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

Root TWRP - Spectrum

Well.... the plot thickens.

If I toss a smaller SD card in, windows mounted it fine. I tried a 2gb.

So, i ran a fs check on my 32gb while it was mounted in my phone through adb. It gave me a couple boot sector type errors. So i opted to try and manually format/partition it to fix the problem.... Horrible idea.

I popped rebooted back to windows again with no SDcard in. It prompted me again to format my card, kinda weird but whatever... So i click format. Just to see what it does. I get a 2gb drive. Now, I'm having a HELL of a time getting my phone to boot or restore. Restore failed to mount/wipe /data.

Good stuff, right?

Fair warning... Don't format in windows right now if it prompts you.
 
I have a very strong feeling that you just formatted your /data partition as fat32 . Are you able to boot into recovery and do a manual format of /data for ext4?
 
I just cabbed flashed. I'm restoring everything now.

I managed to get Dees_troy on irc. Pretty sure he just fixed me up.

I'll have a new build posted here in like half an hour.

*edit*

And yes... yes I did.


In case you're curious....

This may be the fix:

[high]
# Dees_Troy says these are'nt needed.
#TW_INTERNAL_STORAGE_PATH := "/data/media"
#TW_INTERNAL_STORAGE_MOUNT_POINT := "data"
#TW_EXTERNAL_STORAGE_PATH := "/sdcard"
#TW_EXTERNAL_STORAGE_MOUNT_POINT := "sdcard"
# Hopefully prevent issues from letting twrp format
[/high]

Basically, I was telling twrp the storage locations it could use. The internal one was telling twrp that it could use /data/ as a fat32 partition. Unfortunately, its an ext4 partition and windows doesn't like that :p


I pushed the changes to github, I also added and tweaked an init.usb.rb that should make twrp work with the drives you already have by using lg's vendor id in recovery.... we'll see though.
 
PrinceCorwin said:
Probably because no one has had the time to try it out yet, like me. I'll give it a go tonight though. If anyone can find a problem with it, I'm sure it will be me. :D
Click to expand...

Yeah, i figured as much since it's been just under a day.

Figure though that if anyone had used them and they had issues, they'd have posted back with a quickness :p


Somewhat off-topic... But if anyone used my time mod tweaks for CWM, here's the same setup modified for TWRP. I had to change things since TWRP cares if you use local or UTC.
Dev-Host - Enhanced-Initd-vs920.zip - The Ultimate Free File Hosting / File Sharing Service
Dev-Host - TWRP_2.5.0.0_Time_mod.zip - The Ultimate Free File Hosting / File Sharing Service

If these don't work for you, I don't want to clutter this thread up with it though, there's no reason they shouldn't.


@TDM, If you happen to see this... My builds are syncing the build tree from https://github.com/CyanogenMod/android_device_lge_vs920
When I build though, I'm still getting
[ro.build.product]: [i_vzw]
[ro.product.name]: [i_vzw]

Which is making the assert getprop:
assert(getprop("ro.product.device") == "vs920" || getprop("ro.build.product") == "vs920");
in at least the latest pac rom nightly install zips fail, as they're looking for vs920. If I'm using the cm build tree modified for twrp... shouldn't I be getting the same build.prop values as cm would have? I mean, I can just override these props to force it, but it seems like they should be right.

Are we actually using vs920 instead of i_vzw? In my pac rc1 rom that I have installed it looks like I had/have i_vzw still for some reason.
 
Any success or horror reports on this?

I'd like to try and see about possibly getting Dees_Troy to take this as an official build (minus my time script stuff).

...If it's working right for everybody.


No real *need* for it to be official... But at least that would make it so you could download/flash through goo manager ;)
 
I haven't run across any issues yet and no nand corruption to speak of yet. I'm not sure if that means everything is perfect, but it's damn close if it isn't.

P.S. and I would love for an official build if they do rebuilds as the code gets improved.
 
To be honest, I don't know if they do rebuilds or not. I know they want a device tree that builds successfully then they give you a build they make for testing. (according to the site)

So I would assume they have some sort of automated buildbox
 
Neph81 said:
I haven't run across any issues yet and no nand corruption to speak of yet. I'm not sure if that means everything is perfect, but it's damn close if it isn't.

P.S. and I would love for an official build if they do rebuilds as the code gets improved.
Click to expand...

Sorry this took so long, I've been a bit sidetracked.

I pinged them about this over in #TWRP on freenode.

They're waiting until after 2.6 is finished to add support for more devices. Not much reason to add a device when a new version is coming out and the device may need tweaking anyway.

We'll see.
 
Yoinx said:
Sorry this took so long, I've been a bit sidetracked.

I pinged them about this over in #TWRP on freenode.

They're waiting until after 2.6 is finished to add support for more devices. Not much reason to add a device when a new version is coming out and the device may need tweaking anyway.

We'll see.
Click to expand...

Just wanted to say that twrp 2.5.0.0 is working GREAT on my fianc
 
I'm still on a GB based rom (BrokenOut 3.0) and whatever CWM came with it (5.0.2.8, I think, broken date). Is there any reason I shouldn't flash TWRP before flashing CM or AOKP?
 
trav06 said:
I'm still on a GB based rom (BrokenOut 3.0) and whatever CWM came with it (5.0.2.8, I think, broken date). Is there any reason I shouldn't flash TWRP before flashing CM or AOKP?
Click to expand...
You should update to at least CWM 6.0+ if you plan on updating your phone. 5.0.2.8 was a kang and not built from source, leading it to not be recognized correctly when ROMs check out what phone they are being flashed to.
 
Neph81 said:
You should update to at least CWM 6.0+ if you plan on updating your phone. 5.0.2.8 was a kang and not built from source, leading it to not be recognized correctly when ROMs check out what phone they are being flashed to.
Click to expand...
Ok, thanks Neph. And I assume you're saying I should updated to CWM 6.0+ before trying to flash TWRP too?
 
trav06 said:
Ok, thanks Neph. And I assume you're saying I should updated to CWM 6.0+ before trying to flash TWRP too?
Click to expand...

I would if I were you. Just to be safe. in theory it shouldn't matter, but we all know theory isn't something to rely on.

side note: flashed this recovery, love it! thanks for getting it to work on our specs :D
 
trav06 said:
Ok, thanks Neph. And I assume you're saying I should updated to CWM 6.0+ before trying to flash TWRP too?
Click to expand...

Shouldn't matter in the slightest. If you're using the zip j posted all its doing is essentially dding an image over the recovery partition overwriting anything that was there. Technically you could do the same thing while booted to the Rom.... so the recovery shouldn't affect it either way.


Neph's comment above was because cwm could be won't when it wasn't built from source. Also there were kernel compatibility issues...supposedly... flashing 3.x kernels from 2.x kernels for awhile.

Sent from my VS920 4G using Tapatalk 2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom