yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Ubuntu Touch Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] f69m:
Maybe my second answer and your post crossed? But anyhow, here are the steps you can take:

1) Figure out the minimum set of capabilities your process needs to run as a non-root user.

2) Write an email to the Ubuntu Phone mailing list, describing the required capabilities and a convincing use case that motivates the engineers to have a hard look into it.

Honestly, I think the chances are slim, given the kind of capabilities you probably need. But Ubuntu Touch is probably your best bet of all the OSs out there.

EDIT: Mind that Ubuntu Touch uses a read-only rootfs, with only some config files being writable (via bind mount) and apt/dpkg is not supported. Your app must be running as a click package as a non-root user, but I believe it is technically possible to elevate an app process with certain capabilities. It would be your job to convince Canonical to make the policy decision to support it and to make the effort of implementing it.

EDIT2 (you see, I am giving it some thought): Not sure, how your business plan looks like or if your app makes this approach feasible, but another option could be to open-source your basic algorithms and try to have them included into Ubuntu Touch. Then cash in on an app to make the features easily accessible.
[Ubuntu Touch Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] RareHare:
Hm...it would be a bit weird for me to justify the benefits my user-space algorithms to Canonical. My app is not an open-source app. I guess I should have mentioned that first. In any case, I can say that I am "experienced" in this field, and my colleagues, at least, are experts in the field, so if the question is whether I am mistaken in thinking I need this capability, the answer is probably no. :)

However, you do have me intrigued regarding the granting of capability for a click application. My guess is that this would have to happen within the context of Ubuntu Store and not any other way or?

I ask because it is not yet definite that we will choose Ubuntu Phone. That is what I am determining now. I would hate to get into a situation where we have to "work with" Canonical to get access to the Linux API that we need, which is why I was suggesting putting the decision into the hands of the user. I would also like to avoid "lobbying" Canonical for a feature. It would be more efficient for us if Canonical would simply tell us whether they are going to allow it or not, to what extent, and what would be involved.

Again, what we are asking for is pretty straightforward - access to the standard Linux WiFi drivers from user-space.

There's really not much more to it. I was hoping that, based upon the assumption that we actually need this, that Canonical would be able to give us an answer.

[P.S. Yes, our posts got crossed. :)]
[Ubuntu Touch Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] f69m:
Well, I somehow guessed it would not be open source, and probably my EDIT2 to my last post (crossed again) is not an option. But make sure to read my first EDIT, it might have helpful information.

I think the question is not, if it is a benefit to Canonical directly, but if it is a benefit to potential users of Ubuntu Touch. The API support you need might be helpful for other applications too.

Any decision taken by the user must first be implemented by Canonical, or there is no way for the user to make that decision. Unfortunately, I am not an expert on UT app development and the UT SDK, working mostly on low-level things like porting UT to my own device. But, as an example, it should be possible to have an API that creates a sub-process with elevated capabilities (there might be a more elegant solution). Still Canonical will have to implement that and to do this, they need some kind of motivation. The motivation could be a good use case that shows potential for other applications or indeed "lobbying" them directly (which probably means to send them some money).

I have not really used those APIs, but I assume that the kernel capabilities needed for this are usually granted to the root user only. I am pretty certain that UT will not allow you to run a process as root, but as mentioned above, it should be possible to create a subprocess with certain elevated capabilities.
[Ubuntu Touch Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] RareHare:
OK.

Well, the API that I need is definitely helpful for other applications. Namely, it is helpful to any application that already uses it. And there are many such applications that use the 802.11 WiFi drivers that come with Linux.

OK.

I am going to send an email to Canonical asking if they could articulate, clearly, in a manner that a Linux C/C++ software engineer can understand, their policy on native application development. Here's what it currently says on their Wiki:

Which applications do run on Ubuntu Touch?

Ubuntu Touch is primarily designed to support web apps, and native apps programmed in qml and javascript or C++. As it is a real linux, of course all non graphical applications run equally as on any other linux system. You can ssh to Ubuntu Touch and run any console based application.

X11 is not supported (so far) so all GUI standard applications will not run.​

This is slightly confusing, because it gives the impression that, with the exception of X11, the run-time environment on Ubuntu Touch is equal to the run-time environment on Ubuntu Desktop.

Obviously, that is not true.

Native applications on Ubuntu Touch are sand-boxed

. My customer can run a console app on Ubuntu Desktop just fine, but on Ubuntu Touch, she cannot not - I guess she could if she rooted or re-flashed her phone, but that is not practical.

I think Canonical should make it clear that native C/C++ applications on Ubuntu Touch will be sand-boxed. Then they should articulate, clearly on their web site, just how that works, at least the part that they know so far.

The reason I feel this is necessary is that there are a lot of developers who read the press releases and see the words open source native C/C++, more open than Android, etc...and they get the impression that it is basically Ubuntu Desktop for small form-factor, but that is not quite true.

