What the crap is current? Need info on root, bootloader and ROMs for 5.0?

[alexmohr1990]

I've been going through posts around here. I'm currently on OF1, but I see a ton of concerns on the OneClick method, reports of success being across the board. I'm confused on how we're not consistent on one method. But! That's my question - Which has most success / is most reliable? Opinions? I'd love direct links to the ones you prefer.

What bootstrap is current? I see TWRP is still on 4.3/4.4, and Safestrap apparently lost development? What are people using? I'm currently on 5.0 OF1 without root or bootstrap.

..And I saw something about unlocking the bootloader? The phone is recognized as a dev version afterword? Does this allow us to freely install whatever bootstrap we desire? I'd prefer to get TWRP if I can. I've got no fear of ODIN'ing the crap out of this thing.

I've seen comments all over the board on what ROMs work. Like, I can't seem to find much commonality from post to post. I'm a go-for-stable type of person. I adore stock, and don't need fluff. But the thing I do need ( If anyone can advise ) is to crack open this N900V to work on Straighttalk. This phone currently isn't active, and I've already got a Straight-talk SIM. Without any of this modding the SIM is "Unrecognized" per the phone, and I'm unable to change APN settings.

So if there are common setups to flash, I'd love a link to a Modem / GApps typically flashed if needed. Another love would be to get a CM13 (Or Any CM really, I saw CM11 for unlocked bootloader?) variant running, but again, opinions seem to be varied.

Any suggestions, opinions, directions, or guides welcome!

Thanks in advance.

 

[RaaidR]

I've been going through posts around here. I'm currently on OF1, but I see a ton of concerns on the OneClick method, reports of success being across the board. I'm confused on how we're not consistent on one method. But! That's my question - Which has most success / is most reliable? Opinions? I'd love direct links to the ones you prefer.

What bootstrap is current? I see TWRP is still on 4.3/4.4, and Safestrap apparently lost development? What are people using? I'm currently on 5.0 OF1 without root or bootstrap.

..And I saw something about unlocking the bootloader? The phone is recognized as a dev version afterword? Does this allow us to freely install whatever bootstrap we desire? I'd prefer to get TWRP if I can. I've got no fear of ODIN'ing the crap out of this thing.

I've seen comments all over the board on what ROMs work. Like, I can't seem to find much commonality from post to post. I'm a go-for-stable type of person. I adore stock, and don't need fluff. But the thing I do need ( If anyone can advise ) is to crack open this N900V to work on Straighttalk. This phone currently isn't active, and I've already got a Straight-talk SIM. Without any of this modding the SIM is "Unrecognized" per the phone, and I'm unable to change APN settings.

So if there are common setups to flash, I'd love a link to a Modem / GApps typically flashed if needed. Another love would be to get a CM13 (Or Any CM really, I saw CM11 for unlocked bootloader?) variant running, but again, opinions seem to be varied.

Any suggestions, opinions, directions, or guides welcome!

Thanks in advance.

I will say in advance that this phone was my first time going thru any of this, so take what I have to say with a grain of salt if you would like. I have been rooted for about a week, unlocked bootloader and flashed Jasmine 6.1 rom yesterday.



I tried using this method of root for a few days with no results (http://forum.xda-developers.com/ver...b6-of1-n900v-note-3-verizon-oneclick-t3333569). I tried on multiple computers running Windows 7 x64 with no luck. It would start the process, but would never reboot my phone into download mode.

After failing at that, I ended up trying this method with both computers running Win 7 x64 (http://forum.xda-developers.com/verizon-galaxy-note-3/general/root-n900v-5-0-of1-one-click-t3330098) since there were multiple posts saying that it worked for them using Win 7 and running as admin. It would reboot my phone and then the computer program would freeze before the phone would start to download. I ended up taking the free Win 10 update on the wife's laptop and tried again. Phone was rooted in about 90 seconds. All I did was download KEIS and install the drivers it had, then try the program again. Worked flawlessly.

