• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Root How do I get the ota update prompt back?

scary alien said:
Thanks jmar!

:)

(busy at work :p)

FYI, factory images are flashed via the fastboot utility, so adb wouldn't be needed.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
I've never had success fastboot flashing all parts if the image at once. Always had to flash each part separately. Ubuntu 12.10 FWIW:confused:

You're welcome!

Gonna edit my post.
 
is it a a .zip file? grouper?
i understand flashing.a custom rom
with cwm or twrp. is there a tut for stock image flashing?

i have unlocked and rooted with wugs but never installed a stock rom.
 
jmartino5920 said:
Here is an easier solution for you if you aren't comfortable with terminal commands. Make sure you have proper drivers setup if necessary.

http://www.wugfresh.com/nrt/

Again, let us know if you need assistance.

jmar
Click to expand...

If you use the download at the link above, you are looking for an .exe file. Instructions are on the site an I imagine within the utility. Many users have used this to flash stock, lock and unlock their bootloader, it's a great tool.

jmar
 
Modman said:
is it a a .zip file? grouper?
i understand flashing.a custom rom
with cwm or twrp. is there a tut for stock image flashing?

i have unlocked and rooted with wugs but never installed a stock rom.
Click to expand...

If you have used Wugs toolkit, then make sure it is updated to version 1.6.3. Once you've confirmed that you'll feel right at home flashing stock 4.2.2. It is part of the utility's options.

Good luck my friend. You're almost there!

jmar
 
Jmar thank you for responding to my pm. My install failed just like modmans. Should I go ahead and try the debuggered 4.2.1 fiel scary alien?
 
rogueally said:
Jmar thank you for responding to my pm. My install failed just like modmans. Should I go ahead and try the debuggered 4.2.1 fiel scary alien?
Click to expand...

No...that's probably not the issue...

Let us know what exactly messages OTA Verifier is telling you about what is not matching--it's unlikely that the /system/bin/debuggerd file is mismatched on your system, too.

OTA Verifier copies his output to the clipboard, so you should be able to re-post the output in it's entirety.
 
Yes it originally failed but after replacing debuggered and flashing stock recovery it worked. But afterwards Google play was broken.
Some how though today after logging in a different gmail account then logging mine back in some how Google play is working again.

Now I have no need to reflash stock 4.2.2 seems to be working successfully.
 
Modman said:
Yes it originally failed but after replacing debuggered and flashing stock recovery it worked. But afterwards Google play was broken.
Some how though today after logging in a different gmail account then logging mine back in some how Google play is working again.

Now I have no need to reflash stock 4.2.2 seems to be working successfully.
Click to expand...

Nice. Glad to have been a part of the solution.:D

Big thanks to you as well scary!

jmar
 
here is what the verifier is telling me......what do you think. Again I really appreciate your help.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20130306_212114-517810986.JPG
    IMG_20130306_212114-517810986.JPG
    181.7 KB · Views: 69
rogueally,

Looks like you've updated the BrowserProviderProxy system app (which includes the .apk and it's .odex file).

Did you make a backup of these files before you changed it (for whatever reason it was changed for)?

You won't be able to install the OTA until you put the original files back.
 
I had to rename that file for when I sideloaded the AOSPbroswer.apk( which now I pretty sure I did wrong). I think that in the steps after downloading, I thought I made a copy of that file and renamed it. I just renamed to the Original name but I would assume that woule count as a change to the file. I ran the verifier again and it showed only one error this time being line #28 which is the BrowserProviderProxy.apk....my rationale would be to do a factory reset since I dont believe I made a backup of the file before I changed it.
 
rogueally said:
I had to rename that file for when I sideloaded the AOSPbroswer.apk( which now I pretty sure I did wrong). I think that in the steps after downloading, I thought I made a copy of that file and renamed it. I just renamed to the Original name but I would assume that woule count as a change to the file. I ran the verifier again and it showed only one error this time being line #28 which is the BrowserProviderProxy.apk....my rationale would be to do a factory reset since I dont believe I made a backup of the file before I changed it.
Click to expand...

Well, a factory reset is not going to restore that file...:(.

You need to find the proper version of the BrowserProviderProxy.apk (i.e., that matches your version of Android and has the proper SHA1 checksum).

If you can verify the version of Android you have, I can see if I have this file from you from my efforts the other night for getting the other file for ModMan...

Let me know.

:)
 
rogueally said:
Do you think if I did a restore that may help?
Click to expand...

You mean from a Nandroid backup?

Depends on if the backup was before done before modded the .apk (and it's .odex file) in question.

I can always (fairly easily) provide you with the proper versions of the mis-matched files in question if you verify your current version of Android for me...
 
Rogueally and scary,

Those browser files cannot be present to take the OTA. The browser is not part of the original firmware of 4.1.x up.

Best to move those files to the virtual SD card using a root file explorer.

Then run OTA verifier and see what you come up with.

jmar
 
OTA Verifier is simply testing and reporting what's in the updater-script file, so those two particular files seem to be expected by the stock version of Android, eh?

:)

edit: presumably for subsequent apply_patch references...
 
scary alien said:
OTA Verifier is simply testing and reporting what's in the updater-script file, so those two particular files seem to be expected by the stock version of Android, eh?

:)

edit: presumably for subsequent apply_patch references...
Click to expand...

One would think. I would try what I stated above anyway but you do bring an interesting point. Though scary, I am certain our N7s didn't come with the browser apk. It shipped with chrome as the browser. :)
 
jmartino5920 said:
One would think. I would try what I stated above anyway but you do bring an interesting point. Though scary, I am certain our N7s didn't come with the browser apk. It shipped with chrome as the browser. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, that could be...but the OTA's installation (processing of the updater-script) will poopie-out (:p) if it doesn't pass all of the assert tests...

I'm actually not 100% sure that an apply_patch_check requires that the file exists (makes sense that it would) and would simply skip it if it doesn't exist...

I'll have to look at the code and/or test it manually tonight ;) :).
 
scary alien said:
Yeah, that could be...but the OTA's installation (processing of the updater-script) will poopie-out (:p) if it doesn't pass all of the assert tests...

I'm actually not 100% sure that an apply_patch_check requires that the file exists (makes sense that it would) and would simply skip it if it doesn't exist...

I'll have to look at the code and/or test it manually tonight ;) :).
Click to expand...

Sounds good. I look forward to it:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom