7 ms·

Samsung releases Galaxy S II ICS source code

69 points by jhack 15y ago

jsight 15y ago
This is really good news. I just hope the article is correct and this can actually be modded fairly easily for T-Mobile(T989) and AT&T phones.
angusgr 15y ago
Download is still going, but isn't this just the standard GPL parts - ie kernel & some libraries? (EDIT: it is indeed just the GPL parts.) In which case, can someone explain how it's really newsworthy? Samsung have been exemplary in all their GPL compliance for all their Android releases to date. open source code ROM builders and other modders will be able to do more advanced ports and advanced ROMs. Well, now they can build with the latest kernel instead of the Gingerbread kernel, but does that really make much difference to anything else? Are there outstanding kernel bugs in the Gingerbread releases, or new kernel features that ICS AOSP needs to run?
- Xuzz 15y ago
  The bigger question, to me, is what drivers are included. Many of the chips in all these phones do not have specifications freely available or community-built drivers. Does this include, say, the GPU driver? Or is that still a binary blob that has to be (usually illegally) copied from the device's built-in software?
  - angusgr 15y ago
    The Mali (GPU) kernel module source is there, but not the proprietary userland libraries. So the situation is as you say. (AFAIK the only Android manufacturer to secure binary distribution rights for GPU drivers was Google with the PowerVR GPU in the Nexus One, and that download comes with heavy restrictions - only for Nexus One, only for Android, do not redistribute, etc. I don't know why GPU manufacturers are so paranoid.) That said, I don't really know the S2 but I'm fairly sure the Mali GPU libraries and the baseband are the only closed components in the EXYNOS platform. So it could be worse :/.
    - rys 15y ago
      We're not paranoid; that resistribution restriction on our driver didn't come from us (I work for PowerVR). As a rule of thumb, it's the device or SoC vendor that calls those shots and controls redistribution.
      - angusgr 15y ago
        Thanks for clarifying. I admit that I was very put off when I downloaded the Nexus drivers and had to scroll though all the legalese just to use them (I was actually messing with a Samsung S5P SoC on a different board and I was hoping that I might be able to reuse those drivers there - no dice as per the EULA.). Is there any reason why PowerVR don't release userland binary libraries for download themselves? Is it just that the libraries are too closely wedded to specific kernel modules and the like? Or specific hardware revisions? (I noticed breaking changes between different version of the pvr kernel module sources.) Or is it more just that there's no real incentive to bother?
        rys 15y ago
        Purely technically, it wouldn't be too difficult for us to release something. The driver tends to be coupled to the SoC, rather than the graphics core (and core revision), due to integration with the SoC's display hardware, so we'd release drivers for a 'platform' rather than our graphics IP. That's what Google did for Nexus S, so we'd follow that model. The big thing stopping us is support and maintaining the code that does the graphics IP to SoC coupling. We could dump that burden on the SoC/platform vendor (like with Google), but eventually code support just swims upstream to us and we don't have the resources right now to handle that for a large number of SoCs. Apologies that the EULA prevented you from using those drivers on another S5PC110 platform, I really wish that wasn't the case.
      - throwaway1111 15y ago
        I interviewed once for a graphics driver programming position for Imagination Tech. (who own PowerVR) and my impression was that they were indeed absolutely paranoid about open source. The first thing the guy had a go at me for was my pretty meager contributions to open source. Apparently this was a solid indicator that I would give out all the company secrets!
- fpgeek 15y ago
  Yes, there are differences between Gingerbread and ICS kernels, though I don't know what they are (other than moving to a 3.x kernel). From what I understand, this is one of the reasons CM9 development has been slow in general (and particularly slow for some devices). That being said, you're right that Samsung's prompt GPL compliance isn't particularly newsworthy. The recent, newsworthy source release is HTC's. They released the ICS kernel source for the Sensation promptly, without their typical "not until you've waited a few months and threatened a lawsuit" nonsense. Hopefully that trend continues.
wyclif 15y ago
As an Android user, I do not want the TouchWiz overlay. I want the pure, unadulterated ICS UI goodness. Why doesn't Samsung "get it"? (Don't answer that).
- huggyface 15y ago
  You're a hacker purist. Most consumers are not. Many actually like the features that Touchwiz brings. It's actually interesting in that "pure, unadulterated" Android has very heavily borrowed from Sense UI, TouchWiz, and Motoblur. Those custom skins were what really helped move the platform forward.
  - commandar 15y ago
    I don't know. As somebody that was a day-one G1 customer, I think the influence of Mattias Duarte coming on board has had far more impact on the platform than any of these OEM skins. You can see the influence of Duarte's previous work at Palm all over ICS, far more so than any of the custom skins. What I have certainly seen is manufacturers breaking baked-in functionality on Android trying to differentiate themselves. Moto managed to break both manual Exchange configuration and Facebook sync on my Droid 4, for example. It's not like those are obscure functions nobody uses.
    - estel 15y ago
      I'm not sure in which update you're referring to Facebook sync being "broken", but this was purposefully removed from stock by Google in Android 2.3.3.
  - fpgeek 15y ago
    In fact, that argument is laid out in more detail here: http://androidandme.com/2012/02/news/why-androids-custom-uis-are-important-to-the-future-of-the-platform/ http://androidandme.com/2012/02/news/why-androids-custom-uis...
- Steko 15y ago
  There was recent convincing discussion that to the vast majority of the 20+ million(?) people who own the phone have no idea what ICS is and would be shocked if Samsung put out an update that completely changed the UX.

