[Beta] Pixel 2 installer config

FlashyLinux

@flohack said in [Beta] Pixel 2 installer config:

Flash dtbo and vbmeta from here: http://twoot.bin.org.in/nextcloud/index.php/apps/files/?dir=/porting/walleye%2C taimen/walleye&fileid=8312

When I click on this link it asks me to login to nextcloud.

flohack

@flashylinux Sorry this is the right link: https://twoot.bin.org.in/nextcloud/index.php/s/mzfmYJscqPyM2Bc

FlashyLinux

@flohack

Not so good news.

Instead of the being frozen on the boot screen. Now it boot loops.

Try #1
Steps
1. Wiped everything using TWRP
2. Flashed boot with “halium-boot_walleye.img”
3. Flashed dtbo with “dtbo.img”
4. Flashed vbmeta with “vbmeta.img” using fastboot --disable-verity --disable-verification flash vbmeta vbmeta.img
5. Rebooted device

Result – Boot loops

Try #2
Steps
1. Flashed boot with “twrp-3.3.0-0-walleye.img”
2. One time booted “halium-boot_walleye.img”

Result – This booted and then restarted and went into TWRP

I am able to see the device when I boot into TWRP though. Not sure if this is helpful or not.

flohack

@flashylinux Ok can you check after it bootloops if there is anything in /sys/fs/pstore?

FlashyLinux

@flohack

That folder is empty

FlashyLinux

@flohack

I cant edit posts I guess after so long so I am double posting but.

I have not been able to find any file in that directory.

Try #1
Steps

Wiped everything using TWRP
Flashed boot with “halium-boot_walleye.img”
Flashed dtbo with “dtbo.img”
Flashed vbmeta with “vbmeta.img” using fastboot --disable-verity --disable-verification flash vbmeta vbmeta.img
Rebooted device
Let Boot loop 3 times
Booted into bootloader
One time booted into TWRP

Result – Directory empty

Try #2
Steps

Flashed boot with “twrp-3.3.0-0-walleye.img”
One time booted “halium-boot_walleye.img”

Result – Directory empty

I also noticed I was using boot slot "b" and changed it to "a" to see if that made a difference. DO NOT DO THIS. It would not allow me to boot or flash anything. It wouldn't even finish flashing a factory image. I changed it back to slot "b" and everything was back to normal.

RVan

Following...

agates

@Flohack This page at postmarketOS wiki states some issues with pstore. Is it possible we're facing the same issues?

https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Google_Pixel_2_XL_(google-taimen)

EDIT:
Also wondering if we need to set clk_ignore_unused=true, though I'm not sure how or if you've already configured that

flohack

@agates Ill take a look. Well idk how to set clk_ignore_unused but I will try to find out.

agates

@flohack Looks like clk_ignore_unused may be needed as a command line boot option, if I'm interpreting this correctly?

https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Qualcomm_Snapdragon_835_(MSM8998)

If there's an easy way I can test that I'd be happy to, though I realize the same chip is used in taimen and not having this issue.

flohack

Some small progress I have a Pixel 2 now in my hands and can reproduce the bootloop Probably going to attach a UART serial cable via USB to see whats going on

flohack

@agates Yes indeed adding clock ignore helped. Though now the problem is, will that keep some hardware out of sleep state, and impact battery life?

agates

@flohack Awesome! I guess it will be hard to judge battery life since I haven't used the thing as a daily driver for over a year. I'm eager to try it, though, at least to have a phone to develop apps against.

flohack

@agates you can try to run this installer config manually with ubports-installer -f walleye.yml - https://github.com/ubports/installer-configs/pull/150

agates

@flohack It's working! Typing from ubports on my pixel 2 now!

Thank you!

Keneda

@agates said in [Beta] Pixel 2 installer config:

@flohack It's working! Typing from ~~ubports~~ on my pixel 2 now!

Thank you!

Ubuntu Touch / uTouch

agates

@keneda said in [Beta] Pixel 2 installer config:

@agates said in [Beta] Pixel 2 installer config:

@flohack It's working! Typing from ~~ubports~~ on my pixel 2 now!

Thank you!

Ubuntu Touch / uTouch

Ahhh yes, the behavior that drove me away from the community all those years ago: people arguing about the names of things instead of making the experience better for developers

Keneda

@agates
Wow, how can someone feel so bad just because we tell him the right naming of things... ?
Ubports devs themselves remind sometime people here, that ubports is the association that maintain the OS, and not the OS itself , wich is uTouch.
Anyway, sorry hurting your feelings teaching something with kindness.

flohack

@agates Well to be honest, we are we very peacefully about slight variations of things, but with the name of the OS vs the name of the Foundation we need to be strict:

UBports Foundation is the organization doing development for, but not limited to...
Ubuntu Touch, which is the official name for the thing we are doing

Why is this important? Ubuntu Touch is containing the word Ubuntu, and its use is being licensed by Canonical Inc. to us so that we can carry on. We do not want to mix it with UBports, and btw @Keneda also uTouch is wrong and please do not use it :). Since if we get sloppy with that, Canonical might think we do not need the license anymore, and revoke it maybe.
Also we are entitled to sub-license the use of "Ubuntu Touch" to vendors and third parties that want to pre-install Ubuntu Touch on their devices. That is a specific right we can give or deny!

So, to stay clear of and issues with that, please stick to the naming. Also UBports should not be used as a name for 3rd party Github repos, and other project names, since it marks projects as "officially run by the foundation" in perception of the end user. And there we are strict, you cannot use our name for things that you are doing. You can use "Ubuntu Touch" however...

BR Florian

Keneda

@flohack
I know uTouch is far from being endorsed by Canonical (so you, as ubports, can't endorse it neither), but it's the "little name" lot of users use so i name it because he can see it here and there