Acer Liquid E - Official Android 2.2 Froyo 4.001.08.PA

[Guest Borkata]

The official bins for Rogers and Fido were never released.

So I can't flash this right now?

There's a checkprerequesites script that prevents it from being flashed or something else?

or maybe just assert(getprop("ro.build.display.id") == "Acer_LiquidE_1.100.03_PA_ROG");

This is the check :rolleyes: Try editing and replacing.

[Guest Jeras Akdra]

I don't have a chance to use acer tools now.

can someone flash a bin file (or use an updater for windows) then follow the instruction in the pdf inside this file?

Reflashed Acer_LiquidE_4.002.08_EMEA-GEN1_05.01.05

Followed the instructions

I believe no dice. Ends up stuck on a screen with an android and an exclamation point after showing a progress bar.

I apologize if there's a better name for this screen... kinda newby over here.

Edited November 16, 2010 by Jeras Akdra

[Guest xaueious]

Reflashed Acer_LiquidE_4.002.08_EMEA-GEN1_05.01.05

Followed the instructions

I believe no dice. Ends up stuck on a screen with an android and an exclamation point after showing a progress bar.

I apologize if there's a better name for this screen... kinda newby over here.

It's failing at the recovery boot. The assert is preventing the file from being flashed when booting to recovery.

[Guest Koki1337]

Flash back to an Eclair?

[Guest Delnar_Ersike]

Here's a weird line I found in the top-level update.zip's update-script:

assert getprop("ro.product.device") == "a1" || getprop("ro.build.product") == "a1"

Here's a funky line I found in updater-script:

assert(getprop("ro.build.display.id") == "Acer_LiquidE_1.100.03_PA_ROG");

Here are two lines in the second-level update-script that bother me:

assert getprop("ro.product.device") == "a1" || getprop("ro.build.product") == "a1"

assert getprop("ro.product.name") == "a1_rogers"

And finally, three lines in the second-level updater-script:

assert(getprop("ro.product.device") == "a1" ||

	   getprop("ro.build.product") == "a1");

assert(getprop("ro.build.display.id") == "Acer_LiquidE_1.100.87_PA_ROG");

Similar lines can be found in the Fido update as well.

Maybe doing something with those lines could help "unlock" the firmware upgrade for non-Rogers/Fido devices and non-Liquid E devices...

Edited November 16, 2010 by Delnar_Ersike

[Guest Devils-Haven]

Reflashed Acer_LiquidE_4.002.08_EMEA-GEN1_05.01.05

Followed the instructions

I believe no dice. Ends up stuck on a screen with an android and an exclamation point after showing a progress bar.

I apologize if there's a better name for this screen... kinda newby over here.

did the same thing, once its stuck clicked on menu key and saw the error messege "assert failed: getprop("ro.build.display.id")== "Acer_LiquidE_1.1000.79_PA_FIDO"

E: Errorin /sdcard/update.zip

(status 7)

Installation aborted."

[Guest Jeras Akdra]

So I know that I understand this, is the line

"assert(getprop("ro.build.display.id") == "Acer_LiquidE_1.100.87_PA_ROG");"

specifically calling for "Acer_LiquidE_1.100.87_PA_ROG"? As in, in order to flash that bin you'd have to have "Acer_LiquidE_1.100.87_PA_ROG" installed, yes?

Without any modifications to the scripts that is.

Edited November 16, 2010 by Jeras Akdra

[Guest Delnar_Ersike]

Looking up what the assert() method does, I think that's what that line means, yes. Technically, removing those lines would remove the build and device check, however, I think you'll need to sign the modified update.zip's (both the top-level and second-level), and honestly speaking, I don't know how to do that.

[Guest Jeras Akdra]

If we can't modify the checks, can we modify the information already on the phone?

Probably easier said than done, but I can dream can't I?

Edited November 16, 2010 by Jeras Akdra

[Guest koudelka]

I hope they will release kernel source soon...

[Guest Borkata]

I hope they will release kernel source soon...

+1

[Guest snootched]

<rant>

I would highly recommend not using anything that Rogers has touched :rolleyes: ..this is just my opinion.

Rogers (or any carrier I would presume) has a history of customizing things after the first release or two. They release the phone with a relatively stock rom to get it out on the market. Once they've had the time to dick around with the build process etc, things start straying more and more from stock (anyone on Rogers ever try to load a non-DRM'd mp3 as your ringtone - I'm looking at you KRZR K1.. my first K1 with a close to stock ROM did it no problem - subsequent releases won't do it.) anyway...

