ARCHIVED: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/25/2011)

[Kreatur3]

Technically speaking, and I should point out that most devs don't do this; anything coded over an open source/gpl related project is required to have the source code posted or linked in some way as well. It's one of the major things that gets linux builders in trouble as well. Easy solution though, if your code is really built from open source and your own modifications, post the source

I'm sure obijohn has it covered.

Btw; though I'm an S user and happy with my current rom I still have to say this one does look awesome, I'm curious about the SD read tweak as well, haven't really read anything about that before.

Edit: Wow, a re-read of that and I feel really redundant, I want to strike out several of those 'as well's but I'm too lazy

I only caught 3 "as wells" and one of them was in your edit.

This is my favorite rom but would be nice if the aosp source was posted since it would, most likely, help other devs trying to work on a 2.3 rom. More choices equals more time spent tweaking my phone. With obijohns efforts on this rom I would love to see a gb rom come from his quality of work.

 

[JerryScript]

I could be wrong here, but I believe only the kernel is covered by the gpl, the ROM is considered your intellectual property, Sense opened their code by choice, I'm not sure about other overlays, but I'm pretty sure ROMs are not covered by the gpl other than those bundled with kernels, and then the kernel's source must be release.

 

[Kreatur3]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

I could be wrong here, but I believe only the kernel is covered by the gpl, the ROM is considered your intellectual property, Sense opened their code by choice, I'm not sure about other overlays, but I'm pretty sure ROMs are not covered by the gpl other than those bundled with kernels, and then the kernel's source must be release.

I wish you were wrong so that the source for 2.3 would be released. If you are right than XDA has no right to force Obijohn into releasing his source beyond the kernel. I guess we shall wait and see how this plays out.

 

[obijohn]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

I could be wrong here, but I believe only the kernel is covered by the gpl, the ROM is considered your intellectual property, Sense opened their code by choice, I'm not sure about other overlays, but I'm pretty sure ROMs are not covered by the gpl other than those bundled with kernels, and then the kernel's source must be release.

Technically, the entire Android system is open source, not just the kernel. This includes all the framework stuff, all system apks, etc. However, drivers written by hardware vendors can be closed source. Also, extra apks that provide an interface skin can be closed source (like Blur). LG actually provides their contributions to the core Android system on their opensource page bundled with the kernel source download. This allows one to build a working Android 2.2.1 system on the V from source. It's not the same as what they release on the phone, since that includes their proprietary lge-res.apk stuff, which they don't provide the source to.

Since Android itself is open source, Cyanogenmod is open source. Any modifications to the CM7 source, for example to get it to compile for a particular phone, are covered by the GPL. So yeah, aospCMod is supposed to open source that stuff.

Also on the technical side, the developer of open source software DOES NOT have to post it online, it just has to be supplied to someone who asks. The GPL says that anyone who gets the binary has to be allowed to obtain the source from the developer if they want it. It doesn't require that it be posted online. I could email it to each person that asked and the GPL would be satisfied.

The thing that's slowed me down is that I actually never expected anyone to request the kernel source, since 99.9% of it is just the pure LG source already available. As for actual kernel source code changes that I've personally made, there are literally only about 10 files that I've touched (the biggest one being the kernel config file). Most of my kernel tweaks are actually in the boot image, already released as part of the rom, things like the init.rc, init.d stuff, a couple of boot-time qcom scripts, things like that. And all that is already available as part of the downloads.

So, anyway, since I didn't expect to be asked for it (my bad, I admit, I should've planned better), I didn't set up my build environment for git or svn or anything. When I started, I just wanted to see if I could build it myself, I didn't expect to get so involved in making Bumblebee. So I'm still trying to get my source environment cleaned up so that I can post it without it being a complete mess.

Alright, that's all said, I need to get back to working cleaning up this mess so I can post it.

 

[Kreatur3]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

I say you post the mess and move on to bigger and better things. lol.

 

[JerryScript]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

Not trying to argue, but I'm confused. If overlays such as Sense are required to be open source, why haven't all the carriers released their proprietary overlays?

I'm still thinking you don't have to release your entire ROM's source, just your kernel, but I'm obviously not a lawyer.

 

[pbailey212]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

You don't have to release it to the world, but if someone asks, you have to share

 

[easyguy]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

I say you post the mess and move on to bigger and better things. lol.

100% agree, why clean it up for them? They want it? let them clean it up themselves.

 

[MarkD426]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

100% agree, why clean it up for them? They want it? let them clean it up themselves.

More then likely personal preference. If you take pride in your work you wouldn't just finish and dump the pieces on the floor.

