yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Hero CDMA Android Development] XAnimal:
Its has nothing to do with loyalty, I've seen it happen remember a device called the gameshark back in the day well interact at the time made some very specific deals with certain members of the community well bottom line they failed to deliver so we got bloodthristy much as you are right now sir, and we attacked them as a company on several fronts and it was big and messy, so after awhile datel said **** it and interact was abolished and the brand name sold to mad cats. I've been apart of stuff 1st hand when companies get pushed too hard they either push back or drop it. I personally don't care what u do but you little "internet vigilantes" can cause way more harm than good. Regardless of how frustrating it may be you must be tactile to receive what u want. You wouldn't start a charade like this against McDonald's to bring back supersize would you? No because most people don't care and wouldn't back u up. I'm sorry but our numbers are few friend and tactics but be decided because a house divided against itself cannot stand. Lincoln knew what he was talking about
[Hero CDMA Android Development] XAnimal:
I understand I would like for the source to be released aswell but I'm saying there are better ways to go about things as opposed to an 'assault' that will just make them defensive and only send scripted replies. And as far as the stealing part then contact the authors and get them involved if they will great if they don't care then we're kinda like PETA throwing paint on fur coats yea it makes a statement and makes PETA seem like assholes. but does it make anyone think and change their mind about animal rights probably not. I mean why do we want the kernel better roms? Well if your not running ASOP your hypocrite
[Hero CDMA Android Development] gu1dry:
WTF are you smoking?

A.) AOSP ROMs benefit from the release of the kernel source, just as much as any other custom ROM.

B.) A clean, fully working AOSP ROM benefits the entire community as a good clean base to build cutom ROMs on top of.

C.) How am I hypocrite for running an AOSP based ROM?

D.) Please learn to proof-read what you typed, before you post it. Makes it easier for you to get your point across ;)
[Hero CDMA Android Development] XAnimal:
Lol, Sorry I'm on my hero right now and if your not running ASOP then your a hypocrite when u mention stealing but ill let this thread get back on topic I just had to put my two cents in about the repeat and mindless attacking that he was calling for.
[Hero CDMA Android Development] gu1dry:
Oh ok, but just FYI, incogneato IS running AOSP 1.6...
[Hero CDMA Android Development] incogneato:
I'm not here to argue with you (or anybody else) about right and wrong. I paid $539.00 for a phone that is to include certain software. Unless you or anyone else would like to reimburse me the funds, stay out of my way while I attempt to get it from the seller(s).
[Hero CDMA Android Development] wasupwithuman:
Though I just gave my hero to my girlfriend, and got the moto droid. Sprint did email me back about the kernel saying they would forward my message to the correct department, and get back to me. So I will keep you all updated
[Hero CDMA Android Development] cmccracken:
Unless you are a Linux kernel developer, who has contributed code under the GPL, and whose copyrighted work is being violated, then HTC doesn't owe you ****. I find it ridiculous the amount of people that are whining that HTC owes them something. The only people that really have a right to be personally upset are those that write the Linux kernel. IMO, everyone else complaining is just leeching off the work of those that release under the GPL, and you are no better. It gets tiring hearing people that are SO personally put out by HTC not releasing the source, and acting all high and mighty and threatening HTC when they aren't even the copyright holder. Your $539 pays for 0.0000838258165% of HTC's Development budget this year. Cry me a river.

YES, HTC is in violation of the GPL. Guess what? So is every ROM developer here. Where is YOUR source posted (for those bits that HTC hasn't withheld)? ROM devs- do you have documented places to obtain all GPL software contained in your ROMs? This includes not only the source code, but also files used to "control compilation" and "control installation" (Makefiles, shell scripts, etc...). Busybox (which I know has a custom install in Fresh ROM, which I'm using) just won a GPL lawsuit. Where are the Makefiles for Fresh's Busybox? (I'm just using this as an example, not attacking FreshROM, I love it)