Spelling-out, explicitly, Canonical's native C/C++ strategy would save such developers a lot of time and hacking trying to figure out what is feasible and what is not.

To be fair, I just received feedback from a competitor to Ubuntu Touch, giving me assurances that the competing OS will allow the user/owner of the phone to determine whether any software should have root access, etc - basically, like the desktop version of the OS. I will send them an email asking them if they could make public what they have assured me in private.

These are things that should be crystal clear to C/C++ software developers long in advance before committing to a platform. I can only imagine the time that would have been lost if I had misinterpreted what Canonical wrote above, only to find out that there is nothing practical that my customer can do to install my application as easily as they would on Ubuntu Desktop because of the sandbox that cannot be easily turned-off.
[Ubuntu Touch Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] f69m:
Of course I can't speak for Canonical and I might be wrong, but I would really be surprised, if it was possibly to run applications as root on an off-the-shelf Ubuntu Touch device.

Interesting, but then it might be a difference between the "reference" implementation and what is being delivered on an out-of-the-shelf phone. I can't belive a device vendor to take the risk of allowing root access and still providing full warranty. Most likely the user will have to accept a "no warranty" waiver to get root access, if that feature is not completly disabled by the device vendor. The same kind of holds for UT, as sudo works on the development images as mentioned previously.

EDIT: Make sure the feedback you received does refer to an actual device that is/will be available for sale and not to a development platform. Marketing wording can be tricky about simple issues like that,

Agreed, but the same holds for any other platform.
[Ubuntu Touch Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] RareHare:
I was very careful in asking the UT-competitor what their policy would be with regard to the subject of this thread, and they assured me that, when they say open, they really do mean open, as in open-like-the-desktop. However, just now, I found clues on the Internet what they said might not be quite true. So I just sent a grab-me-by-the-ears-while-you-are-speaking email asking them to be clear. :)

However, they have committed to allowing the user to install my application. They know that my application will open a device driver, and they said that it should work fine, that they would allow the user to do it, and that they had already intended to create a feature where the user gets to decide, after a WARNING, though they are not yet certain what this feature will be called. Note that they are not doing this for me alone. They are doing it, in general. In other words, they are doing what I proposed earlier: give the user the choice of whether to "use metal chainsaw".

As far as voiding the warranty goes...honestly, I do not think that will be a problem. As you know, I can write software that will wipe my hard disk clean on Windows, right now, put it up on my web site, and anyone in the world can download that software, and the most that will happen before they install my application is that they will get a brief warning. So the model for allowing the user to do foolish things has been with us for a while, and companies are still very profitable with this model, and despite viruses (I developed anti-virus algorithm that some of you use, btw), most people are happy with the level-of-control they get with their desktop devices. When Windows Vista tried to remove some of it, even moderate users were very angry, as you know.

I think that, especially for cell-phone carriers in the USA (Verizon, AT&T, Sprint)...the reason is not so much to protect the consumer, but to make sure that the user is not able...for example...to remove the bloatware that they put on the phone. It is more about controlling the customer experience for profit than for protection or being liable for damages.

The UT-competitor has probably figured out that there is a market for a truly open mobile platform, one where the decision of what happens to the device reverts to the owner of the device. They are probably counting on all the pent-up demand of C/C++/etc. native software developers who have been trying to escape the Android/Java iOS/* Sandbox, and not only that, the developers who are able to create revolutionary innovations if they had more access to the Linux API. My guess is that, once one OEM takes this path, the others will not have any choice but to follow, because there will be a free-for-all (no pun intended) in the development market. It will be messy, perhaps, but there will no longer be any restrictions on getting the most out of the device.

It will definitely be more efficient to decouple development from deliverance.
[Ubuntu Touch Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] f69m:
Well, sounds good, just hope that they will find an OEM that shares their views. I think Desktop/Windows is not a relevant reference, as nobody will send their PC back to Microsoft, if it is not working. And if you want to use official MS support you are paying dearly. On the other hand support/warranty is a huge concern for phone and tablet vendors.

Again, not being able to run a process as root on a UT device is my personal opinion and I am not speaking for Canonical or their partners.

EDIT: Do the "bad" operations you mentioned work on Windows 8 phone? I suppose not.
[Ubuntu Touch Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] RareHare:
No, the "bad" options do not work on Windows Phone 8, which is too bad, as the code was originally written for Windows.

In fact, WP8 is practically useless for systems-level programming. When I first checked the programmer's API for WP8, it was appallingly restrictive. There was no hope whatsoever for being able to create reasonable, system-level applications. So I was happy when I Googled "Android native C++" and found some hits, only to discover that Google's idea of native C++ development is to have Java call out to a highly restricted blob of C++ code, with all of the headache that comes with that model. I was a bit happier when Tizen made their announcement, only to discover that they, too, would sandbox native C/C++ applications. Meego, etc...you know the story. Each OS vendor claims to be open, then there is a lot of excitement in the media...and then disappointment by developers, because open source does not mean that the end-platform is open.