I followed this (http://forum.xda-developers.com/ver.../how-to-unlock-verizon-galaxy-note-3-t3360309) to unlock my bootloader. The one exception, is that I followed a YouTube video on how to do it by using a Terminal Emulator on the phone rather than via PC. In the video the guy adds "samsung" to a couple places in the code, but I did not. I followed the code exactly as is in the post I linked and it worked.

To install TWRP via FlashFire, you have to unlock bootloader. Once you unlock the bootloader, FlashFire will give you an option to download and flash TWRP.

 

[bftb0]

Poor Man's App Freeze

@RaaidR

FWIW, you can also perform a similar "freezing" function by going in to the /system/app folder and doing a

chmod 0000 filename.apk

On the .apk and .odex files you want to freeze. (For all I know that might be the technique that TiBu uses)

Note that since /system is typically mounted read-only, you have to temporarily mount it read-write when doing this. For example, in a terminal emulator:

su
mount -o remount,rw /system
cd /system/app
chmod 0000 Knox*.apk Knox*.odex
...
cd /
sync
mount -o remount,ro /system
exit
exit

Unless you need to make room inside of /system/app to install other apps (which will then survive a recovery-boot "factory reset"*), there's almost nothing to be gained by actually removing them rather than freezing them. They don't consume any runtime resources and probably don't even affect boot time following a cache/dalvik-cache wipe once they are "frozen".

Here is a list of things I froze in an older stock ROM; mostly to prevent OTA nagging, Knox BS, and some VZW spyware:

ContainerAgent.apk
ContainerAgent.odex
ContainerEventsRelayManager.apk
ContainerEventsRelayManager.odex
FWUpgrade.apk
FWUpgrade.odex
KLMSAgent.apk
KLMSAgent.odex
KNOXAgent.apk
KNOXAgent.odex
KNOXStore.apk
KNOXStore.odex
KnoxAttestationAgent.apk
KnoxAttestationAgent.odex
LocalFOTA.apk
SDM.apk
SDM.odex
VMS.apk

This post (from 4.3) has a more extensive list of debloating; I haven't used it so I can't vouch for it.

*some market apps don't seem to behave correctly when you drop their .apk into /system/app, so ymmv on this style of hack.

@alexmohr1990

Sorry for the small tangent/thread-jack.

If you like solid, bugfree performance, stick with rooted stock (but kill off stuff you dont want to be running via freezing and Android's built in app "Disable" feature in Settings==>Application manager)

Frankly, the only things you need to "freeze" are apps that do not appear in the Application manager - e.g. stuff like Verizon spyware (VMS.apk) and Knox crapola. For anything that shows up in the App manager, you can use the "Disable" feature. (TiBu "freezing" pre-dates
the appearance of the app Disable feature in Stock Android, so a lot of long time users of TiBu don't seem to be aware of Android's now built in app disable feature)

Can't help with the carrier stuff; I've only been on Verizon.

good luck

 

[RaaidR]

@RaaidR

FWIW, you can also perform a similar "freezing" function by going in to the /system/app folder and doing a

chmod 0000 filename.apk

On the .apk and .odex files you want to freeze. (For all I know that might be the technique that TiBu uses)

Note that since /system is typically mounted read-only, you have to temporarily mount it read-write when doing this. For example, in a terminal emulator:

su
mount -o remount,rw /system
cd /system/app
chmod 0000 Knox*.apk Knox*.odex
...
cd /
sync
mount -o remount,ro /system
exit
exit

Unless you need to make room inside of /system/app to install other apps (which will then survive a recovery-boot "factory reset"*), there's almost nothing to be gained by actually removing them rather than freezing them. They don't consume any runtime resources and probably don't even affect boot time following a cache/dalvik-cache wipe once they are "frozen".