If you want to take HTC to task for their GPL violation, fine. But get off your high horse and don't be a **** about it and ruin HTC's relationship with the open-source community.
[Hero CDMA Android Development] posguy99:
Yes, I'm sure random kernel developers will give your spam ALL the respect it deserves.
[Hero CDMA Android Development] posguy99:
Or there *is* no kernel support for the CDMA Hero, and it's all in the enabler that's running. Has anyone thought of that?
[Hero CDMA Android Development] posguy99:
Yes, this attitude will certainly cause HTC to pay attention to you and give you what you're demanding.
[Hero CDMA Android Development] cmccracken:
I have actually personally checked this out. There are in fact missing kernel source files in the source the HTC is distributing. These files are referenced in defines from the kernel config on the CDMA Hero. The CDMA has a specific kernel, and some of the source for that kernel has not be released by HTC (intentionally, or otherwise- could have been an oversight that they haven't figured out yet).
[Hero CDMA Android Development] djsplitimage:
you know, if people spent as much time actually digging in the code and attempting to fix problems as they do flaming each other, we would've had 2.1 complete by now. Maybe it's just me (since I'm not a programmer) but I would think a board like this would serve one of three purposes

1) a resource for devs to create roms, fix bugs, and share programming tips and tricks

2) a sensible place for visitors to come and learn some more about their investment and be brave enough to try out new thing and provide devs with feedback on errors or try to troubleshoot their own errors

3) A mature place where conversations about things such as this whole GPL/Code thing can take place.

I've seen very few posts that specifically call out what it is thats missing and why HTC should repackage and re-release a kernel that they already made available. If there were more e-mails like those I'm sure the logic in HTC having to release a CDMA specific Hero kernel again would probably make more sense.

To those who just want to be right, get a grip, you know what you know, you may work in this field or that one and have extensive knowledge of whatever, but we're not at your job, we're in a community environment where you either get with it or get lost. Everyone here wants the same thing, so how about we all collaborate to put forth a simple e-mail, firm yet flexible, that details the reason for needing it. The whole "it's under GPL it should be out waaah waaah..." nonsense falls on deaf ears unless you get specific as to why.

Some people still living in a "Windows Mobile" environment....."Android"? remember? Open Source? Strong supportive community.....that last part seems to be missing.

/rant
[Hero CDMA Android Development] chuckhriczko:
Wow. Harsh words for a junior member... a non programmer no less. Here's the deal. The number one rule in programming (well, one of the top rules) is to not reinvent the wheel. Can we put CDMA capabilities into the GSM kernel? Yeah, probably. But HTC has already done it. Considering it's licensed under the GPL we want them to release what is rightfully the Linux communities property.

I have been thinking for a while now on how to add CDMA capabilities to our kernel and I'm looking into it as we speak. Now look, I don't yell. I am a very community oriented member who doesnt enjoy yelling at or flaming other members. But I choose right now to temporarily flame.

[MODS, be warned. I am going to curse]

Get the hell out of my thread! I am sick and ****ing tired of people submitting non constructive posts. If you want to help then help. If not then don't read the thread. It's as simple as that. If you don't like what we are doing then you build the ****ing kernel with CDMA support. Like I said, I don't flame people or yell at people and I am not going to do it after this but if you are not willing to do that then you have no ****ing right to come over here and tell us that we are doing it wrong and then not do anything yourself. Be constructive or piss off!

Ok. So, how about some kernel building guys! Woo hoo!
[Hero CDMA Android Development] chuckhriczko:
Earlier in the thread we have confirmed that HTC does owe us the source. That's the land of the GPL. That's international law. That is black and white. The devs here have already confirmed the kernel source would help. The problem with upgrading to 2.x is that we need the 2.6.29 kernel. When it's all said and done we need this and we are owed this as the community.
[Hero CDMA Android Development] djsplitimage:
Cool, so with that said, want me to start making that template e-mail I suggested for people to use or you? Because if I'm to do it then I'll need to know the specifics as far as why there should be a specific CDMA kernel released (missing files, and any other technical info that is different from the GSM release besides the obvious "its a CDMA phone" thing) The more technically specific it is the better, so that way the point that there is a big difference between what's out now and what is usable to us is made painstakingly clear.

Just like you, I'm all for helping, and less about the *****ing. Since I'm not a programmer, but can honestly say I'm a pretty good writer, that's how I'm contributing, so yeah....suggestions
[Hero CDMA Android Development] animal7296:
I just got off of the phone and a guy there (Ryan i believe) said he has spoken to the development team and that the kernel source code on http://developer.htc.com/ is the only part of the code that is covered in the gpl. The rest of the code we are looking for is proprietary and not subject to the GPL licensing laws.