 

[pbailey212]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

If obijohn was a half ass type of person his rom would run like aosp

 

[JerryScript]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

If obijohn was a half ass type of person his rom would run like aosp

This is the definition of trolling.

 

[pbailey212]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

Trolling (Verb) present participle of troll(Verb) 1. Fish by trailing a baited line along behind a boat: "we trolled for mackerel".
No, that is the definition of trolling

 

[obijohn]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

Not trying to argue, but I'm confused. If overlays such as Sense are required to be open source, why haven't all the carriers released their proprietary overlays?

I'm still thinking you don't have to release your entire ROM's source, just your kernel, but I'm obviously not a lawyer.

First, you're right that I don't have to release the ROM source, because I don't have it. I didn't build the ROM from source, I worked with the binary. And all my mods to the ROM are transparent in the ROM zip itself (including the TWS bugfix, which is done as a decompile/edit/recompile of some jars -- and I have provided all that info to LeslieAnn so she could include it in her ROM, and I'll be happy to provide it to anyone else who asks, but I didn't use source code to do it so the GPL doesn't apply here).

But yeah, you might have been a bit confused by my explanation. Those overlays can indeed be (and usually are) closed source. However, if a carrier/manufacturer makes changes to the core open source Android code (for example, adding extra functionality to the power menu, which would be in /system/framework and /system/android.policy and possibly /system/framework-res) then those changes would have to be open sourced. For some reason, no one seems to be holding their feet to the fire on this. Code written specifically for hardware can be closed source, as long as it does not itself build upon code that's already open source.

My own understanding* of the GPL as it relates to Android and phones is that the carriers are required to release their full Android source minus only the propriety hardware bits which have to be released in binary form with the source so that it can be compiled into a fully functional system. Basically the GPL requires that the source code be in a state that can be built by the end user, which requires providing the proprietary hardware stuff in a binary format that can be linked when the source is built. Yes, the GPL actually does require this, and none of the carriers do it. Ok that's not entire fair since the Nexus line does it, but they're the only ones doing it since Google makes them (the Android build process has a step that extracts the proprietary hardware binaries of your Nexus phone, so the whole thing can be built in a useable state -- Cyanogenmod also uses this process for phones that CM supports). I can't begin to express how frustrated it makes me that Google doesn't require this of all carriers that use Android, but at least they do it with the Nexus line. Yes, Android is open source, which means that the carriers can do almost anything with it. But doing "almost anything" doesn't mean they get a pass on the GPL -- which, again, requires that the source be in a state that can be built, which requires bundling or extracting the proprietary parts in binary format in the build process, which, again, no one does. <insert rants and ragefaces here>

LG's code for some of the hardware layer in the Android system is released as open source (I'm not talking abou the kernel here, they released all of that), so they get points for this. But some of it is not, and they don't provide a way to extract the required binaries in the Android build process, so building Android from source for the LG does not result in a fully functional system. There are also lots of things they added to the /system/framework source that they don't provide, and their modifications to some of the system apps as well which rely on those framework changes too, so trying to use the framework from a pure Android source build breaks the phone. All in all, they are better than some at releasing source, but they still aren't fully compliant.

*When I say "my own understanding of the GPL", I mean my understanding as someone who was a lawyer for almost 20 years and handled copyright cases in Federal Court. That doesn't mean I'm completely knowledgeable about all the intricacies of the GPL, but it does mean I do have some specialized knowledge of copyright law.

 

[obijohn]

BTW, the current kernel source is now posted, so I can get back to work on the new kernel and then Gingerbread.

 

[JerryScript]

Re: [ROM+Kernel] ~*~ Bumblebee 2.4 ~*~ (6/11/2011)

Trolling (Verb) present participle of troll(Verb) 1. Fish by trailing a baited line along behind a boat: "we trolled for mackerel".
No, that is the definition of trolling

Troll (Internet)

 

[pbailey212]

Ok, enough about definitions, lets get back on topic why this rom is way better than aosp

 

[Kreatur3]

Lol I was stoked for the "update" to find it was the kernel release.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk

 

[hyruu]

Ok, enough about definitions, lets get back on topic why this rom is way better than aosp

LOL

 

[israelsalinas14]

Will the new kernel have undervolt? That would be awesome! Are there any disadvantages of undervolting?

So is 806-806 really the best for battery life? How about 806-600?

 

[arhtard]

Ok forgive my ignorance here, but....

This new update posted on 6/25, is it a new kernel I need to install?
Or is it just the BB source code that was needed to be posted?

Once again I apologize, I'm very new to androids and mods.
Trying to catch on though.

Thanks in advance.

PS. Thanks for all your hard work Obijohn