Is /e/OS Q installed on Samsung S9 with current v0.11.2-beta?

Hello everyone,

Is the recently released /e/ Q version for the S9 installed directly with the most recent version of the /e/asy-installer (v0.11.2-beta) or does the installer load /e/ Pie?

The S9 I have has Android 10 pre-loaded and I don’t want to use the /e/asy-installer if it is going to (or attempt to!) downgrade to /e/ Pie.

Clarification on this is greatly appreciated! Thanks!

The /e/asy-installer is not clever enough to downgrade your S9 with stock Android 10 to Android 9. There are only a few constellations where Samsung allows a downgrade. As of bootloader version April 2020, Samsung no longer allows a downgrade even within Stock Android 10. To put it simply, the S9 Android 10 bootloader has a roll-back lock that cannot be bypassed.

Let’s look at the files that the /e/asy-installer downloads after successfully identifying the S9:

These files were already used in /e/ OS 8-Oero times of the S9 ‘starlte’. TWRP 3.2.3-0 is totally outdated, so it may still work. But why isn’t a successor used, e.g. version 3.3.0-0, 3.3.1-0, 3.3.1-1, 3.4.0-0 or now 3.5.0_9-0? New /e/ OS and old tools?! Why?

As a test, I tried to install the /e/ OS without /e/asy-installer, i.e. manually via TWRP 3.5.0_9-0 on my Galaxy S9 with Samsung firmware Android 10, build date April 2020. The result was the following error message:

After the “Reboot System” in TWRP, the S9 started in Samsung download mode. The previously working firmware became inoperable, TWRP was also unusable.

Note: I assume that the file does not yet have the status /e/ OS ROM and that is why it is causing this mess.

Well, as long as the S9 boots into Samsung Download-Mode, nothing is lost. I reinstalled the latest TWRP 3.5.0_0-0, with this then the /e/ OS ROM

The result is - a working Galaxy S9 ‘starte’ with /e/ OS ‘Q’ - without using, without using

And the summary of my experience is - I don’t trust the ‘Windows’ /e/asy-installer. The classic installation method is the safest method for me, at the same time it is easy to handle.


@SuzieQ I don’t even know where to begin in thanking you for the wealth of information you have provided in the above post, which has not only saved me immeasurable grief but will surely help others who haven’t even gotten around to asking the question!

I regret I have but one :heart: to give it!

How were you able to identify the list of files that /e/asy-installer downloads after successfully identifying the S9? :confused:

And that you tested it to verify it didn’t work in the current state goes above and beyond the call of duty- Wow, just wow. :astonished:

OK, so time for the “Question of the Day”: if the /e/asy installer files were updated/corrected to include TWRP 3.5.0_9-0 instead of twrp-3.2.3-0-starlte.img and download/install as this tool would actually work as intended would it not?

@mcmd, in some people’s eyes I am a madman, a troublemaker. In truth, I am an AOSP & FOSS enthusiast. And I like /e/OS.

I would much rather report only positive things about /e/ and eOS. But /e/ has been in the toilet for months. Talking things up is not my style. Others do that (more or less better).

»How were you able to identify the list of files that /e/asy-installer downloads after successfully identifying the S9?«

The /e/asy-installer v0.11.2-beta shows which files it downloads, e. g.:

e-asy-installer_v0.11.2-beta_25022021-downlaod e-latest-starlte_zip

I find all these files on my Windows PC in this directory:

@mcmd, testing isn’t a chore for me. I do it because I care and because I want the /e/ OS and everything around it to be better. Making mistakes is normal, you have to learn from them and correct them.

The sole purpose of an installation tool is to properly install software on a device so that the user can work with it. Therefore - yes, especially if the /e/ OS ‘Q’ to be installed is the correct file version, then an “easy” installation should succeed. Other device-flasher or scripts can do this too, after all.

You and me both. That’s why I’m here- to learn and pass on to others what I have learned!

Thank you, I didn’t know the /e/asy installer wrote the files to the AppData folder!

Are the files or even needed if TWRP 3.5.0_9-0 is used with

1 Like

The two .ZIP-files only have something to do with TWRP insofar as they can be installed with TWRP.

As I wrote above:
I did not use these two files because they were not necessary for the /e/OS ‘Q’ to work. A clean Stock Android 10 as a base and the /e/OS ROM ‘Q’ are a good team to use the S9 99.99% deGoogled.

Hi @Manoj.

Due to the extraordinary detective work of @SuzieQ above, the /e/asy installer developer should be made aware that the installer is not using the most current /e/ Q OS build for nor is using the most recent version of TWRP (3.5.0_9-0).

Just wanted to let you know as currently this situation results in “Error 7” installation failures, as she has shown in detail above.