Here is a list of things I froze in an older stock ROM; mostly to prevent OTA nagging, Knox BS, and some VZW spyware:

ContainerAgent.apk
ContainerAgent.odex
ContainerEventsRelayManager.apk
ContainerEventsRelayManager.odex
FWUpgrade.apk
FWUpgrade.odex
KLMSAgent.apk
KLMSAgent.odex
KNOXAgent.apk
KNOXAgent.odex
KNOXStore.apk
KNOXStore.odex
KnoxAttestationAgent.apk
KnoxAttestationAgent.odex
LocalFOTA.apk
SDM.apk
SDM.odex
VMS.apk

This post (from 4.3) has a more extensive list of debloating; I haven't used it so I can't vouch for it.

*some market apps don't seem to behave correctly when you drop their .apk into /system/app, so ymmv on this style of hack.

@alexmohr1990

Sorry for the small tangent/thread-jack.

If you like solid, bugfree performance, stick with rooted stock (but kill off stuff you dont want to be running via freezing and Android's built in app "Disable" feature in Settings==>Application manager)

Frankly, the only things you need to "freeze" are apps that do not appear in the Application manager - e.g. stuff like Verizon spyware (VMS.apk) and Knox crapola.

Can't help with the carrier stuff; I've only been on Verizon.

good luck

I went with Jasmine 6.1 so that I could use the Xposed software since it requires a deodexed rom.........stock rom isn't deodexed from what I read.

Also, I read a few list's like that, but wasn't sure on how much I could screw up in 5.0 since the list's were from previous versions of Android.

 

[alexmohr1990]

@RaaidR : This is the type of post I'm looking for. I've been ROMing since a Droid 2, but never hadid as much trouble as this silly vzw version note. Thanks!
@bftb0 Well. Typically I would stay stock. But even stock has anyone crafted an unofficial stock higher than 5.0? I saw something about s7 firmware. I did recently install CM13 for a friend on a S4. Made me super jelly and wanted to try it. My biggest concern is getting this thing unlocked to the point I can use preferably LTE on straighttalk. So I definitely need to be able to modify apn settings, but unlocking is a point I've never dived into, much less on such a difficult model.

 

[RaaidR]

@RaaidR : This is the type of post I'm looking for. I've been ROMing since a Droid 2, but never hadid as much trouble as this silly vzw version note. Thanks!
@bftb0 Well. Typically I would stay stock. But even stock has anyone crafted an unofficial stock higher than 5.0? I saw something about s7 firmware. I did recently install CM13 for a friend on a S4. Made me super jelly and wanted to try it. My biggest concern is getting this thing unlocked to the point I can use preferably LTE on straighttalk. So I definitely need to be able to modify apn settings, but unlocking is a point I've never dived into, much less on such a difficult model.

You are welcome. If you run across any issues, I might be able to help, but my knowledge is limited. Good luck going forward, let me know how it works out for you.

 

[alexmohr1990]

Excellent! @RaaidR all of it for the most part worked like a charm. Root was no trouble, same for bootloader. Both on first try. Had to flash TWRP Manually through Odin, but I got it. Good stuff. Now to hunt down a ROM. Thanks a ton for such a precise response!

So... For ROMs... Does this mean I can now access Developer Version ROMs? I'm looking for something unlocked (Or can easily modify carrier settings) and stable. Not into the idea of "Whelp. Guess it decided not to boot today" that I've run into with ROMing on previous phones. Haven't really got to play with Xposed yet, so it'd be cool to tool around with it too.

 

[RaaidR]

Jasmine 6.1 comes with Xposed infused and is very close to stock rom from what I have experienced so far and from what others have said about it. As far as Developer Roms go, that I can't tell you much about that. I went straight to Jasmine because from everything I have read it seems to be the most stable of what is out there. Hopefully somebody on here can give you some different options. If you decide to go with Jasmine, make sure to remember to flash the partial firmware thru Odin after flashing the rom.

 

[alexmohr1990]

Is this the Jasmine ROM you refer to? http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2760380

Guess I've never had a device with an unlocked bootloader. Hah. I guess my next question would be - I wouldn't be able to use any Pre-5.0 ROMs? Not that I truthfully want to for the most part. But as you said, there just seems to be a slim amount of things about as I guess many have moved on to newer devices and Root/Bootloader progress came so late.