Not sure if this helps at all, actually i am sure it does not help at all. But I am just reporting what i have been told.

If there is any thing else i can do let me know.
[Hero CDMA Android Development] obelisk79:
HTC doesn't owe us the 2.6.29 kernel, they owe us the 2.6.27 kernel which could provide us with insight into compiling a functional 2.6.29 kernel. Once HTC releases an upgrade to android which uses the 2.6.29 kernel then they would need to require that as well.

Technically they don't owe the community anything, they need to honor the linux developers who work on the kernel and also honor the gpl license under which it was released.

I wish I could close this thread, it's a trainwreck of misinformation and has gone entirely off topic.
[Hero CDMA Android Development] cmccracken:
chuckhriczko, is HTC shipping a binary 2.6.29 kernel on any CDMA Hero? Mine only has 2.6.27. If they are not distributing 2.6.29 on the CDMA Hero yet, then they are under absolutely no GPL obligation to release any 2.6.29 source code for it. Perhaps I misunderstood, and you were referring to needing the current (.27) code to attempt to port to .29?
[Hero CDMA Android Development] animal7296:
Here are a couple of websites that Ryan at HTC sent me in an e-mail. I am sure they have been researched but it is just a bit more info i recieved. If it helps, good, if not I tried.

http://github.com/loxK/android-msm-2.6.29-hero

http://github.com/cyanogen/cm-kernel/tree/android-2.6.29-eclair
[Hero CDMA Android Development] realmrealm:
a start?

Whatever we create should probably go to the legal department (if they have one) as they are paid to cover the companies butt and may take this more seriously.

Here is a possible start on a letter.....

--------------

Hi,

We have noticed that you are providing phones labeled as "HTC Hero" through the service provider: Sprint. As I'm sure you're aware, the kernel that is being used on these phones is released under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2.

Under section (3) of the license, when distributing derivitives of this code you are obliged to either:

a) accompany it with the source code, or

b) provide a written offer to provide the source code on request for no more than the cost of physically performing the distribution

Currently you are doing neither of these, and as a result are breaching the license of the code. Previous requests have been met with responses from HTC that this code has been released already. This is a false statement: the source code currently available on HTC's developer website is for a GSM Hero phone. The Sprint Hero uses a different kernel than the GSM Hero, and thus requires that source code for that specific kernel is also released. We are requesting that you conform to your obligations under the license.

Please do not misunderstand we are not requesting the source code for the entire operating system, but for the kernel, 2.6.29 (or is it 2.6.27?), for the Sprint CDMA Hero. Which falls under the rules set forth in the GPL license that HTC accepted when they chose to modify it.

Thanks,

--

NAME - EMAIL ADDRESS
[Hero CDMA Android Development] bobdude5:
i like this one..it doesnt sound threatening just making a request..specifically points out what is being requested and nicely put together
[Hero CDMA Android Development] realmrealm:
oh yeah...

we should also include a link to the GPL:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html

-AndyS-
[Hero CDMA Android Development] cmccracken:
From what I can tell, it looks like the following files should be present in the 2.6.27 CDMA source, and are not. This list is not comprehensive. These are only the ones referenced from the CONFIG_MACH_HEROC config options. There are most likely other CDMA-Hero-specific config options that likely reference their own files (that may also be missing).

arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc.c
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc-keypad.c
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc-panel.c
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc-mmc.c
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc-camsensor.c
arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc-rfkill.c
[Hero CDMA Android Development] djsplitimage:
So in the GSM there are similarly named files except they just say "hero" instead of "heroc" right? Trying to list what the difference what the difference is between what's out and what we really need.
[Hero CDMA Android Development] cmccracken:
Yeah, the CONFIG_MACH_HEROC tells it to build the *.o's for all of those *.c's.

Here's a few more config options that are set on CDMA, but not on GSM (yes, I'm copying and pasting from a diff, but someone has to get this stuff in writing). Keep in mind that the CDMA kernel is used for a few different devices, so not all of this stuff is relevant to us. However, it does all need to be released under the GPL. Each of these options needs to be researched to see what files they reference, and what the state of those files is. I'm hoping that some of the senior dev's that have been working with this stuff for awhile will step up and help provide documentation for what kernel stuff is missing here...

