yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[HD2 General] d0ug:
Yeah i'm hoping he meant the platform is more open, not open source. Quite a difference there.

As far as platforms being open, Android and WinMo are probably on even playing fields. But WinMo probably has more seasoned developers/hackers that know a lot of the tricks with the OS

And actually WinMo may be more open as far as user rights, because google does have the ability to withdraw an app from their store and uninstall it from users handhelds remotely. I don't think MS has that ability from their app store, and they most certainly don't have that ability to uninstall apps loaded from downloaded cabs

Google has already done this once http://www.dailytech.com/Google+Use...+Removal+Tech+for+First+Time/article18843.htm Though it does seem legitimate to protect the users. whats to stop some app, say like DeCSS for decrypting DVDs being deemed illegal, and then google being forced to remove something due to a lawsuit, not because it is in any way is dangerous to a user.

It really rubs me the wrong way for a 3rd party to be able to uninstall and maybe even possibly remotely install code onto a piece of hardware that i OWN!
[HD2 General] ryan562:
i remember reading that on engadget. google *seems* to be acting in good faith to protect themselves from liability from apps that would violate certain copyright infringements and the like. but i just hope they would use this feature to get rid of all the trashy porn searching programs on the market. steve jobs wasn't joking when he made a comment about that.
[HD2 General] samsamuel:
what right do you or big steve or the chocolate factory have to decide what someone else can or can't search for? who defines "trashy porn"?

first step towards a fascist totalitarian state is controlling the populace's reading/viewing material.

first they came for the pornographers, and no one spoke up, because we werent pornographers

then they came for the app devs they didn't like, still no one spoke, because we arent devs

next they took control of the adding/removing of apps on devices they didn't own, and still we were silent,

when they come for us, who is left to speak out?
[HD2 General] samsamuel:
practically every horror story in history can be seen as acting 'in good faith' when viewed from teh correct (incorrect?) stand point. Good faith is no measure of goodness.

[mod-break] The rest of this post removed, sorry but this has no place here.
[HD2 General] ryan562:
its also my right to protect my kids who have droid phones from seeing those types of programs.google should at least have the devs place an "18 and up" disclaimer for these apps. i wasn't too happy to see my lil nephew dl and use one of these apps.
[HD2 General] aptness leadership:
yea, but what does any of this have to do with windows mobile 7 (photon)?

:confused
[HD2 General] tai4de2:
What do you think this would gain you vs. 6.5?
[HD2 General] aptness leadership:
Perhaps more enjoyment of a longer lasting device?:rolleyes:
[HD2 General] aptness leadership:
....and FUN! But just imagine, working really hard to create something that no one gives a rats butt about. Thats why I posed the question, would it be interesting, would anyone even care?
[HD2 General] mfrey0118:
+2

I had android for my G1 for almost a year and a half (both stock and cooked) and I would not go back.
[HD2 General] mfrey0118:
Preach it, brother!

And you can take out the word "own" from "I own my phone" and replace it with "use"...because due to copyright laws, and legalese EULA's, we essentially are leasing proprietary equipment that the manufacturers actually own.

So unless your strawman reads the legalese and understands it and you do not agree, you are basically saying "yes" to not having owner's rights over the stuff you buy...
[HD2 General] mfrey0118:
[mod-break] Post deleted. Sorry, but this has no place here.
[HD2 General] mfrey0118:
First off, due to research on EMF's and cell phones, giving developing children mobile phones is not a good idea, IMO (and spare me the safety crap I was perfectly safe w/o them).

Second, proper parenting will eliminate practically every problem that Big Business/Government is using as a guise to take away our ever-dwindling freedoms.

"your right" = "your responsibility"

Don't whine about rights when you're perfectly willing to give up freedom to have someone else establish those "rights" for you.
[HD2 General] mfrey0118:
What exactly is the difference between WM7 and WP7?
[HD2 General] sirphunkee:
There isn't...

Windows Mobile 7 is what everybody thought the next OS was going to be called.