I'll give it a try though. Plan to make a day of flashing.

Edit: For Jasmine... It makes note of a retail version and developer version... Are we technically on the dev version after the unlock? I didn't see a mention to tell the difference.

 

[RaaidR]

I believe you are not able to downgrade from 5.0 once you go to it, or at least that was my understand pre-root. If that has changed post-root, I cannot say but I didn't attempt it.

Also, although we now have the developer mode enabled due to unlocking bootloader, I didn't know the difference and chose to follow the retail instructions and it worked flawlessly.


I searched for "Jasmine 6.1 install" on YouTube and followed the video by EverythingSamsungPro since I also followed his video on bootloader unlock.

 

[bftb0]

Edit: For Jasmine... It makes note of a retail version and developer version... Are we technically on the dev version after the unlock? I didn't see a mention to tell the difference.

unlocked bootloader == developer edition.

Having a "DevEd" device means that the bootloader will no long prevent you from booting unsigned "bootable" partitions (boot and recovery). And, also that Odin no longer requires things flashed in the AP slot such as boot.img, recovery.img, and system.img to be Samsung signed.

The implications is that the "Retail" version of Jasmine is required to use the pure stock boot image, and no custom recovery, whereas the DevEd version can do one or both. Small mods of the boot.img blob are the most likely.


Noting that the "boot.img" binary blob is actually three separate pieces:

boot.img = kernel + ramdisk + devicetree

I can't tell you if the DevEd version of Jasmine modifies the stock kernel, the ramdisk, or the device treee (or any combination thereof). Intuition tells me that mods of the devicetree are highly unlikely and small mods of the ramdisk are the most likely. Is the kernel modded? I don't know, you'll have to dig into that thread to find out.

Practically speaking, having only a single boot which is rooted is a bit of a hazard, but it is far more of a hazard if the bootloader is still locked. If that one boot/ROM started boot-looping after a broken modification by the owner, the only recourse is to go back to pure stock using Odin and start re-rooting. With an unlocked bootloader, in principle you could install a custom recovery (flashing it with Odin) at any time, so a 2nd independent, rooted custom boot/recovery is available to perform system maintenance.

So you can use either the DevEd version or the Retail version on an unlocked phone. Probably you should dig in to the Jasmine thread to find out if the differences between the two are compelling to you based on whatever it is you want your phone to do.

good luck

PS. See this very nearly identical inquiry & reply in the Q&A Forum, especially the remarks about "partial firmware flashing". You do not want to over-flash your unlocked bootloader.




---------- Post added at 11:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:08 PM ----------

I believe you are not able to downgrade from 5.0 once you go to it, or at least that was my understand pre-root. If that has changed post-root, I cannot say but I didn't attempt it.

What is known for sure is that the Samsung bootloader (which is actually a whole slew of partitions) enforces an Anti-Rollback policy on the bootloader firmware.

It is actually not known if it would be possible to run a 4.3.x or 4.4.x stock ROM on later versions of bootloader firmware. For instance, if your bootloader firmware was OB6 or OF1 ("5.x") but you flashed stock versions of NC4/NK1 ROM software (4.4.x "boot.img" and "system.img")

Why is it not known? Because AFAIK, no-one has tried it. (Well, actually @ryanbg tried all sorts of dangerous flashing combinations in the old days, but I'm not sure if he published the details). I suspect it would be safe to try these experiments (clean flash of only boot.img and system.img from prior releases) - if and only if you have an unlocked bootloader. (If they don't work, flash something that does; hard to imagine they will cause a hard-bricking on what is a DevEd phone).

So it is probably most accurate to say "we can't flash OB6 or OF1 bootloader firmware back to NC4", but "it's not known if OB6/OF1 bootloader would successfully boot 4.4.x (or even 4.3.x) ROMs" (boot.img + system.img)

I hope that's not too confusing. It's a little subtle, but makes far more sense to anyone who realizes that there are a ton of partitions in these Samsung phones, and that "4.3", "4.4", "5.0" are more closely associated with boot.img and system.img than they are with the (many) bootloader partitions.

