Ubuntu phone on FP1, (similar hardware as the Aquaris E4.5 Ubuntu)

Many on this forum people fail to recognise that the issue with the FP1 being stuck on 4.2 has much bigger implications than ‘having the latest OS or Apps’. The FP1(U) is stuck on Android 4.2 because the drivers are not available. The drivers not being available also means no alternative OS will be available. Read the impressions of the FP1(U) on the xda developer forums, developers are quickly losing interest in the FP1 as a platform.

Having root access without drivers is similar to being given access to a car. But then you find out you’re not allowed to use the steering wheel, or the brakes, or the tires. You still have acess to the car, it’s just that you can’t do anything to change it.

That is actually unrelated, but root access enables us to use the excellent Xposed framework or Titanium Backups for example. And the open bootloader makes it easy to flash Ubuntu OS or Cyanogen, if they become avaible sometimes ;-).

I am fully aware of the implications. I do not want to be so pessimistic and try to focus on solutions, not problems.

Four days ago you said:

Today you said:

These statements are logically inconsistent. Unless you have become fully aware of the driver implications in the last few days.

I am approaching this as a realist not a pessimist. Avoiding the issue and side stepping does not really help.

Dear @for83, i do not like the way you are handling this discussion. It feels you are doing personal attacks on my reasoning in trying to find logical inconsistencies in my posts.

You are accusing my of a) side stepping and b) logically inconsistency. I do need see why you do this, and it certainly not helps in validating your points. I can put it simply: It never stated porting is possible, i said should as it was in my best knowledge. While it is still unclear if porting is possible, the guide i posted earlier today has only be released two three days ago, before that, is was a simple Wiki page stating it will be released soon. You can believe me on that or ask Alan Pope or David Calle of Ubuntu. So at the time of writing my post, it was not clear that current versions of Ubuntu Touch are based on Android 4.4. In fact older versions used Cyanogenmod 10, which is based on Android 4.1.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Touch/Porting
Touch/Porting (zuletzt geändert am 2015-02-20 13:57:49 durch davidc3)

I completely fail to see a logical inconsistence here and think you are cherry-picking 2 sentences given in reply to different statements just to devalue my points or opinion. Let me say that clear: This community is so full of great people that i see absolute no need in further discussing this with you if you keep on playing like you did.

It is a forum i like to go, were we try to help each other and engage with Fairphones ideas. We are critical here, but we argue causes not persons and in most cases, that works very well. I think i made my point pretty clear.

2 Likes

Here is pretty extensive review of Ubuntu for Phones by Jono Bacon. It is a bit biased, since Jono was Community Manager at Canonical (makers of Ubuntu) for some years. But it gives you a great impression.

1 Like

There must be drivers for Android 4.4.2 because there is a Kitkat port of Cyanogen Mod running on the FP1. So there is everything one needs, if one has the ability to port Ubuntu.

@ben:

It seems very orderly, but it feels like the first Windows Mobile devices from the early 2000s must have felt. There is NO eye candy. NOTHING. Does it even have a wallpaper option? From what Jono Bacon shows, Ubuntu phone looks REALLY boring!

The article you linked to says:

“This is basically the same rom as the KK build I do for the Wiko Stairway with a few FP1 changes (esp of course the kernel, magnetometer service, other minor differences). It uses a blob from the Wiko mtk-ril.so as the original FP1 blob crashes the rild.” (where rild obviously means build).

The Wiko Stairway uses a MT6589 - this is why the build was possible It is also why various things with that CyanogenMod build will not work with the FP (video encoding / decoding, camera etc). It is the phone equivalent of installing an OS on one computer and then moving the hard disk to another ‘similar’ computer and being content with the result.

1 Like

No, “rild” does not mean “build”. A “build” does not crash, it fails. (Or to be specific, a build system/process obviously can crash like every other software, but that is typically not what we speak of). What crashes is the RIL deamon called “rild” for Radio Interface Layer, as chrmhoffman wrote correctly in the xda-forum. It is a layer of software between the Radio Hardware (Radio in this case means the mobile chipset, not FM) and Android services for telephony.

1 Like

Sorry my mistake. The expression “crash the build” is perfectly acceptable English though.

So what this means is that FP1 blob is so bad that the only way chrmhoffman had of getting telephony working on an FP with CyanogenMod was to use a blob from another phone?

I do not know if the blob is “bad”. Lets agree it is incompatible. That is actually not surprising given the Fairphone runs Android 4.2 and chrmhoffman was trying to get Android 4.4 to build.

I think is is some kind of miracle the port even runs!

2 Likes

a bit off-topic, I guess, but the news for the FPs aim to port other OSes to the FP (the lastest blogpost) has reached the Ubuntu community as well.

omg.ubuntu

2 Likes

I just read in an article in Heise online that Fairphone Company is working on an Ubuntu-OS Portation for FP2 and has still not given up hopes on making this also available for FP1 users.

Is this correct? Who has more infos on that?

As I´m fed up with some Android features I already started looking for alternative OS-smartphones from Meizo (=Ubuntu) or Blackberry. But if something is still going on with FP1 that would be a well needed argument to stay with this.

You were moved fast. I don’t have much hope for the FP1. The FP1 based on MTK and there is no public code for that, so I assume nobody will be able to port the code. And it’s a bit too old and too slow.

Update: This answer is for the FP2 only!

For the FP2 try the links below and searching the forum! Make sure you check the “What’s working” part.

https://devices.ubports.com/#/FP2

Some more details on the port can be found here (older/February time frame)

The page you linked to is about FP2. @GT-Eins, however, asked about FP1 (that’s why I moved the post here).

@keesj has the keynote at the Linuxwochen Wien next week. Maybe Ubuntu Touch will also be a topic.

1 Like

So I understand:
FP2 is possible
FP1 maybe - just in case of a (proposed) Android update

correct?

My bad. I tried to fix it. I hope they will be able to record his talk this time :slight_smile:

1 Like

Yes, but I wouldn’t wait for the FP1. The FP2 is a better candidate. But according to an old blog post and a talk by @keesj they have the MTK ‘base’ source code. So things are possible but no one knows. But they are very busy so not sure if they have time for things like the FP1 or Ubuntu OS.

Could you post the link to that article? Or give a quote to that particular paragraph?

Do you have a link?

I doubt that Ubuntu Touch is ever coming to FP1. This is the first time I hear anyone claim that. Of course, it would be nice, but I don’t see it happen.

There is indeed this heise online article (I’m not sure, if it is the one, @GT-Eins is referring to) from February 2016, which states the following:

English translation: Even with the first Fairphone the company hasn’t given up hope yet to provide a newer Android and alternative OSes and is still working on a solution.

I still think that there is a theoretical possibility that there can be a Ubuntu Touch port for the FP1 because we have already experienced two community ports on an Android Kitkat codebase (CM11 and Kitkat 4.4.4 by @chrmhoffmann) and I can’t imagine why a company, which could pay a developer full time for porting an OS and has obtained the software licenses to be legally able to, couldn’t come up with alternative OSes.