The UT-Competitor already has a few OEM's" and will soon have more.

I also think that the notion that a smartphone should be strongly linked to a cell-phone carrier will fade by 2020. I also believe that the first company that offers a no-restrictions-whatsoever Linux distro on smartphones will be surprised at how big there is a market for such phone, without the phone carriers. The reason is that there are many applications where a smartphone becomes essentially a PDA, where there is no need for phone carrier (Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, etc.) access whatsoever. My brother, for example, works for a large corporation that would pay more than $1000 per device for the software alone, for perhaps 7,500 units, if they could have it...but they cannot because there is a restrictive layer of fat around the Linux core that prevents us engineers from doing what we need to do. In this situation, it is not practical to develop a custom device. Also, this company would not be interested in the cell-phone nature of the device. In fact, it is to their advantage that it be turned off. A real PDA would have worked, perhaps, but ..where are the PDA's these days?

This is why I think that the first company that does a Truly Open Linux mobile device platform, without restriction, would capture a massive market, a market whose size is being underestimated, IMO.

The company that does the next-best-thing to that...given the end-user the option to open the platform...might do well too, depending on how well they design the mechanism that allows the device to become open.
[Ubuntu Touch Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] nikwen:
Have a look at Robert Scholl's comment here: https://plus.google.com/+MatthewWithers/posts/59T5BuSzh5s

Quite intersting. :good:
[Ubuntu Touch Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] f69m:
Yes, freedom is a nice thing, but unfortunately it tends to be abused on the Internet. I feel that it is important to protect an average user from the worst and that a click-away warning is not enough. Anyway, I guess we hit a dead end again, starting to run in circles.

Maybe one day you can drop the name of that UT-competitor here, so we can follow its success. :)
[Ubuntu Touch Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] RareHare:
I just received word back for UT competitor. Their plan is the following:

[Disclaimer: I do not work for nor speak for competitor in any way. These are only my opinions, and even if they are correct, they are subject to change at sole will of competitor.]

The end-user himself/herself will have the option, on all devices, not just "developer devices", to put the device into developer mode. They are going to formalize breaking the sandbox, so that it is not cryptic. While doing this will be relatively easy,

there will the possibility of voiding the warranty

. My guess is that possibility=likelihood, as you previously suggested.

The end-user himself/herself will have the single-click option of side-loading applications from untrusted sources.

I guess this is a reasonable compromise. The user will get easy way to take control of his/her phone (removing bloatware, installing native C++ applications that s/he knows in advance that she can trust, etc.). The down-side is that user might contaminate ROM, just as s/he might contaminate hard disk on PC. I imagine that there will be a PC tool to restore the OS in this case, while losing any data that was on the phone, of course, just as in the PC world.

But what the competitor has done, which I have been waiting 7 years for...:D ... is put the decision back into the hands of the user. To use analogy that you used earlier, if a person buys PC, then formats hard disk because s/he thought there was virus on it, then struggles to reconstruct the image on hard disk, that would be his/her problem in eyes of PC manufacturer. The UT competitor is taking the same approach, which, I think, is very smart, because they are going to get both kinds of users:

...those who lean toward safety

...those who want the benefit of having control of their device, and are willing to accept the risk that comes with that control.

They are also going to get a huge number of native C/C++ developers who know that they are no longer constrained by the sandbox, if the end user so chooses. Turns out that there are a lot of end-users (industrial, etc.) who would "so-choose". Ironically, in my case, these applications will be developed on Ubuntu Desktop. And in a strange way, because they are going to reestablish developer/user direct relationship, we will be more inclined to put our Apps on their App Store because we know that we will not have to suffer the tedium and inefficiency of trying to create system apps by taking pieces of exposed API as the OS vendor allows it, and constantly begging for exposed API (as I had to do with another non-UT competitor).

The competitor is: SaliFish!
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] ssamurai:
hi I intalled the JB on my phone from this Thread link and it worked perfectly...

but there was a serious problem the new system coudn't read my sim card I always saw on the task bar "emergency call only'" I thought I had to unlock the the phone after trying many ways and many apps I tried with another sim from another provider it worked perfectly I have Galaxy Ace S5830i when I type *#7465625# I see that picture I coudn't use my phone without network so I had to go back and restore my old system

is there any solution please...
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] amolgosavi:
Flash custom kernel..
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] ssamurai:
I already did it I took the kernel in this POST from Mods & Tweaks no change ...
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] amolgosavi:
Then flash stock rom thru odin and then flash acejb rom
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] ssamurai:
before updating to JB I flashed with the stock rom with odin then that custom kernel then the JB the network didn't work with my own sim card but when I tried with another sim card of another provider it worked