CONFIG_ELF_CORE=y

CONFIG_BUILD_CIQ=y

CONFIG_BUILD_OMA_DM=y

CONFIG_ARCH_MSM7501A=y

CONFIG_MACH_NEONC=y

CONFIG_MACH_HEROC=y

CONFIG_MACH_DESIREC=y

CONFIG_MACH_HEROCT=y

CONFIG_MSM_AMSS_VERSION=4410 (set to '6355' in GSM)

CONFIG_MSM_AMSS_VERSION_4410=y

CONFIG_MSM7XXX_MODEM_BUSY_COUNT_MAX=3

CONFIG_MSM_SMD_DATA5_64K=y

CONFIG_HTC_35MM_REMOTE=y

CONFIG_HTC_AUDIOJACK=y

CONFIG_TOUCHSCREEN_SYNAPTICS_T1007=y

CONFIG_TOUCHSCREEN_MELFAS_I2C=y

CONFIG_INPUT_DUMMY_KEYPAD=y

CONFIG_INPUT_CAPELLA_CM3602=y

CONFIG_AMP_TPA6130A=y

CONFIG_USB_FUNCTION_SERIAL=y

CONFIG_USB_FUNCTION_PROJECTOR=y
[Hero CDMA Android Development] wasupwithuman:
Are people really asking if we have the right? Come on. Its a Linux kernel, first thing you should think of is gpl. Technically they us. .27 but when they release. 29 they owe us that. I think sprint might be better to ask, they seem to have a little Better customer service...
[Hero CDMA Android Development] gu1dry:
I have altered what you have posted. Here is my version/contribution:
[Hero CDMA Android Development] wasupwithuman:
Sounds very professional.:cool:
[Hero CDMA Android Development] djsplitimage:
Gu1dry, I definitely like the letter, I think however we should change the lingo in that last line from "specific" to "an example". We're dealing with corporate lawyers (if I'm correct in assuming that this is where this particular letter is going), and if you list only a handful of things and there's more, but preface it with some sort of terminology that makes it sound like a finite list, they'll just give you that finite list if they make any kind of move.
[Hero CDMA Android Development] gu1dry:
I try ;) :p

I have altered. Read it & point out another other suggests you have.
[Hero CDMA Android Development] Kcarpenter:
Been through 4 years of college, and I was told by every programming professor that the number 1 rule of programming was "You MUST have a big ego, you are going to be able to do something that VERY VERY few people can."...Number 2 Rule was that garbage about reusing code....blah... thats for the birds! :cool:

On the other note. I have emailed HTC and directly asked them for files.

I need the following files to correctly compile the HTC provided Kernel for the CDMA Hero.

arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc.c

arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc-keypad.c

arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc-panel.c

arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc-mmc.c

arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc-camsensor.c

arch/arm/mach-msm/board-heroc-rfkill.c

These files are not included in the source that was provided. I am asking for the files to be provided under the terms of the GPL v2 which the Kernel is licnesed under. Since the files are directly incorperated into the Kernel, they are required to be distributed, hopefully this was just an oversite.

Thank you,

It's 1:15 in the morning and that was probably the biggest line of BS i have hammered out this year....:D Sorry if its not accurate, im still newb-ish to all this Linux DEV stuff.

I am also working on (hopefully done tomorrow) a lengthy letter to HTC picking apart the previous replies to users so that the canned response is dispelled before it is sent. Also outling what parts of GPL we belive they are violating.

Thanks to everyone for all of the Info they have researched thus far, it is very helpful. A lot less googleing.

--Wow, i never though I would use google in verb form.-- :o
[Hero CDMA Android Development] maxtheheathen:
Wow, this thread is back to being rather constructive. The latest requests are quite well written. Cotacting the legal department sounds good,

Besides the publicly available info:

Legal Department

HTC America, Inc.

13920 SE Eastgate Way, Suite 400

Bellevue, WA 98005

Phone: (425) 679-5318

Fax: (425) 861-1715

Including an e-mail for sending DMCA notices and other copyright claims,

copyright_NA@htc.com, sort of appropriate.

