Newbie to rooting - maybe a stupid question.

[FractalSphere]

I have read the other threads and know you can't generally root the natively updated Froyo 2.2 yet on the HTC EVO - but the Unrevoked and Easyroot processes refer to a graceful root where you preserve your phone OS until you choose to update an image and subsequently blow it away after a possible backup. Right?

Is there the 'ungraceful' way to root - basically allowing the process to blow away your current Android OS and upgrade from there, even without an actual backup? My contacts can be re-synched and apps re-downloaded. SMS/MMS messages I don't even care if they're backed up, and pictures/videos can be copied off beforehand.

Or is it the lower-level bootloader that is unable to be bypassed, preventing anything further?

I'm guessing the answer right now is still no, but I haven't read this option discussed so I wasn't sure if it was simply an assumed to be not-possible or just not considered acceptable for some reason.

Thanks!
Rich

 

[2CupsWithString]

Root by itself just means getting super user access to your phone. Unrevoked forever, which I think you're referring to, will just tell the phone to accept ROMs in the boot loader that don't have a signature. From there you can flash a rom that has root, or a custom recovery or even another boot loader.

You can "ungracefully" root by first wiping your caches and then flashing a stock rom with root or any other custom rom. Remember though root is just getting root / super user access to your phone... flashing a custom recovery or taking the signature verification off the boot loader isn't rooting but it's a way to achieve root.

 

[Yourdogsdead]

As far as I know, this is the only "ungraceful" rooting method I could find. As far as I know, it only works with 2.1 phones. The Unrevoked one is a lot easier though.

 

[FractalSphere]

As far as I know, this is the only "ungraceful" rooting method I could find. As far as I know, it only works with 2.1 phones. The Unrevoked one is a lot easier though.

Yeah, that's the answer I was looking for - whether the non-safe-way worked with only 2.1 or not. Thanks!