Post Reply

Flashing a Kernel via Recovery vs ADB

18th January 2014, 04:07 AM   |  #1  
Silicon Knight's Avatar
OP Senior Member
Flag Seattle, WA
Thanks Meter: 14
 
319 posts
Join Date:Joined: Mar 2011
Donate to Me
More
I was curious as to any difference between flashing a Kernel via ADB using a boot.img or flashing it as a .zip via recovery. Is there a benefit of one over the other. I've always done it via ADB, but I recently tried via a zip file through TWRP but didn't notice any difference, but wasn't sure if I was just being oblivious or not lol

I heard someone mention that when flashing it via ADB you don't get the Modules that come with the Kernel. Which I don't know if that was BS or not, cause as I stated, after trying it both ways, I didn't notice any features taken away i.e. flashed bricked kernel via ADB and then restored stock kernel and then flashed bricked via TWRP, and I was able to activate DT2W/S2W regardless of the method of flashing, as well as OC capabilities, Fast Charge, etc etc.

Just been curious about this for awhile, and there doesn't seem to be much discussion about it, so was unable to find an answer. Dev's always seem to give you the option to download a boot.img or .zip file, and wasn't sure if htat was just due to giving peopel the choice of preferred flashing method, or because of inherit benefits between the two.
18th January 2014, 04:13 AM   |  #2  
Chromium's Avatar
Recognized Contributor
Flag Toronto
Thanks Meter: 5,983
 
4,400 posts
Join Date:Joined: Oct 2012
Donate to Me
More
Its simply 2 different options of installation. The final result is the same: a boot.img gets extracted and written onto the appropriate partition of your device.

When you use fastboot to flash the img. the executable on your computer does this directly.
When you use a recovery to flash the zip (which also contains the boot.img), the edify script within the zip gives instructions to the recovery on how and where to write the image to.

There isnt really any advantage to doing one over the other.
18th January 2014, 04:50 AM   |  #3  
BirchBarlow's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Philadelphia
Thanks Meter: 124
 
345 posts
Join Date:Joined: Oct 2013
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silicon Knight

I was curious as to any difference between flashing a Kernel via ADB using a boot.img or flashing it as a .zip via recovery. Is there a benefit of one over the other. I've always done it via ADB, but I recently tried via a zip file through TWRP but didn't notice any difference, but wasn't sure if I was just being oblivious or not lol

I heard someone mention that when flashing it via ADB you don't get the Modules that come with the Kernel. Which I don't know if that was BS or not, cause as I stated, after trying it both ways, I didn't notice any features taken away i.e. flashed bricked kernel via ADB and then restored stock kernel and then flashed bricked via TWRP, and I was able to activate DT2W/S2W regardless of the method of flashing, as well as OC capabilities, Fast Charge, etc etc.

Just been curious about this for awhile, and there doesn't seem to be much discussion about it, so was unable to find an answer. Dev's always seem to give you the option to download a boot.img or .zip file, and wasn't sure if htat was just due to giving peopel the choice of preferred flashing method, or because of inherit benefits between the two.

Fastboot is the tool to which you are referring to, not ADB. You use fastboot to flash image files to partitions directly through the bootloader. That being said, there's no difference which method you use, the end result is the same. Using fastboot requires an unlocked bootloader, flashing through the recovery does not. When you flash a zip through the recovery, the proper destination partition is automatically overwritten whereas when you flash an image in fastboot, you have to specify the proper partition. That's the only real difference.
The Following User Says Thank You to BirchBarlow For This Useful Post: [ View ]
18th January 2014, 05:34 AM   |  #4  
Silicon Knight's Avatar
OP Senior Member
Flag Seattle, WA
Thanks Meter: 14
 
319 posts
Join Date:Joined: Mar 2011
Donate to Me
More
Excuse me, Fastboot is what I meant yes. My bad lol.

Thanks for the info, I figured as much. Im experienced with both methods and understand how they work. Just wasn't sure if there was a benefit over one or the other when it comes to flashing custom kernels. Thanks bro I appreciate the help. I will stick to flashing via fastboot then. I just prefer to do it that way.

I also use flashify sometimes as well. Seems to work pretty good.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
4th March 2014, 06:44 AM   |  #5  
AXDFREEDOM's Avatar
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 215
 
681 posts
Join Date:Joined: Jul 2013
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromium_

Its simply 2 different options of installation. The final result is the same: a boot.img gets extracted and written onto the appropriate partition of your device.

When you use fastboot to flash the img. the executable on your computer does this directly.
When you use a recovery to flash the zip (which also contains the boot.img), the edify script within the zip gives instructions to the recovery on how and where to write the image to.

There isnt really any advantage to doing one over the other.

i have a locked bootloader but i have root, can i "flash" throught root explorer overwriting boot.img file?
and reboot?
4th March 2014, 06:48 AM   |  #6  
rootSU's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Oxenhope, West Yorkshire, UK
Thanks Meter: 11,683
 
22,646 posts
Join Date:Joined: Aug 2010
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by AXD96

i have a locked bootloader but i have root, can i "flash" throught root explorer overwriting boot.img file?
and reboot?

Root explorer is not a flashing tool and no, it cannot modify the kernel

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
4th March 2014, 06:55 AM   |  #7  
AXDFREEDOM's Avatar
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 215
 
681 posts
Join Date:Joined: Jul 2013
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by rootSU

Root explorer is not a flashing tool and no, it cannot modify the kernel

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

maybe a stupid question, but the kernel is all saved in boot.img?
4th March 2014, 07:18 AM   |  #8  
rootSU's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Oxenhope, West Yorkshire, UK
Thanks Meter: 11,683
 
22,646 posts
Join Date:Joined: Aug 2010
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by AXD96

maybe a stupid question, but the kernel is all saved in boot.img?

Yep Indeed. What you can browse is /sys, which are the "files" the kernel manipulates to do what it wants...

..but browsing here is of no benefit to changing a kernel

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
4th March 2014, 10:41 AM   |  #9  
jball's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Amber
Thanks Meter: 171
 
807 posts
Join Date:Joined: Jan 2012
More
Unlock your device and just use the a custom recovery.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
5th March 2014, 07:15 AM   |  #10  
praveenkumarkm8's Avatar
Member
Thanks Meter: 0
 
33 posts
Join Date:Joined: Jun 2012
More
can we change kernel alone
i am using SENSONIC with stock kernel can i change kernel alone.

I want to change to franco kernel . Is it enough installing zip using recovery or i have to do fresh install of the ROM.........

Thanks in advance.

Post Reply Subscribe to Thread
Previous Thread Next Thread
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Top Threads in Nexus 5 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting by ThreadRank