Then, M$ said it was actually going to be "WP7S", ("Windows Phone 7 Series")

Then, M$ said it's actually going to be just "WP7", ("Windows Phone 7")

Then, you asked your question :D
[HD2 General] muchelaguito:
For those of you, thinking of moving to WP7, think twice... it's much more restrictive and less practical to use than our current version. I got this from wikipedia:

Microsoft said that when Windows Phone 7 is initially released, it will not be "feature complete" in regards to the operating system.[46] Microsoft has confirmed that, unlike Windows Mobile, they will complete features and add them through updates when they are complete with a high degree of quality.[47]

Many features that existed in older Windows Mobile phones will not be available on Windows Phone 7, including:

* Microsoft hardware specifications mandate that all Windows Phone 7 handsets include an electronic compass.[48] However, the compass feature will not be working at release time, as the compass API is not complete, and software programmers will not be able to access it.[49][50]

* The networking API does not give access to sockets, preventing Voice over IP applications such as Skype from operating on Windows Phone 7.[51]

* IPsec virtual private network (VPN) security was supported in Windows Mobile, but will not be supported in Windows Phone 7.[52]

* Microsoft has decided that Removable SD Card and PC Tethering, both of which was supported in Windows Mobile, will not be supported in Windows Phone 7 in the intrest of data security which appeals to enterprise users.[53]

* Although Windows Mobile 6.5 had full multitasking, Microsoft has decided not to allow 3rd party multitasking in Windows Phone 7 until as it stated they can execute it well enough in a fashion which won't affect user experience which in this release they deem essential for its success.[54] Windows Phone 7 will only allow one application to run in the foreground at one time, and no 3rd party apps will be allowed to run in the background.[55] The lack of multitasking also prevents inter-application communication between third-party apps.[56]

And this is a "no no" for me:

Microsoft's goal is to create a great and predictable user experience by redesigning the user interface, disallowing partners to modify or replace it, integrating the operating system with other services, and strictly controlling the hardware it runs on

...so, bye bye custom ROM's with great eye Candy interfaces...
[HD2 General] mfrey0118:
Wow...so limiting. But isn't that how it always goes? Ever since windows came out (remember DOS and SUPERDOS? and Apple II's?) it's been less and less "user friendly", i.e. able to be understood and manipulated by it's owner.

I remember when I was a kid, my best friend's dad was a Mac repairman. He said he hated Windows because it was dumbed down and you weren't able to see what was going on, you just "point and click"...

I didn't realize just how limiting WP7 is going to be...sounds like they're going for an Apple-like system with their phones now.

Honestly, what I read about WP7 vs WM 6.5.x helped me make the decision to go with the HD2 over another Android phone when I was in the market.

It's funny though, because you have to read through so much hype and rhetoric to get a truly unbiased and educated opinion. I have to laugh at the folks who keep saying things like "get an Android phone" or "wait for WP7"...and since we already have XDA experts working on a dual boot setup with Android, for us HD2 owners it's win-win: not only do we get a fully customizable and powerful operating system capable of doing pretty much anything we want, but we also have the luxury of enjoying cooked ROM's with WP7 goodies and we can even boot up an Android OS if we want to!

People keep complaining about the rudimentary interface of WM 6.5 but in my opinion the HTC Sense more than makes up for it with "eye candy".

My HD2 is the only smart phone I've gotten so far where it's limitations have not gotten me itching for a cooked ROM...and the only reason I installed HSPL3 was to get rid of that stupid lavendar "stick together" BIOS screen.
[HD2 General] Chainfire:
Some senior members refer to the "old" WM7 ("Photon") as WM7. This was a continuation of WM6, and some screenshots and videos of it do exists if you search for it. This WM7 was supposed to enter beta around October 2008, but the project was cancelled a month or so before that, in favor of the dreadful beast that is now WP7.
[Networking] Foyaxe:
Hi,

Im using Cyanogenmod 5.0.8 on my htc Dream (G1).

I want to mount my NFS share with my music collection just as i do it with my pcs.

su
mount -t nfs 192.168.1.102:/media/media /sdcard/media
mount: mounting //192.168.1.102/media/media on /sdcard/media failed: No such device

Whats wrong?

Is there no NFS client support in the kernel?

Thanks,

Foyaxe
[Networking] Thailandian:
Unfortunately, this post probably comes way too late for the original poster, but it may be useful for anyone else, like me, who stumbles across this thread looking for a way to mount nfs on Android devices.

The answer is to use busybox.

There is support for nfs version 3 in the kernel, but the standard mount command seems to have been hobbled. The busybox mount command seems to work exactly the same as the standard linux mount command (except that it actually works on Android :))

After downloading busybox from the Android Market, this is the command I use:

busybox mount -o nolock,ro,hard,intr,vers=3 -t nfs 192.xxx.xxx.x.x:/your/nfs/share /mnt/sdcard/YourLocalFolder

I'm not sure how important all the options are, but I suspect that vers=3 is important at least. nolock, hard and intr are also useful when having problems mounting according to the mount man page.
[Networking] ArneAC:
I am getting 'failed invalid argument' ;(

Trying since quite a while now but won't work. Any more hints?

cheers,
[Networking] Thailandian:
Well the good news is that 'failed invalid argument' probably means that it's just a typing mistake or something similar. This should be fairly easy to solve.

One idea to check first - you need to create the directory that you want to mount your NFS share onto before you can mount it. If I remember rightly, failing to do that will give you an 'invalid argument' error.

Also, you will need to give the command root privileges - but I think you must have already done that or you would be getting a 'permissions' error rather than 'invalid argument'.

Failing that, I suggest that you copy and paste the command you are using here - although you should replace your server's ip address with x's as I did for security.

Then I can have a look at it to see if there's anything obvious.

Cheers
[Networking] adyroman:
You can also use AndSmb from Market to connect to Windows shares or Samba shares on Linux.
[Networking] MountainX:
I'm getting the same invalid argument. It is not a typo, but I don't know what the cause of the problem is.

in busybox, my commands are:

su
mount -t nfs 192.168.1.1:/DataVolume/Public ~/Downloads/temp/

adding or removing the various options such as "-o nolock,ro,hard,intr,vers=3"

does not make a difference.

It is not a problem with the local mount point -- that error is "no such file or directory".

This error is "failed: invalid argument" -- even with no arguments other than "-t nfs".

lsmod shows the modules loaded:

nfs 104232 0 - Live 0xbf036000

lockd 42336 1 nfs, Live 0xbf028000

sunrpc 150792 3 nfs,lockd, Live 0xbf000000

Can anyone help? Thanks.

P.S. I'm testing with NFS v3, but my ultimate goal is to connect to an NFSv4 server. Does busybox support NFSv4 mounts?

EDIT: it looks like this error "invalid argument" may be due to a conflict between versions of busybox and linux.

Found this here

My linux is 3.0.8-GLaDOS-V1-15

My busybox is 1.19.3-Stericson

Any idea how to proceed?
[Networking] acertabuser:
I ran into this same issue on my new Acer A200 (busybox 1.19.3-Stericson) and my host server is using NFS V3. I'm wondering if your 3.0 server might be using NFS V4 and support is not enabled? Here is an excerpt from my /proc/config.gz on the Acer. Ideally V3 and V4 would have been set.

CONFIG_LOCKD=y

CONFIG_SUNRPC=y

CONFIG_NFS_FS=y

# CONFIG_NFS_V3 is not set

# CONFIG_NFS_V4 is not set

CONFIG_ROOT_NFS=y

# CONFIG_NFSD is not set

CONFIG_NFS_COMMON=y

Now I suppose in my case that if I really want this to work that I'd have to learn how to create a build environment and compile a nfs.ko myself.

EDIT: I just seen that you specifically stated you are testing w/NFS v3
[Networking] MountainX:
That's what I'm thinking too.

In the mean time the short term solutions I'm considering are either samba (CIFS) or SFTP (i.e., the SSH file system). I've been using SFTP in the other direction (PC to phone) and it works great. I haven't test using it on the phone to mount the share from the PC yet, but I hope to do that this weekend.
[Networking] brian_o'fish:
Tried to nfs mount from a CM9 running galaxy nexus, kernel self compiled and surely contains NFS (client and server).

Doesn't work, the same way already described here.

Looking at the source and build intermediates, it appears to me that

1) the CM9 compiled busybox does not contain NFS mounting code.

2) busybox does not support mounting NFS v4 at all

Trying to compile busybox with nfs support builtin, breaks because several header files related to

RPC and portmapper appear to be missing from the android sources. Which is probably the reason why

NFS in not in the standard busybox mount...

Oh, how I wish nfs mounting were handled by the kernel, instead of relying on magic code in the userlevel mount...
[Networking] MountainX:
Thanks for sharing your findings. Very interesting. I guess the next option would be to compile the mount command and use that rather than using the BusyBox mount...
[Networking] brian_o'fish:
works for me

Well, there already _is_ nfs mount code in busybox, but it was configured away, because it needs the SUN RPC library, which is missing from Android / Bionic. That issue would probably also exist for mount.nfs from other sources, which would most likely also need additional porting work.

