PATCH — Focused 1.9.0 update to 2.3.340

The points and concerns droidxchat brings up are clearly being dodged. I for one am curious to see how they are addressed.

Sent from my DROIDX using DroidForums App
 
drod2169 said:
sephtin said:
Droid74 said:
hey sephtin, is there a 2.3.340 SBF yet that you are aware of?
Click to expand...
tatuud said:
Sephtin, maybe you can answer this, what happens if we muck things up on the OTA, are we just out of luck since there is no full sbf out. I kind of like being on 2.3.15 since we have the full sbf in case we mess things up. thanks for any advice you may have on this subject.
Click to expand...

Only a /system .sbf that I'm aware of...

Which reminds me.. wonder if it's possible to use the full .320 .sbf if stuff really hit the fan.. (?).
Might find out someday... ;)
Click to expand...

shortly skimmed through this thread.. found this that i'd like to address.

The full .320 SBF is useable on this 340 ota. It's kind of like when we had 2.3.9/2.1u1 and 2.3.15.

Just a heads up though, the kernel is very likely not different, to those "skeptics" out there. It is probably compiled on a different date, by a different employee, hence the different version.

Also, the AVERAGE user has NO need for a full SBF other than "peace of mind", or like this case, to get back on the update path. Any normal root user would not edit anything on the level to actually need to replace anything other than /system, so system sbf's work PERFECTLY fine. You will not find a dev putting anything out that edits things directly to require a full sbf. It's just not possible for us with the locked bootloader.
Click to expand...


Thanks for some sanity, and you are correct, functionally exactly the same. Have a good day.
 
droidxchat, thanks for your concern and for explaining why you believe this is important. It's better to know this could be a problem than to not. I will be applying the fix that you posted from TBHs site.

p3 thanks for doing what you do and for enabling us to push our phones. I personally don't believe you would leave us high and dry so if you say you'll provide a way to get where we need to be then that's good enough for me. Without your work the above "debate" wouldn't even been possible.

As heated as this debate got, i do think there was a good conversation in there and I'm glad the mods didn't interfere.
 
digitalslacker said:
droidxchat, thanks for your concern and for explaining why you believe this is important. It's better to know this could be a problem than to not. I will be applying the fix that you posted from TBHs site.

p3 thanks for doing what you do and for enabling us to push our phones. I personally don't believe you would leave us high and dry so if you say you'll provide a way to get where we need to be then that's good enough for me. Without your work the above "debate" wouldn't even been possible.

As heated as this debate got, i do think there was a good conversation in there and I'm glad the mods didn't interfere.
Click to expand...


The general debate was actually one person spewing filth and lies, droidxchat had no knowledge of what is going on, and many posts in other threads show his general lack of knowledge and in some instances pure ignorance. There was no debate, its was sarcasm mixed in with authoritative posts by someone who is not an authority on such matters.

I/We thank you, and yep we work hard to bring a lot of stuff out for the droid family (Motorola) of phones so we just hope you enjoy your phone more today than you did yesterday.
 
P3Droid said:
The general debate was actually one person spewing filth and lies, droidxchat had no knowledge of what is going on, and many posts in other threads show his general lack of knowledge and in some instances pure ignorance. There was no debate, its was sarcasm mixed in with authoritative posts by someone who is not an authority on such matters.

I/We thank you, and yep we work hard to bring a lot of stuff out for the droid family (Motorola) of phones so we just hope you enjoy your phone more today than you did yesterday.
Click to expand...

Not one thing that I said was wrong or a lie. It's obvious you know it too... because of how unspecific your posts are. You never addressed a single point or answered a single question. Wasn't just me that saw that you were dodging.
 
P3Droid said:
... And as such, as I told your cohort Sephtin - no person would not have a way to upgrade from .320 to the official release. I said this before the .320 release and I said this after. ...
Click to expand...

And for biting my lip, and not saying anything (well, almost nothing).. this is how I'm treated.
*sigh*
<3 ya P3. Keep up the good work.

Edit: I'm not big on drama, just information/knowledge. If I may submit some constructive criticism, P3.. I would LOVE to see, rather than flaming.. uhmm, my cohort (?).. to correct him. Spread some of the wealth of knowledge with the little people.

So much for this thread. :S lol. (I did report one of the posts, asking to please have a mod split it.. but looks like it's not happening... meh).
 
sephtin said:
P3Droid said:
... And as such, as I told your cohort Sephtin - no person would not have a way to upgrade from .320 to the official release. I said this before the .320 release and I said this after. ...
Click to expand...

And for biting my lip, and not saying anything (well, almost nothing).. this is how I'm treated.
*sigh*
<3 ya P3. Keep up the good work.
Click to expand...

Sephtin, not saying that you are invovled here, I meant that we had exhanged posts in which you stated ** show me ** and in that instance, it was shown.

I was just linking the two of you together for the sake of this, but I should not have. This is all on DroidXChat.
 
What's on me? Correctly pointing out a serious problem that you thankfully fixed? Was I wrong that the kernels were different despite you saying they would be the same? Was I wrong that people could not ota with the kernel from the .32 leak? Was I wrong that they were then at that point sTuck outside of the update path? You keep saying I'm wrong. You never actually point out anything I'm wrong about. Convenient

Sent from my DROIDX using DroidForums App
 
I upgraded to the ota and noticed the cell standby bug appeared to be fixed. Then I installed the leaked 1.90 version of rubix. Then I tossed on the patch and noticed cell standby is back to accounting for 50% of my battery usage. Did I do something wrong? Is this not actually fixed in the 2.3.34? Or do I just have to wait for the next version of rubix?

Sent from my DROIDX using DroidForums App
 
P3 Droid, you know I have the utmost respect for you. But we got to have this bickering stop. Both you and DroidXchat have got to stop the finger pointing and accusations. Is the problem ultimately resolved? It appears to be, the only thing that seems to be going on now is finger pointing.

I don't want either of you guys arguing, if it starts up again I'll just shut the thread down.
 
On this patch. Um can you or able to put madden on? Or could I just extract the file and set permission and works the same way? Just curious and Thx.

Sent from my DROIDX using DroidForums App
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Questions about Leak/NonLeak/OTA for RubiX look here
2
Replies
16
Views
3K
jfalco
J
D
  • Locked
Anyone who was on .32, please update your kernel
2
Replies
15
Views
4K
Jaxidian
J
D
Need Some Handholding (Deathly Afraid of Brickage)
Replies
13
Views
3K
D_meist
D
J
rubiX Focused on .340 OTA
6 7 8
Replies
105
Views
20K
Growler48
G
D
If you were ever on .32, please update to the newest kernel
Replies
12
Views
3K
ScottyDsntKnow
S
Back
Top