The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to geneven For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2012-05-01
, 05:51
|
Posts: 856 |
Thanked: 1,681 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ Aleppo ,Syria
|
#3222
|
Current versions do not. Older versions did. We've already determined this is an older version. If it was installed in conjunction with SP, then really there are injections and the like. For all we know he could be using one of the script versions, from before there was even an installer package...
As for a "test" about BP, we have that test: We ask if someone has it installed. When dozens of people have issues with it, and the question at hand is about changes happening that are known to be caused by BP, a test is far from needed.
As you've noted multiple times in your own thread, sometimes it will take more than one reboot to "fix" issues around install/uninstall of BP. Also, if this version of BP is old enough to be using 125Mhz, it's probably also old enough to have uninstall issues as well (there were many versions that didn't clean up after themselves very well). Which means that even uninstalling it may not have cleaned it off his system.
|
2012-05-01
, 19:12
|
|
Posts: 1,455 |
Thanked: 3,309 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Rochester, NY
|
#3223
|
oh well i believe i've been angry a bit especially i saw what ed_boner posted right after a new explosion near my house
well here you messed up a bit
even older version of batterypatch didn't inject
it's speedpatch that does so
|
2012-05-01
, 20:00
|
Posts: 125 |
Thanked: 108 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#3224
|
|
2012-05-01
, 20:22
|
Posts: 372 |
Thanked: 61 times |
Joined on Jan 2012
|
#3225
|
|
2012-05-02
, 08:12
|
Posts: 856 |
Thanked: 1,681 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ Aleppo ,Syria
|
#3226
|
|
2012-05-02
, 19:40
|
Posts: 270 |
Thanked: 45 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ UK
|
#3227
|
|
2012-05-03
, 04:09
|
Posts: 36 |
Thanked: 7 times |
Joined on Dec 2011
|
#3228
|
@rm53
thank you for your post it makes me feel that am not spending time on for the community for nothing
@Mohammed Muid
yes it will be completely removed
but note that you MUST update to the latest versions and then remove them if you want
because
SP versions older than 4.0 are not getting removed completely (current latest is 4.0)
BP versions less than 7.5 are not as well (current latest is 8.2)
|
2012-05-03
, 11:19
|
Posts: 372 |
Thanked: 61 times |
Joined on Jan 2012
|
#3229
|
|
2012-05-03
, 11:45
|
Posts: 5,795 |
Thanked: 3,151 times |
Joined on Feb 2007
@ Agoura Hills Calif
|
#3230
|
Tags |
autobrick, awesome-script, do no install, f***epitaph, install it now, perfect_ n900, script-a-brick, very safe |
|
The giveaway was that after I changed my settings to something like the following:
MINFREQ=600
MAXFREQ=600
GOVERNOR=ONDEMAND
and so on
and I would set this as the DEFAULT setting
After I rebooted, the max and min settings would have changed, and the GOVERNOR setting would be back to CONSERVATIVE.
Now I KNEW that the CONSERVATIVE msetting was put there by the patches and CHANGED BACK TO THESE SETTINGS EVEN AFTER I SET THE DEFAULT NOT TO BE CONSERVATIVE GOVERNOR.
This happened to me MANY times. This even happened after I UNINSTALLED the battery patch/speed patch combination.
It is NOT happening to me now. I am positive that those settings were put back by something in the battery patch/speed patch programs.
I didn't mention it online because no real harm was done. But I am making this statement now because the maker of the patch seems to be claiming that nothing like this ever happened to anyone. It happened to me, and I NEVER ONCE voluntarily made that CONSERVATIVE setting because I remembered a discussion by Titan and others in the original overclocking thread that concluded that the conservative setting was NOT HELPFUL.
All I want is 40 acres, a mule, and Xterm.