Best regards, Marc

@mcmd, the /e/ communication leader has long since registered our lines. He is a careful observer. And don’t wait to change your OS. In stock Android 10, first enable ‘OEM unlock’, then install TWRP 3.5.0_9-0 or eRecovery recovery-e-0.13-q-2021012097133-dev-starlte.img, and so then install the /e/ OS ll My recommendation: Use this guide. Flashing the eOS is not witchcraft.


I understand. My intent was to have a leave a simple summary comment on this so that if someone wanted to understand what the status of the installer was with the S9 it would be there- they could also see that I notified the communications leader so there was no need to do it again.

I won’t. I expect to have some time this weekend to install TWRP 3.5.0_9-0 and then the /e/ OS as you outlined above.

For some of us it certainly seems that way! :rofl:

Thank you again for your help- even as a “troublemaker” you are an invaluable asset to the /e/ team! :star_struck:


@mcmd, once you’ve TWRP or e-Recovery installed on your S9, the next step is a breeze.

1 Like

Please apologize my ignorance. How do I install/update TWRP?
I am aiming to move from /e/ o (8.1.) to /e/ Q (10) on an S9+. I also saw “Error 7”.

Edit: I just found this Galaxy S9 'starlte' + /e/OS 'Q' dev AOSP Android 10

The most common methods are flashing the TWRP files via Odin v3.14.4 (Windows host machine) or Heimdall suite (Linux PC’s). Instructions are a dime a dozen, especially for Odin3 - which is also available here.

1 Like

@SuzieQ Is it possible to save a Nandroid backup of the Samsung ROM for archival purposes once TWRP is installed but before flashing /e/OS?

Yes @mcmd, this is possible. But I have also found that restoring with TWRP Restore has not always worked one hundred percent. In theory, the Nandroid backup is easy and safe to handle, but practice always teaches me otherwise.

So I do separate backups of important data and files before the ‘Nandroid backup’, then the actual Nandroid backup. Besides, I hope that I don’t have to restore because … well, you know …

A sync to Nextcloud (e.g. /e/cloud) or with other CustomROM via SeedVault backup to Nextcloud can be very helpful.

I appreciate the insight. In this case, I am not concerned about preserving data, but rather in preserving the ability to go back to the stock ROM if I decide to sell the device at some time in the future.

To do this, should I backup all the partitions in TWRP (except Recovery of course) to be sure everything’s “there” or are only specific ones needed to accomplish this?

I know that there are Samsung “stock” ROMs available on certain websites (Sammobile, etc), but I do not know which S9 ROM is correct as they are carrier-specific. For example I am in the US, but purchased a device that shows “Samsung, Yateley UK” on the back. How would I know which U.K. ROM is correct (BTU, EE, H3G, O2, etc.)?

The cleanest way back to factory stock Android is via Odin3 or Heimdall. This will not only erase all partitions but reformat them from scratch. The real factory state is restored, so to speak.

U.K. ROM 'BTU’ is a good choice because it’s a provider-free firmware version. But the other versions are also fully suitable. They don’t differ in the basic functions (LTE frequencies) but rather in the bloatware included.


@SuzieQ Once again, many many thanks for your help! I’ll download the BTU version now for future needs and update this post with my /e/OS install experience so that others may be informed.

It’s look like TWRP 3.5 as TWRP 3.4 don’t match for installing Nougat, Oreo, or Pie,
But only Q and R.

The easy installer install the stables /e/ builds and it don’t yet exists Q stable /e/,
the dev build has just been released yesterday !

Hi SusieQ, right now I have the latest TWRP (twrp-3.5.0_9-1-starlte.img) version on the G960F, OpenSUSE Leap 15.2 KDE Dolphin has a pretty robust ability to connect to these devices, S8 /e/, and motorola for LineageOS all went well. This is my 4th phone in a few years and Samsung S9 is the most challenging, it gets to the mtp:/starlte/Internal Storage/ and then I can’t get any farther in.

adb CLI does not find the device at all, so two things, as you wrote somewhere no VENDOR file, no patch file used. The phone came with android 10 and 1 Feb 2021 update, running filemanger as root made no difference doesn’t get anywhere either and also it seems you prefer the e recovery tool instead, can I install the recovery tool instead? or am I overlooking something else?

Hi @luka,
your S9 comes the brand new stock Android 10 ‘1 Feb 2021’. There’re the best conditions to switch to /e/ OS ‘Q’ because the S9 firmware is fully tuned to Android 10 - including VENDOR, MODEM, etc… Therefore, we do not need any additional tools, except for a custom recovery.

TWRP Recovery offers me numerous tools such as the file manager. I appreciate TWRP very much. Nevertheless, eRecovery is a useful installation aid for the /e/ OS ‘Q’.

Yes, that is exactly why you should try eRecovery version recovery-e-0.13-q-2021012097133-dev-starlte.img, if TWRP is bitching° around, and and then use it to flash the /e/ OS via abd sideload It works flawlessly.

_ _
°Do you’ve an S9 DUOS or an S9 single SIM?

1 Like