[G2 and Desire Z Android Development] BRad Barnett:
Ok guys, I know it's hard to follow, but here are the facts:

1) the ril libs are *dynamically* linked libraries

2) CM 7.0 nightlys, about a month back, inserted a Sense UI based RIL lib, and it caused the phone to disconnect when the screen went off

3) this was caused by a segfault in rild, due to the fact that htc_ril.so did not have the symbols it was looking for

The above is *FACT*. There is absolutely no disputing it, unless you do not understand how dynamically linked libs work, or can't read the segfault that *everyone* had issue with.

Second, based upon the above FACT, one must wonder what other surprises could await for us in the radio layer.

Note, that this entire time, I have been worried about NEW USERS and even MILDLY EXPERIENCED USERS just flashing radios 'because'. The instructions to flash radios to that aussie radio made into COUNTLESS HOW-TOS and INSTALL GUIDES FOR NEW CM INSTALLERS!

Hello?! HELLO?! If you guys want to play, GREAT! Experiment ALL YOU WANT! However, the CM wiki should not have experimental install steps (and it did!) for new users! New users should *not* be flashing radios, period, ever.

So, when I say that only t-mobile radios should be used, that statement is logical and realistic based upon the idea that such a radio is designed to work with a lib_rtc.so that we *have* workable with a non-sense UI based rom.

If you guys can't understand all the reasoning above, there is nothing else I can do for you.

Lastly, some people here have been going on about how they DO notice a difference in radio reception. Fine, bully for you. Maybe you ever *are* testing in a fashion that is methodical and logical enough to allow for real, scientific interpretation of the results.

However, even a post or two above this one, I see someone claiming that they tested methodically. However, did they even test at the same time of the year? Did they take into account solar flares during the tests of their original radio? Did they test their original radio as much?

I'm sorry, maybe a couple of people out of the thousand or two that are playing with radios have done tests in a sterile, scientific manner, but 99.9% of the people I've seen are just testing in a hap-hazard method.

You guys really want to test radios?

Take 10 phones. Put them 10 feet apart each. Write a script on each of the phones, that snags the dB rating every second or so. Flash a different radio to each phone.

Further, run (say) a ping command at the same time. Also run a script to automatically call a number that drops you immediately to voicemail, and every minute attempt that outgoing call. Place a constant tone in the background, so that when you listen to the recording, you can detect dropped out audio. Then write a script using SOX so that you can detect when individual recordings are of low quality.

Lastly, make sure the phone script also tracks whether the call succeeded or not.

Then, log this repetitive activity for a week. Then, move the phones to a place where their is a poor signal, a good signal, a great signal.

Run all those tests for a week.

Then, correlate all the data. Graph it to make it easy to detect differences visually.

Then, and only then, will you actually have any real data -- separate from *most* (not all!) of the variables that can affect your tests.

Or, how about this? Buy one of those mini-GSM stations. One that you have direct control over. In the same room, you'll be able to moderate transmit power yourself -- and atmospheric pressure can be controlled and will be less of an issue. So will cloud cover, random sunspots, etc.

Then log the dB rating of all the above again. Just to make it a real test, make sure that after a few hours of testing each of the 10 phones, you flash random radios onto them -- so we can see the differences individual phone hardware makes.

Tests like the above -- that's testing how radios really work. While there may be one or two of you running multi-hour, multi-night, multi-radio tests on dB ratings in the same location, with the same atmospheric conditions -- I doubt that many are.

Come on, have a little respect for the *reasons* people use scientific methodology to tests these things, ok?

And lastly, again, drop the htc_ril.so crap. It's proven. If you want to disprove it, then disprove that the bug in CM's nightlies wasn't caused by htc_ril.so.. or that the screen off problem wasn't from missing symbols in that above dynamic library.

Prove it, with debugging tools, otherwise at this point you're just trolling on that htc_ril.so point, ok?