 

[fubz]

You can get CM13 here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/ver...opment/rom-temaseks-unofficial-build-t3364382
I've been running it for a couple of weeks and I have found it to be the only usable MM rom at the moment. Otherwise that Jasmine ROM is a solid choice.

 

[RaaidR]

unlocked bootloader == developer edition.

Having a "DevEd" device means that the bootloader will no long prevent you from booting unsigned "bootable" partitions (boot and recovery). And, also that Odin no longer requires things flashed in the AP slot such as boot.img, recovery.img, and system.img to be Samsung signed.

The implications is that the "Retail" version of Jasmine is required to use the pure stock boot image, and no custom recovery, whereas the DevEd version can do one or both. Small mods of the boot.img blob are the most likely.


Noting that the "boot.img" binary blob is actually three separate pieces:

boot.img = kernel + ramdisk + devicetree

I can't tell you if the DevEd version of Jasmine modifies the stock kernel, the ramdisk, or the device treee (or any combination thereof). Intuition tells me that mods of the devicetree are highly unlikely and small mods of the ramdisk are the most likely. Is the kernel modded? I don't know, you'll have to dig into that thread to find out.

Practically speaking, having only a single boot which is rooted is a bit of a hazard, but it is far more of a hazard if the bootloader is still locked. If that one boot/ROM started boot-looping after a broken modification by the owner, the only recourse is to go back to pure stock using Odin and start re-rooting. With an unlocked bootloader, in principle you could install a custom recovery (flashing it with Odin) at any time, so a 2nd independent, rooted custom boot/recovery is available to perform system maintenance.

So you can use either the DevEd version or the Retail version on an unlocked phone. Probably you should dig in to the Jasmine thread to find out if the differences between the two are compelling to you based on whatever it is you want your phone to do.

good luck

PS. See this very nearly identical inquiry & reply in the Q&A Forum, especially the remarks about "partial firmware flashing". You do not want to over-flash your unlocked bootloader.




---------- Post added at 11:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:08 PM ----------



What is known for sure is that the Samsung bootloader (which is actually a whole slew of partitions) enforces an Anti-Rollback policy on the bootloader firmware.

It is actually not known if it would be possible to run a 4.3.x or 4.4.x stock ROM on later versions of bootloader firmware. For instance, if your bootloader firmware was OB6 or OF1 ("5.x") but you flashed stock versions of NC4/NK1 ROM software (4.4.x "boot.img" and "system.img")

Why is it not known? Because AFAIK, no-one has tried it. (Well, actually @ryanbg tried all sorts of dangerous flashing combinations in the old days, but I'm not sure if he published the details). I suspect it would be safe to try these experiments (clean flash of only boot.img and system.img from prior releases) - if and only if you have an unlocked bootloader. (If they don't work, flash something that does; hard to imagine they will cause a hard-bricking on what is a DevEd phone).

So it is probably most accurate to say "we can't flash OB6 or OF1 bootloader firmware back to NC4", but "it's not known if OB6/OF1 bootloader would successfully boot 4.4.x (or even 4.3.x) ROMs" (boot.img + system.img)

I hope that's not too confusing. It's a little subtle, but makes far more sense to anyone who realizes that there are a ton of partitions in these Samsung phones, and that "4.3", "4.4", "5.0" are more closely associated with boot.img and system.img than they are with the (many) bootloader partitions.

I did flash the partial firmware on mine and did not flash the modem part for the developer edition, so far I have had no issues. Am I missing something I am supposed to have?

 

[bftb0]

I did flash the partial firmware on mine and did not flash the modem part for the developer edition, so far I have had no issues. Am I missing something I am supposed to have?