Thus, I snatched the librpc code from uClibc today, and meddled with it until it compiled in my copy of the CM9 sources. Got it to work! I can now NFS mount on my GNex, and the freshly built and installed update.zip was copied onto the device via NFS :cool:

I sent the changes to the cyanogen review system. That was my first contribution ever - I have no idea whether they will like it or not.

If you would like to try it out - and have a KERNEL with NFS support compiled in - send me an E-Mail, and I'll send you a statically compiled busybox (approx. 800k) back that you can play with.
[Networking] MountainX:
Congratulations! That's very cool! I just sent you my email address. I'm looking forward to trying your busybox. Good job getting this to work!
[Networking] MountainX:
I got it. Thank you! How do I use it? Do I just replace /system/xbin/busybox with your (renamed) statically compiled file?

I'm running the GLaDOS kernel which claims to have NFS support, so we'll see what happens. Since you and I have the same phone (GSM GNex), if this doesn't work, my next step will be to do exactly what you did and compile my own CM9. I have never done that before, so I would appreciate anything you can share about the steps you did. Thanks again!
[Networking] brian_o'fish:
There is also the question of where you would put the mountpoint.

To test it out, (as root) I made a directory /data/data/de.bof.mounts/, copied

the busybox file there and made it executable (chmod 700 file), made a

subdirectory mnt there, and then ran './busybox mount -o nolock -t nfs SER.VER.I.P:/export/path ./mnt'

You can use the normal 'umount' command to unmount later.

If you want to go down that road, here's the feedback I got when I asked about that 10 days ago:

http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=22706426&postcount=352

In comment 360 there, I write a bit about the amount of source fetched from the net, and how much disk space you would need.

The most problematic part will be setting up your compile host with all the neccessary development packages, which is very dependant on what kind of host system / distribution you use. Google describes it here for an Ubuntu 10.04 install: http://s.android.com/source/initializing.html - which fortunately gave me enough hints to get my openSUSE 11.4 system into working order after half a day of builds aborting in mid-flight...

Your best bet is probably setting up a fresh Ubuntu 10.04 virtual server with approx. 64 GB hard disk and 8 GB RAM, as that is what google appears to use.
[Networking] MountainX:
Thanks again. That's great info.

I'm testing the first option, which is using busybox the same way you used it.

For me, that involves two steps (loading modules and issuing the mount command).

Here's what I'm doing. I realize I probably don't need to load all these modules, but I'm doing it anyway.

My statically compiled busybox (which you supplied) is in /system/xbin/ and it is executable.

cd /system/xbin/

insmod /system/modules/sunrpc.ko

insmod /system/modules/lockd.ko

insmod /system/modules/nfs.ko

./busybox mount -t nfs 192.168.1.11:/Public /sdcard/nfs/Public

The error is:

mount: Mounting 192.168.1.11:/Public on yigit failed: Protocol not supported

My guess is that the kernel (GLaDOS) which claims to have NFS support may not actually have it (even though it does ship with both nfs.ko and nfsd.ko). Hopefully, I'm wrong on that point and there is a simple mistake I'm making.

For mount commands I have tried all these:

mount -o nolock -t nfs 192.168.1.11:/Public /sdcard/nfs/Public

mount -o vers=3 -t nfs 192.168.1.11:/Public /sdcard/nfs/Public

mount -o prot=17 -t nfs 192.168.1.11:/Public /sdcard/nfs/Public

mount -o prot=6 -t nfs 192.168.1.11:/Public /sdcard/nfs/Public

I had no success with any of them (although the errors were different with some of them). The last two simply report "failed" with no additional detail.
[Networking] brian_o'fish:
Well, I built my kernel nonmodular / have NFS compiled in, as CM9 does not

even have a modules directory + I don't want to hassle with loading modules

before use.

Anyway - to check that after loading the modules, the kernel thinks it has

an nfs client filesystem type, have a look at /proc/filesystems. For NFS v3,

you need an entry reading nodev nfs there.

Hmm. Did you check that the NFS server supports the NFS v3 protocol?

Try mounting it using mount -t nfs -o vers=3 ... from your desktop box.