Perhaps LevelUp Studio might have a few more e-mails and numbers from HTC's lawyers after receiving a nastygram over Beautiful Widgets

Just a thought, keep up the good work guys!
[Hero CDMA Android Development] kylez64:
I like this idea and can't wait to hear their response :)
[Hero CDMA Android Development] realmrealm:
wowsers

@gu1dry - you have definitely spruced up the letter quite a bit, thanks!

There are a couple of grammatical/spelling issues (I assume from when the letter was being edited) we can fix these up at the end.

Does anyone see anything in gu1dry's letter that should be different/added?

I would say we give it 24 hours to allow people (on XDA) to give some feedback in case we are forgetting anything. Then if you want I can have my wife do the final editing (she's an editor). Then we can decide on the particulars like what methods we can use to get it to them (letter, email, submital on website) and then we press the go button.

What do you guys think about setting a time period? I think that as long as we set something reasonable (not "within 24 hours") that it would help with expediency on their part. Do you agree? I was thinking of asking for it by the 15th of January. I know that is a long time from now, but 10 business days is very reasonable (I think) for them to parse out the asked for source, make sure they have all the approvals to release it from internal people, package it, and get it out on their website. This isn't a one man business that can just go "ok" and then upload it to their website that afternoon. There are politics and procedures that we will need to realize are going to have to go on internally at HTC for this code to see the light of day.

Also I think that we should tell them what is happening if it is not received, or a suitable response is not received by the 15th. I would suggest that we tell them that we are going to release our findings of their violation of international license in the form of a press release to print and digital media outlets on the 16th.

I really think that we need to make sure the letter has a tone of:

"We are releasing public these found violations of international licenses on the 16th, so I would hurry up and get that code on the site so that we don't have to"

instead of:

"Please give us the code or else we are going to tell everyone about it."

The first one makes it look imminent, and will make more urgency with them dealing with it. The second one makes it look like a threat, and they may try to call us on it, and see if we are bluffing.

I'm glad we seem to back on topic here, lets keep going.

-AndyS-
[Hero CDMA Android Development] cmccracken:
Both statements have a threatening tone. The first thing a REAL lawyer will tell you is not to make any threats unless it is an actual lawyer making the threats. If we simply REQUEST the files, and they don't comply, then they get a cease and desist from an actual lawyer (go through gpl-violations.org, EFF, or SFLC). From a legal point of view, neither is to be taken seriously by HTC unless they come from a law firm (and a law firm wouldn't threaten to alert the media, they'd send a C&D since that what the copyright law upholds). Otherwise, this amounts to blackmail.

I really like the tone of the statement "Since the files are directly incorperated into the Kernel, they are required to be distributed, hopefully this was just an oversite." This gives HTC an easy out, and a way to save face. Oh, and it should be spelled "incorporated" and "oversight".
[Hero CDMA Android Development] Kcarpenter:
It was late :D

I haven't recieved a response yet. The letter was on my laptop, I will post tonight or when they respond. I also asked for direct contact information for departments who could handle the request as "Tech Support" keeps backing down. Understandbly so, they have scripts and probably don't know what code looks like. But they should in fact have contact info.
[Hero CDMA Android Development] Kcarpenter:
@romeo, not sure if you read the whole thread, but we have already established they need to publish a lot of code that is missing. Yes, there are modules that belong to HTC. We are not denying that. We are saying there are piece of code missing that need to be posted to properly build and modify the kernel for the phone. If we had the kernel, we would probably have a lot more done than we do with 2.1 and it wouldn't be so "Hacked up".

Not saying I did have anything to do with writing the current code, but who is to say I am not willing to help improve whats there? Sorry I wasn't around when Linus wrote his original Kernel, I was busy playing with my lego's and blocks to help write an OS. Now I'm a big kid who can help. Doesn't mean I should be excluded from asking for source code that should in fact be released.

They did publish HERO files in what was released but not HEROC, why would they post them for GSM but not CDMA, HTC says they only changed things to make 1.5 run on CDMA. Why are they holding back on that?

BTW HEROC files are needed to compile and run with out bricking our phones.