Well, the point of that partial firmware was to upgrade the bootloader firmware set (if needed) and also install a stock boot and recovery images. Here's the contents of that .tar.md5.7z archive:

-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff 5932800 2015-07-16 06:39 NON-HLOS.bin
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff 1110652 2015-07-16 06:39 [b][color=red]aboot.mbn[/color][/b]
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff 10840336 2015-07-16 06:39 [b]boot.img[/b]
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff 56542976 2015-07-16 06:36 modem.bin
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff 11796752 2015-07-16 06:39 [b]recovery.img[/b]
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff   164388 2015-07-16 06:39 rpm.mbn
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff   280976 2015-07-16 06:38 sbl1.mbn
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff    32356 2015-07-16 06:38 sdi.mbn
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff   321284 2015-07-16 06:38 tz.mbn

The one shown in red - "aboot.mbn" is the final (third) stage of the bootloader, and it corresponds to the "aboot" partition which is modified by the bootloader unlock technique. "aboot.mbn" is the code you visually observe running on the phone in Odin mode and during bootloader sequences.

So, what you did was that you re-locked your bootloader, and if you had a custom recovery installed you overwrote that with the stock version. If you were to boot into Odin mode, you will no longer see the "MODE: DEVELOPER" message.

If you want to unlock the bootloader, just run the unlock tool again as root. (You will have to destroy your external SD card again)

Good luck


PS. This is a little of a tangent but it is worthwhile that you look at that file listing above as you are new to this. Whenever a (Note 3) "bootloader" firmware upgrade is performed in Odin, all of the following files are flashed in the same Odin session:

NON-HLOS.bin, aboot.mbn, modem.bin, rpm.mbn, sbl1.mbn, sdi.mbn, tz.mbn

These files each are flashed into separate partitions, but they have interlocking dependencies; you can't flash them individually in a willy-nilly fashion. If you ever do that you are risking a hard-bricking.

The only exception in this group is the "modem.bin" radio firmware. (Some people fool around (mix-n-match) with various radio firmwares, probably without any firm evidence to support their claims as to why they engage in such behavior.)

When people distinguish between "ROM" and "bootloader firmware", they mean by ROM these files:

recovery.img (stock ROMs; omitted if you already have a custom recovery)
boot.img
system.img.ext4
cache.img.ext4

That's what made the bundle you flashed "partial" - it didn't contain the stock system.img or cache.img

 

[RaaidR]

Well, the point of that partial firmware was to upgrade the bootloader firmware set (if needed) and also install a stock boot and recovery images. Here's the contents of that .tar.md5.7z archive:

-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff 5932800 2015-07-16 06:39 NON-HLOS.bin
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff 1110652 2015-07-16 06:39 [b][color=red]aboot.mbn[/color][/b]
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff 10840336 2015-07-16 06:39 [b]boot.img[/b]
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff 56542976 2015-07-16 06:36 modem.bin
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff 11796752 2015-07-16 06:39 [b]recovery.img[/b]
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff   164388 2015-07-16 06:39 rpm.mbn
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff   280976 2015-07-16 06:38 sbl1.mbn
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff    32356 2015-07-16 06:38 sdi.mbn
-rw-r--r-- hsbadr/staff   321284 2015-07-16 06:38 tz.mbn

The one shown in red - "aboot.mbn" is the final (third) stage of the bootloader, and it corresponds to the "aboot" partition which is modified by the bootloader unlock technique. "aboot.mbn" is the code you visually observe running on the phone in Odin mode and during bootloader sequences.

So, what you did was that you re-locked your bootloader, and if you had a custom recovery installed you overwrote that with the stock version. If you were to boot into Odin mode, you will no longer see the "MODE: DEVELOPER" message.

If you want to unlock the bootloader, just run the unlock tool again as root. (You will have to destroy your external SD card again)

Good luck


PS. This is a little of a tangent but it is worthwhile that you look at that file listing above as you are new to this. Whenever a (Note 3) "bootloader" firmware upgrade is performed in Odin, all of the following files are flashed in the same Odin session:

NON-HLOS.bin, aboot.mbn, modem.bin, rpm.mbn, sbl1.mbn, sdi.mbn, tz.mbn

These files each are flashed into separate partitions, but they have interlocking dependencies; you can't flash them individually in a willy-nilly fashion. If you ever do that you are risking a hard-bricking.