I install the the stock rom with odin again but this time I didn't install the custom kernel I still have the same problem can't you see it's not about kernel or rom it's the JB itself cuz I tried an old version of JB a beta version the network was working...
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] amolgosavi:
Then your sim card have problem..unlock your network thru galaxy toolbox
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] ssamurai:
it's not my sim if it's mine why did it work with the beta version of JB and it worked with normal rom I used all the tools that unlock networks with no result I even locked the network and unlocked it just to see if there's any change
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] amolgosavi:
I also used acejb rom but i dont have that problem...anyway use another rom like TWR v9..
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] ssamurai:
I really apreciate your help but can you add some links with your answer please I didn't find anything
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] amolgosavi:
Go to this link..you ll find rom list of ace s5830i..

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2305664

:)
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] ssamurai:
thank you very much but almost of those roms don't upgrade my android to version 4 I've installed the Ace-i-Sure v.10.0.0 and JB beta 3 they worked fine but ACE-I-SURE doesn't upgrade the android version to 4 and JB is a beta version but this JB upgrate it...
[Galaxy Ace S5830i Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] amolgosavi:
Hahahaha...actually there is no rom 4.+ for ace i..only build prop is changed that means that was not 4.+ rom...u also can change 2.3.6 to what u want...

Just use root browser and go to system/build prop..and edit build prop 2.3.6 to what u want.

And if only wants to show 4.+ then flash touchwiz v9 rom..look this
[Galaxy Note 8.0 (Tablet) Q&A, Help & Troubleshooti] sashusmom:
Hello guys. I got my Note 8 at the holidays, I used OTA to get the 4.2.2 update, and I used autoroot, and just checked my recovery and I have Philz touch 5 installed.

When I check for OTA updates, I find the message your device has been modified, no updates available.

I am running stock 4.2.2. Do I need to unroot and return to stock recovery for OTA updates? I did not remove any apps or freeze anything. The only difference is recovery and being rooted. This question is in anticipation of the release of 4.4 kitkat, slated to be pushed to our device- but I'm not holding my breath for when that will be.

Thanks for your input!:)
[Galaxy Note 8.0 (Tablet) Q&A, Help & Troubleshooti] gooberdude:
Hi, I had rooted my 4.2.2 and installed a bunch of root apps... At this time, my Kies says there are no updates available. You will have to wait for 4.4.3 to come out for any update feature to work.

For myself I will do a factory system reset to bring my tablets update apps out of freeze and clear out any cache and the apps that were installed. Once the tablet is booted, I use Kies to push the new firmware once it is released.

Care should be used in restoring apps... many are not 4.4.3 compatible like 4.2.2. So some issues will arise with using customizations. I may hold off another year before installing 4.4.3... I don't like being a tester, been doing that for 30 years now, and like the stability of 4.2.2.
[Galaxy Note 8.0 (Tablet) Q&A, Help & Troubleshooti] sashusmom:
Thanks for that reply. So, will putting back to factory system reset take root off too? And restore factory recovery? Thanks again gooberdude.:D

I have kies set up. And good tip about apps not being compatible with updated platform. I hope to remember that when the time comes!!
[Galaxy Note 8.0 (Tablet) Q&A, Help & Troubleshooti] gooberdude:
Actually if you are using SuperSU you can do a complete wipe of root... Titanium Backup also has a root remover option. I think both force a reboot when given the ok to wipe. I found by doing the factory reset clears out root and all the apps as well all in one stroke. Though it will take some time while it initializes a fresh copy of the OS.

Rooting does not play with boot loaders, or partitioning. It is just like any common app so to speak but are system files to allow root access permissions with apps. So even if you leave a root alone, a ROM upgrade should overwrite the root files as they are not protected or hard encoded into a partition in any way.

I do believe any full ROM upgrade will remove all system mods. But it is good practice to wipe the old OS settings by doing a factory reset. Kies will do all that is needed for installing a new ROM. As it is designed to do that function in the best manner possible.

For the most part Odin is a tool that requires a certain amount of user input to perform tasks... it is not fully automatic as to clearing and formatting key areas before loading custom firmware. As custom firmwares may load differently than OEM ROMs.
[Galaxy Note 8.0 (Tablet) Q&A, Help & Troubleshooti] sashusmom:
That's what I thought too. I am surprised that OTA says I have altered the OS, so I can't do OTA upgrade. The only thing I think I have done is root. I just can't remember 3 months ago if I tweaked it any other way.:(

I have used ODIN- mostly when I got this tablet back in November. Had to learn how to use it, but it was fine. I always read 3 times, and do things correctly :) Sort of like measure twice, cut once:silly: Most likely will odin back to stock when the time comes. More work, more brain power required :)