69 points by jhack 15y ago

This is really good news. I just hope the article is correct and this can actually be modded fairly easily for T-Mobile(T989) and AT&T phones.

angusgr 15y ago

Download is still going, but isn't this just the standard GPL parts - ie kernel & some libraries? (EDIT: it is indeed just the GPL parts.) In which case, can someone explain how it's really newsworthy? Samsung have been exemplary in all their GPL compliance for all their Android releases to date. open source code ROM builders and other modders will be able to do more advanced ports and advanced ROMs. Well, now they can build with the latest kernel instead of the Gingerbread kernel, but does that really make much difference to anything else? Are there outstanding kernel bugs in the Gingerbread releases, or new kernel features that ICS AOSP needs to run?

Xuzz 15y ago
The bigger question, to me, is what drivers are included. Many of the chips in all these phones do not have specifications freely available or community-built drivers. Does this include, say, the GPU driver? Or is that still a binary blob that has to be (usually illegally) copied from the device's built-in software?
- angusgr 15y ago
  The Mali (GPU) kernel module source is there, but not the proprietary userland libraries. So the situation is as you say. (AFAIK the only Android manufacturer to secure binary distribution rights for GPU drivers was Google with the PowerVR GPU in the Nexus One, and that download comes with heavy restrictions - only for Nexus One, only for Android, do not redistribute, etc. I don't know why GPU manufacturers are so paranoid.) That said, I don't really know the S2 but I'm fairly sure the Mali GPU libraries and the baseband are the only closed components in the EXYNOS platform. So it could be worse :/.
  - rys 15y ago
    We're not paranoid; that resistribution restriction on our driver didn't come from us (I work for PowerVR). As a rule of thumb, it's the device or SoC vendor that calls those shots and controls redistribution.
    - angusgr 15y ago
      Thanks for clarifying. I admit that I was very put off when I downloaded the Nexus drivers and had to scroll though all the legalese just to use them (I was actually messing with a Samsung S5P SoC on a different board and I was hoping that I might be able to reuse those drivers there - no dice as per the EULA.). Is there any reason why PowerVR don't release userland binary libraries for download themselves? Is it just that the libraries are too closely wedded to specific kernel modules and the like? Or specific hardware revisions? (I noticed breaking changes between different version of the pvr kernel module sources.) Or is it more just that there's no real incentive to bother?
      - rys 15y ago
        Purely technically, it wouldn't be too difficult for us to release something. The driver tends to be coupled to the SoC, rather than the graphics core (and core revision), due to integration with the SoC's display hardware, so we'd release drivers for a 'platform' rather than our graphics IP. That's what Google did for Nexus S, so we'd follow that model. The big thing stopping us is support and maintaining the code that does the graphics IP to SoC coupling. We could dump that burden on the SoC/platform vendor (like with Google), but eventually code support just swims upstream to us and we don't have the resources right now to handle that for a large number of SoCs. Apologies that the EULA prevented you from using those drivers on another S5PC110 platform, I really wish that wasn't the case.
    - throwaway1111 15y ago
      I interviewed once for a graphics driver programming position for Imagination Tech. (who own PowerVR) and my impression was that they were indeed absolutely paranoid about open source. The first thing the guy had a go at me for was my pretty meager contributions to open source. Apparently this was a solid indicator that I would give out all the company secrets!
fpgeek 15y ago
Yes, there are differences between Gingerbread and ICS kernels, though I don't know what they are (other than moving to a 3.x kernel). From what I understand, this is one of the reasons CM9 development has been slow in general (and particularly slow for some devices). That being said, you're right that Samsung's prompt GPL compliance isn't particularly newsworthy. The recent, newsworthy source release is HTC's. They released the ICS kernel source for the Sensation promptly, without their typical "not until you've waited a few months and threatened a lawsuit" nonsense. Hopefully that trend continues.

wyclif 15y ago

As an Android user, I do not want the TouchWiz overlay. I want the pure, unadulterated ICS UI goodness. Why doesn't Samsung "get it"? (Don't answer that).

huggyface 15y ago
You're a hacker purist. Most consumers are not. Many actually like the features that Touchwiz brings. It's actually interesting in that "pure, unadulterated" Android has very heavily borrowed from Sense UI, TouchWiz, and Motoblur. Those custom skins were what really helped move the platform forward.
- commandar 15y ago
  I don't know. As somebody that was a day-one G1 customer, I think the influence of Mattias Duarte coming on board has had far more impact on the platform than any of these OEM skins. You can see the influence of Duarte's previous work at Palm all over ICS, far more so than any of the custom skins. What I have certainly seen is manufacturers breaking baked-in functionality on Android trying to differentiate themselves. Moto managed to break both manual Exchange configuration and Facebook sync on my Droid 4, for example. It's not like those are obscure functions nobody uses.
  - estel 15y ago
    I'm not sure in which update you're referring to Facebook sync being "broken", but this was purposefully removed from stock by Google in Android 2.3.3.
- fpgeek 15y ago
  In fact, that argument is laid out in more detail here: http://androidandme.com/2012/02/news/why-androids-custom-uis-are-important-to-the-future-of-the-platform/ http://androidandme.com/2012/02/news/why-androids-custom-uis...
Steko 15y ago
There was recent convincing discussion that to the vast majority of the 20+ million(?) people who own the phone have no idea what ICS is and would be shocked if Samsung put out an update that completely changed the UX.