The only exception in this group is the "modem.bin" radio firmware. (Some people fool around (mix-n-match) with various radio firmwares, probably without any firm evidence to support their claims as to why they engage in such behavior.)

When people distinguish between "ROM" and "bootloader firmware", they mean by ROM these files:

recovery.img (stock ROMs; omitted if you already have a custom recovery)
boot.img
system.img.ext4
cache.img.ext4

That's what made the bundle you flashed "partial" - it didn't contain the stock system.img or cache.img

In the download screen I still show as being in developer mode, but I did unlock the bootloader before flashing Jasmine ROM. So would flashing the partial firmware be the reason why I had to reflash TWRP with FlashFire after flashing Jasmine?

 

[bftb0]

In the download screen I still show as being in developer mode, but I did unlock the bootloader before flashing Jasmine ROM. So would flashing the partial firmware be the reason why I had to reflash TWRP with FlashFire after flashing Jasmine?

For sure, yes. (cause of recovery needing to be re-flashed).



But that is really very surprising that you still have Developer Mode showing. I guess I'll look into something (perhaps the DE sig is flashed into the back end of the aboot partition and it survived the new flash because the aboot.mbn image is not sufficiently large to cause an erasure of the erase block that the sig lives in.)

That's new information you just discovered right there.

I assume that you do not get the "Unauthorized Software" pop-up message when you boot the custom recovery, is that right?

Thanks for the information.

 

[RaaidR]

For sure, yes. (cause of recovery needing to be re-flashed).



But that is really very surprising that you still have Developer Mode showing. I guess I'll look into something (perhaps the DE sig is flashed into the back end of the aboot partition and it survived the new flash because the aboot.mbn image is not sufficiently large to cause an erasure of the erase block that the sig lives in.)

That's new information you just discovered right there.

I assume that you do not get the "Unauthorized Software" pop-up message when you boot the custom recovery, is that right?

Thanks for the information.

Nope, I don't get any warnings or pop-ups about anything when I load TWRP. When I boot to TWRP, it just boots right to it like it should without any warnings at all.

Just so you know, this is exactly what I did in order:
Rooted phone (Yemen n900v 5.0 of1 one click)
Unlocked bootloader with Terminal Emulator
Downloaded FlashFire and flashed TWRP
Flashed Jasmine 6.1 ROM with FlashFire (in FlashFire I selected Wipe and chose System Data, 3rd Party Apps, Dalvik cache) and set reboot in FlashFire to Bootloader
Flashed partial firmware via ODIN in AP slot
During reboot, I removed battery and booted into Recovery Mode (Vol Up, Home, Power Button)
Wipe/Factory Reset
Wipe Cache Partition
Reboot and complete setup

After this I re-downloaded all of them and restored data via TB. During this, I noticed that I no longer had TWRP. Opened FlashFire again and downloaded and flashed TWRP one more time.


Being new to all of this, I assumed that TWRP got wiped when I flashed new ROM and did all of the wipes so I just assumed that it wiped everything else also. After this, everything works perfectly. I don't have any issues with anything, except I wish I could download some new themes to use with the ROM (may be able to, I just haven't found out how to yet. I have been looking, just haven't come across the correct stuff to read).


As far as it being new information, leave it up to the noob to stumble across it haha.

 

[bftb0]

Being new to all of this, I assumed that TWRP got wiped when I flashed new ROM and did all of the wipes so I just assumed that it wiped everything else also.

Shouldn't be "the ROM" that did that. Devs can do whatever they want, but it has been the custom for ROM devs to avoid packaging up recovery images for flashing during a ROM install. First because (strictly speaking) it's not needed by "the ROM" to function, and second because many devices have more than one choice for custom recoveries, so doing that would be over-riding the owners' decisions about what custom recovery to use.

