Porting LineageOS to FP2

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007fefbec14ac0>


Just thought that perhaps libril-qc*.so could be changed in the new blobs.


Would be great to get a list of changed blobs for all releases. @Teemu_Hukkanen please? :wink:


Does this change make a difference in power consumption while the screen is switched on? My impression is,that it is higher with Lineage than with the open FPOS.


I see a lot of changed binarys and xmls comparing the blobs from 17.03 and 17.07 with a diff. How could we use the new blobs with the LAOS builds? I have no glue what to do but be willing to help.


The blobs are not taken from the fp open but from the stock fp OS. Not sure if that truly matters. I could check if there’s a new version out there, too.



New blobs are up. And some CVE fixes in the kernel. I will try to get all CVEs done, but that is very slow process.


Flashing LineageOS is not working

@chrmhoffmann: Is that the requirement, so that a device with LineageOS appears in the deviceliste?


New testbuild with the new blobs available @ https://fp2.joutubes.nl/builds/full/

Gonna test it now.


unfortunately, the new blobs don’t solve the proximity sensor drain


SIM2 SMS bug also still persist :frowning:


Tested testbuild.zip (14.1-20170807-UNOFFICIAL-FP2):

  • Not able to Disable/Enable SIM slots

The .sha512 files should not contain a path. Currently it is not possible to check the .zip files with a single linux command.


Gonna fix the sha512 files and will update the porting post with all the found bugs. Thanks for the work.

Also started a new testbuild with the new security patches:

@chrmhoffmann is there anything you can do about the 3 bugs mentioned above, or are they broken upstream?


So should the recent testbuild from 07.08.2017 contain the binary blobs 17.07.6? (As they can be downloaded here )
If so, why is the build.prop of the actual testbuild referring to fp2-gms-17.04.8 in its fingerprint?
Am I getting something wrong? Is the version number in the fingerprint not related to the binary blobs delivered with the image?


The buildserver uses this repo for the blobs:
which contains the blobs

So I think the version number does not match the actual blobs used.


SIM slot 1: Main Sim w/ PIN
SIM slot 2: prepaid Sim with default 0000 PIN

Turn on phone, upon entering the correct SIM1 PIN: “SIM PIN Operation failed”

SIM slot 1: prepaid Sim with default 0000 PIN
SIM slot 2: Main Sim w/ PIN

Turn on phone, SIM1 PIN request skipped(*), upon entering the correct SIM2 PIN: both SIMs are activated correctly, all network services can be used

(*) There is a setting activated on the Sim card (as I just learned) that it is not locked


Is this FP2 specific or general LOS?

08-08 20:12:30.647 14273 14273 W sh : type=1400 audit(0.0:304): avc: denied { read } for name="/" dev=“rootfs” ino=1 scontext=u:r:untrusted_app:s0:c512,c768 tcontext=u:object_r:rootfs:s0 tclass=dir permissive=0

I see this also when working with a terminal emulator. Not being root gives a a permission denied (termux) or “empty directory” (file manager)

“of course” :slight_smile:


I’d call this wanted behavior because why should a non-root user be allowed to see that folder?


I recently built and installed LineageOS on my FP2, works decent so far. Thanks to all contributors.

I just realized a feature I loved on the Fairphone OS that seems missing in Lineage: Mounting the SD card as USB Mass Storage to a computer.

I’m not an Android dev, but some digging around makes it look like 1) nobody believes this is possible, while 2) it’s perfectly possible and low-level implementation just waits for a userspace button.

Using LineageOS on the FP2

Well, why not? This is root, the start of everything, and what secret do you expect there? Besides, on every SELinux enabled system, / is readable by everyone. I can’t think of any reason not to be able to read /. Except you would propose security by obscurity. But even then, the contents of root are no secret on Android. You may argue for /system, and the likes, but /? Also /data is only readable as root, as seen by the permissions. So, if /data is rwxrwx–x, which reflects this, / is rwxr-xr-x, as on every Unix system, and forbidden by policy? I wouldn’t call this consistent…


It’s more about signed builds and release keys