If that does not help - do you have an "strace" program? Then you might try

to run (on device) something like

and then e-mail me the /sdcard/mount.nfs.trc file? That will give a hint about

which step in the mounting receives the error.
[Networking] xywin:
Would you mind sharing your busybox binary? I got my modules compiled for the kernel and they are loading just fine but the busybox binary I have is missing the nfs functionality as previously mentioned in this thread. And I currently don't have the ressources to build half the android framework.
[Networking] brian_o'fish:
cyanogenmod NFS mount testing

There are now available for testing, several cyanogenmod static busybox

binaries, as well as a CM9 kernel with NFS support.

Visit http://bei.bof.de/droid/mykernel/ for directions and download links.
[Networking] xywin:
Okay I tried your busybox version and it works pretty good. After I realized I forgot to add nfs v3 and v4 support in the module >.>. But yeah it works. The nolock switch is of course mandatory for the mount. Unless you intend to start a portmap daemon.

I got that error in the beginning. As mentioned I forgot to tick the boxes for v3 and v4 support in the nfs module. If you have the kernelconfig you can just add the the functionality and push the kernel modules. No need to flash a new kernel. For NFSv4 support you also need to add auth_rpcgss.ko and rpcsec_gss_krb5.ko in that order before loading nfs.ko

A little speed test:

Procedure: Copying a 1GB file via WLAN (n-Wlan) over both the CIFS and NFS mount. Timed with `time` and using a simple `cp`

Result: CIFS comes in at 1.654MB/s and NFSv3 at 3.219MB/s. So with NFS it's actually possible to watch HD-movies over the network. Finally

CIFSManager:

If you want to use CIFSManager you have to do the following (as root):

rm /system/bin/mount
ln -sf /system/bin/busybox.static /system/bin/mount

To autoload the modules with CIFSManager open the options and tick every box and change the value of the "Path to cifs.ko" to the following value:

/system/lib/modules/sunrpc.ko:/system/lib/modules/auth_rpcgss.ko:/system/lib/modules/rpcseg_gss_krb5.ko:/system/lib/modules/lockd.ko:/system/lib/modules/nfs.ko:/system/lib/modules/cifs.ko

Now you can add NFS mounts using the following syntax when creating a new share:

XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX:/path/to/your/export

Don't forget the colon. In the option parameter for the new mount add "nolock" without the " of course.
[Networking] brian_o'fish:
Thanks xywin for testing and reporting!

One question though: you talk about NFSv4. I had the impression that my static busybox contains no code at all to do v4 mounting. It tells me "NFSv4 not supported" when trying to force v4 mounts.

Are you sure you have it work with v4?
[Networking] xywin:
I have no working NFSv4 setup here so I couldn't test it. I just added the modules in case I'd find the time to set one up.
[Networking] brian_o'fish:
nfs v3 mounting merged in cyanogenmod 9

My change to make "busybox mount -t nfs" work for nfs v3, has been merged this morning into the cyanogenmod 9 base source, and should be in the next nightly.

The neccessary (nonmodular) kernel code is also in there, for Galaxy Nexus devices. Talk to your cyanogenmod kernel maintainer regarding other devices.
[Networking] MountainX:
Congratulations! That's great news. I'm sure you are happy to have your code incorporated into CM9. That's a nice achievement.

It sounds like I'll be loading the next nightly build onto my Galaxy Nexus. Thank you!
[Networking] jfluckey:
Noob here. I think I am following along o.k., but want to know if this is persistent or if I will need to do this every time I reboot. I will be trying this tomorrow on my HP Touchpad running the nightlies of CM9. Thanks!
[Networking] brian_o'fish:
There is no attempt made at persistence, no settings app, nothing user friendly, just plain old infrastructure.

Right now, I have no intention to work on such.

Any proper kind of persistence would need to hook into connectivity up/down notifications, unmounting and mounting on demand when certain configured WLANs become active or inactive.

It would also need a rational approach at where mount points should be, and possibly creating mount point directories again after system upgrades or reboots.

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

Other topic: being a happy owner of a Transformer Prime, since yesterday afternoon, and promptly converted to CM9 without much hassle, I am glad to see that nfs mounting works on that platform, too :)
[Networking] geva:
Another answer is simply to use the CIFS Manager app. It seems to be doing the same thing in the background, but provides a bit simpler means to do it.