In this case though, the dual- or triple- purpose Jasmine ROM (DevEd/Retail/Multiboot) has to install a stock boot image for Retail versions. In most stock distributions, the device or carrier vendor uses the identical kernel in the "boot.img" file that is used in the "recovery.img" file. (The ramdisks are different, and that accounts for their wildly different behaviors - the recovery doesn't need to rely on /system or /data to boot up to a primitive UI such as TWRP... and that's exactly why recoveries are used for OTA installations, upgrades and repairs - neither /system nor /data need to be mounted for them to boot up a UI; in a way of speaking, those file systems are "offline" when the recovery is booted. That of course makes manipulating them, erasing them, etc much more convenient).

I haven't followed the Jasmine thread much, but since there have been version releases which are based off of different stock releases, hsbadr needs to insure that the correct stock boot partition (file "boot.img") is installed along with the customized stock ROM (Jasmine) for the Retail version, and that's the purpose of that "partial firmware" flash. I suppose he left the recovery.img in there simply because it is good practice to keep stock recovery images in lockstep with stock boot images. And of course, that development predates the appearance of "Unlocked" bootloaders, so there was no reason on Retail devices to have anything except a stock recovery installed.


.

 

[RaaidR]

Shouldn't be "the ROM" that did that. Devs can do whatever they want, but it has been the custom for ROM devs to avoid packaging up recovery images for flashing during a ROM install. First because (strictly speaking) it's not needed by "the ROM" to function, and second because many devices have more than one choice for custom recoveries, so doing that would be over-riding the owners' decisions about what custom recovery to use.

In this case though, the dual- or triple- purpose Jasmine ROM (DevEd/Retail/Multiboot) has to install a stock boot image for Retail versions. In most stock distributions, the device or carrier vendor uses the identical kernel in the "boot.img" file that is used in the "recovery.img" file. (The ramdisks are different, and that accounts for their wildly different behaviors - the recovery doesn't need to rely on /system or /data to boot up to a primitive UI such as TWRP... and that's exactly why recoveries are used for OTA installations, upgrades and repairs - neither /system nor /data need to be mounted for them to boot up a UI; in a way of speaking, those file systems are "offline" when the recovery is booted. That of course makes manipulating them, erasing them, etc much more convenient).

I haven't followed the Jasmine thread much, but since there have been version releases which are based off of different stock releases, hsbadr needs to insure that the correct stock boot partition (file "boot.img") is installed along with the customized stock ROM (Jasmine) for the Retail version, and that's the purpose of that "partial firmware" flash. I suppose he left the recovery.img in there simply because it is good practice to keep stock recovery images in lockstep with stock boot images. And of course, that development predates the appearance of "Unlocked" bootloaders, so there was no reason on Retail devices to have anything except a stock recovery installed.


.

Ah, I gotcha. Yea, I just guessed that since I did all those wipes that was cause for it having disappeared rather than me flashing that firmware, which makes more sense. Is there "Dev" or "Retail" version of Jasmine or is it just the install process that changes depending on whether your phone is developer or retail?

 

[bftb0]

Ah, I gotcha. Yea, I just guessed that since I did all those wipes that was cause for it having disappeared rather than me flashing that firmware, which makes more sense. Is there "Dev" or "Retail" version of Jasmine or is it just the install process that changes depending on whether your phone is developer or retail?

TBH I don't know. I'd say "read the thread" but it's what - 1200+ pages long?

Maybe search that thread for keywords.

One way to determine it would be two download the installation bundles for each and pick them apart or perform checksums e.g. on the boot.img file from each. If they have identical checksums (MD5 or SHA1 or whatever), then the kernel+ramdisk (== boot image) are the same. The same can be done for any pair of files to test for "sameness". If the checksums are different, then you have to pick them apart more carefully to find out what the differences are.

The boot image controls many long lived "services" that get started by the parent of all processes in Unix/Linux - the "init" process. So many times even stock-derived boot images have tweaks in their ramdisk (which contain files such as the "init.*.rc" files that control how init behaves), even if a pure stock kernel is used. But I don't know if the DevEd version of Jasmine has mods like that; it well might though.