Device manufacturer specific comments in porting guide
Created by: br0ke
First I want to say thanks to all the people who work on this project.
Right now as you already know different manufacturers have a different take on how much control they should give to their users and different levels of openness regarding publishing their internals. People who want to contribute to the project will be well informed if we guide them through the habits of the manufacturer of various parts and the overall device manufacturer.
If everyone if okay with this, I think we should make the porting guide a more detailed version of what is exactly going on with pmbootstrap. Currently it assumes the potential porters have a very good understanding of the custom ROM ecosystem (I don't, and found navigating and understanding everything difficult). Even within the wiki there are some things which can be corrected. For example:
-
This page talks how there is a random github repo with the kernel source, but Samsung actually maintains a comprehensive Open Source website where a search for the device model number will give the kernel and any updates.
-
Samsung uses different SoCs depending on the date and the release line. If it is a Qualcomm SoC, then for the graphics driver, you'll have the freedreno reverse-engineered OSS driver, and if it is the ARM line, there's lima but it is less popular compared to FreeDreno. Pulling the drivers from here will be more in the spirit of opensource (if possible) rather than getting binary blobs.
I'm happy to start working on the porting wiki page and would appreciate any further commentary.
Sidenote: Are there any plans of moving the guides of this repo's wiki? As I see there's a pmOS website hosted on github. Why not extend and make use of that website? Even editing the website can be done with markdown with Github pages, and you can receive PRs which will grant proper access control, style check tooling etc.