have fixed flickering graphics bug.

Well done.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] anoneemooz:
There doesn't seem to be anything on the git related to that being fixed. Try looking at a gif..that's what usually causes things to go crazy. Or try the speedtest.net app I think.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] shap08:
yeah okay it is still present :P
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] wtr_dhd:
Speedtest, winamp, best noticable to check if bug is still present indeed :)
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] shingers5:
On latest nightly graphic glitches are still present but not as bad. Still have gmail and stock browser issues but way less and severe than previous. This rom , PA and official cm10.2 are the 3 I use right now.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Lekebil:
after the last nightly 0827, my play store won't connect, anyone else experiencing this?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] shingers5:
Thats why i use PA gapps with this rom. Mutlidpi playstore and i have no issues at all
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] virani_joush:
Have you flashed the gapps again after flashing the latest?

Sent from my GT-N7100
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Lekebil:
Thanks, I'll give a shot.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] bandroid842:
EFS backup?

Can anyone tell me how to do an EFS backup with this ROM or CM 10.1? The normal Terminal-based methods I found online haven't been working, and I only have a mac.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] crypta:
If your phone is rooted, just look for the directory and copy it, e.g. to ext sdcard.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] $ideWinder:
Type this into the terminal

su

dd if=/dev/block/mmcblk0p3 of=/storage/sdcard1/efs.img bs=4096
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] bandroid842:
Thank you! I think it just worked. Could you tell me how to restore, just in case? :)
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] shingers5:
There are about 2 or 3 threads about efs backup and restore in this same forum. Just have a quick look and you will find. Most efs issue happen when flash new stock roms with stock kernel. Ive found that when flashing these roms and use custom stock kernel i avoid such issues. Eg. I flashed Stomax Ultimate with stock kernel and old modem dlk7 and imei was unknown etc but flashed adam kernel and all was back to normal
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] $ideWinder:
To restore

dd if=/storage/sdcard1/efs.img of=/dev/block/mmcblk0p3 bs=4096
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] crypta:
What's most annoying, is the Bluetooth behavior. If a headset gets disconnected and reconnected, the dialer freezes. You can answer a call but it's silent. If you hang up, the clock freezes and sui does the dialer.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] seb_reunion:
Regarding the graphic glitchs, i just applied this fix and it seems to work on this rom too.

No more graphic glitches so far.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] crypta:
First quick test, it seems good.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Goneeuro:
Sorry. Wrong thread.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] nitrous²:
Entropy512 about to leave Android?! What he says actually emphasizes pulser_g2's words...

Sorry to bring this up again, but looks like sh!t just got real.

Remember we've got the RC build on 28th of august? Even though Exynos devices were marked as "never stable" by the CM team itself, to never reach any state beyond nightly.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
I'm not sure what they're going to accomplish with that. If it's stable, is it going to earn them anything - will they be able to ship Note 2's with CM10.1 on them...? :silly:

Cause that's where they wanna get : putting CM on phones and selling them... Kind of like Xiaomi, right?

---------- Post added at 09:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:32 AM ----------

Perhaps [MENTION=2178960]pulser_g2[/MENTION] can implement this starting from the upcoming builds.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] lgstoian:
Progress is being made on the LIMA driver , here is a new status update.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] nitrous²:
Care to be enlightened. I'm pretty new to Exynos, thus it makes me the more curious.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
So... That is something that will enhance the capabilities of the Mali driver? Meaning improved graphic performance / bye-bye glitches?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] lgstoian:
This is a project to reverse engineer the closed source binary driver for the Mali 400 GPU. That means we won't be dependent on the binary blobs anymore once this project matures enough. Will it have better performance then the closed source one , I don't know as things are still in their early stages. Though from the look of things it's quite possible that it will perform better.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
And... it will be pushed to CM or how is it going to be deployed?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] gondsman:
All demos for lima were on a mesa/X11 driver, don't expect CM to use lima drivers anytime soon.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
The drivers will be for the kernel... right?

So at least kernel devs will be able to implement them in their builds and still deploy awesomeness :good: ... right? :)
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] gondsman:
The reverse engineering can be used to develop an android driver, sure. But I wouldn't count on it, I think that we'll all have a new phone before it will be ready.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Formhault:
So... I take this new lima thing is / will be useless :confused:
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] lgstoian:
[MENTION=3740419]gondsman[/MENTION] :

There were several demos a while ago on an Android tablet using the Lima driver.

[MENTION=4129455]Formhault[/MENTION] :

The Lima driver is very useful once it matures more. The issue is we don't have many Dev's still interested in our devices and the one that we still do have may not have the required skills to make this work. Let's say this thing get's quite usable in a year from now , who do you think will be left interested in implementing it in CM ?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] gondsman:
I haven't followed the latest developments, I remember the quake 3 demos and they were using X. Yours is a good news so, even if as you've already said, it will probably not be so useful for us.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] lgstoian:
[MENTION=3740419]gondsman[/MENTION] :

The Dev has stated that the driver once cleaned up should be compatible with any Linux Window Manager. So it should run X , Wayland , Mir and our Surface Flinger. Once he publishes these changes in the coming weeks in theory we would be able to use it in CM as replacement for the current blob we use , though we still need a closed binary for the shader. But again what Dev is even remotely interested and has knowledge of Linux GPU drivers to do this ?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] $ideWinder:
Could anyone please post the Device Settings.apk file from this rom??
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] nitol:
Here

http://db.tt/nlem440g

Cheers
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] crypta:
Don't get me wrong, but will there be any progress or updates?

This Bluetooth problem really begins to be a notable downside.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] crypta:
Strange thing, clock freezes sometimes in status bar.

...if this is of any value... seems a bit quiet in here.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] krazie1:
And it looks like you were right pulser, cyanogenmod is going mainstream
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Slagathor:
And why wouldn't they? Look at the success of MIUI. I really cannot blame them, just feel sorry for myself for not using free software anymore. Just remember paying costumers are high maintenance costumers.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] rashid.fairus:
the end of OPEN SOURCE and GPL, gratzzz:D

via Note2
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] DubelBoom:
Now everything is clear ;)

https://plus.google.com/106978520009932034644/posts/L8FJkrcahPs

I think what they did is very disgusting, and just because of this I WONT get a CM inc. device!
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] pulser_g2:
Well, as the above posts show, I think those predictions were fairly spot on.

I've not forgotten the note 2, or any other devices. Panic not, fine open source appreciators. Don't fear that the commercialisation and move away from transparency and openness shall force you to suffer, because it won't...

While some argue going commercial is good, consider who the duty of care is owed to. As a community project, the duty of care is to its users. As a company, the responsibility is entirely towards your investors and shareholders.

Are your interests as a user coming first in these secretive discussions? Or are only corporate interests being considered? You'll never know under the new regime... So I'd take every single action or inaction with a large quantity of salt...

In a hypothetical world, what would happen if a commercial Rom project was asked to install some overly intrusive advertising network support framework, to help track users. You know fine well I'd hit "-2" and ensure the world heard about them. But what about a certain company? Would they speak out if one of their investors tried to adversely influence the end product?

Just something to consider. I sure as heck won't be running any commercially developed operating system or high privilege software on my phones, and I encourage others to follow as much as possible. Trust those whose motivations are transparent and are to benefit you, not those whose motivations are driven by profit alone.

I'd love to talk more about this, but the more I talk, the less gets done... But remember that open source will always triumph over closed, or proprietary, or commercial solutions.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] lyrois:
Exactly. The only one with high privileges should be the user or a transparent substitute – and certainly nobody who has to answer to investors instead of 'consumers' of their product.

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Xparent Skyblue Tapatalk 2
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] jcrompton:
Are you going to do any more work on this ROM in the future or are you going a different direction because of all the above?
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] crypta:
To continue the main discussion here,I would like to state, that I read a news post lately about CM Inc. where 7m venture capital was mentioned.

Venture capital isn't given for human reasons, just for profit.

And as a responsible founder you have to decide if you are willing to sell your ideals or not.

There ate no ideals behind venture capital companies beside from marketing reasons.

To sum this up: I hope for an decent AOKP Rom, as CM is dead for me, if they really took venture capital.
[Galaxy Note II Original Android Development] Slagathor:
Come on guys, this is not fair. You are stating quite extreme business models and company considerations which only benefit your point.

To play the advocate of the devil: Xiaomi is a fine example of how Android can really be programmed for the great mass (not only for the few with programming skills). I agree with CM when they say Android can be better and more UI friendly. Besides, innovations doesn't come cheap... research is fast paced and one need to work full-time to beat the competition.

In short: I hope you guys are wrong, but I won't be so naive to say you can't be right.