</rant>

I'd suggest waiting on the official Acer stock ROM (EMEA etc.) and stick to flashing that. You just don't know what things Rogers had been muddling with inside the build.

[Guest vache]

FYI, don't try to flash this on non Canadian Liquid. It will simlock it.

For Canadian users, removing assert() verification is the right way.

Edit : As snootched say, wait for the update of your region. (EMEA, AAP, FET, CUS1, CUS2....)

Edited November 16, 2010 by vache

[Guest ARCBOY]

Thank you very much for a news.

I'll try tomorrow.

[Guest Jeras Akdra]

Interesting thought.

Does this mean that us Canadians who have flashed the recent EMEA leaks will have to wait for a different solution?

[Guest snootched]

Interesting thought.

Does this mean that us Canadians who have flashed the recent EMEA leaks will have to wait for a different solution?

You can always go back to a ROG build if you want.. me personally, and awaiting the official Acer EMEA, then choose whatever custom rom on top of that (if it's so desired.) All of the ROMs I have tried work without issue on rogers wireless network - so personal choice I guess.

Also - there was a hint this was coming. Rogers just updated their App in the market last week - and the only change of note was "Supports Froyo" .. so now those on rogers, we can see our data usage, balance, etc. with the Rogers My Account app.

[Guest Delnar_Ersike]

Removing the assert() verifications might not be enough. There appears to be a binary in the top-level update.zip called check_prereq that might interfere with the updating process as well.

Edited November 16, 2010 by Delnar_Ersike

[Guest xaueious]

I didn't proceed on trying to remove the assert. There are 2 update.zip files. Removing one assert probably at least updates the baseband, but I'm not sure in which binary this is done in from just reading the scripts.

Remove assert and use malez to flash unsigned is an idea, but I am not sure of the consequences.

[Guest alan090]

I didn't proceed on trying to remove the assert. There are 2 update.zip files. Removing one assert probably at least updates the baseband, but I'm not sure in which binary this is done in from just reading the scripts.

Remove assert and use malez to flash unsigned is an idea, but I am not sure of the consequences.

Ill have a look at it tonite - im not happy with the latest leak that i didnt even update my froyo rom with it - hope this one is better - once i can get it flashed - simple as nandroid and cook :rolleyes:

[Guest Jeras Akdra]

After some digging, I found a way to get back to Acer_LiquidE_1.100.03_PA_ROG

One thing that I did notice, however, is that the name of the second file is the same as my current build number. Further more, attempting to flash the official Fido 2.2 update, it gives the error involving "Acer_LiquidE_1.100.79_PA_FIDO", the name of the second file as well.

Could it be that the issue lies with those files (incorrect upload on acer's part) as opposed to a flag within the system itself?

Edited November 16, 2010 by Jeras Akdra

[Guest alan090]

Ill have a look at it tonite - im not happy with the latest leak that i didnt even update my froyo rom with it - hope this one is better - once i can get it flashed - simple as nandroid and cook :huh:

this is easy - dont even need to flash it - ill just make an update.zip out of it :rolleyes:

[Guest endamaco]

I think the best thing to do is to modify your own build.prop and inside that write the name of the rom with that requested

[Guest vanisleguy1976]

I think the best thing to do is to modify your own build.prop and inside that write the name of the rom with that requested

I'm a Rogers customer, and I find this exciting and also confusing.

I don't know a heck of a lot of the technical terms everyone is using here, and I'd like to give the official 2.2 a test drive... But it seems like there is a great deal of playing around required.

But in reality, would it be an advantage to use the official Rogers release? I'm thinking it'll just be the same as the Froyo leaks (I'm on LCR_F)... But with the added bloatware we love so much (yeah, that's sarcasm) and without all the great tweaks we've gotten used to.

Edited November 16, 2010 by vanisleguy1976

[Guest Chewy11]

Any Canadians have this running... I'll guinea pig it in a few hours if anyones interested

[Guest vanisleguy1976]

Any Canadians have this running... I'll guinea pig it in a few hours if anyones interested

I'd run it but, as I said a few moments ago, I don't have the know-how to change all the things that need to be changed.

So please be the Guinea pig! Haha... And let me know what you do to make it work :rolleyes: