SamyGO

Nice. Finally you can be clear.
Now if you want to learn from your mistake. Diff your last posts with your last post :p
Wait i can tell you right away. The "I decided" was missing the whole time.
If you want to understand it more precisely, you can diff know the sentence
1.) "it's not supported"
With
2.) "it's not supported, because i decided to not support it"

A reader of sentence 1.) asks himself what is not supported in which way? Is it not supported to be communicated, or is it not supported technically caused by a newer firmware. The reason can also be several other things, like it's a dev secret.

Now sentence 2.) implies alot more. With the information that you created the new setup Scripts and this sentence you intentionally coded the way it now is. You even explained the intention of the newer method. The reason i already suspected even in the first post and told you that this is not really an argument. (Plus when we have root, either way the tv is brickable.)

So all in all it was a first good step to be clear. We now have solved the problem.

Thank you to all contributors of this thread.

We always respect the decisions of the developers.

The questions was NEVER whether tv is "brickable" but when it's LESS "brickable"...

Well, if something is brickable it is brickable. There are only two states. Brickable=true||false. It can't be less brickable.
The correct answer now would be that the chances to have a bricked TV is less likely, when you have Root Rights activated by plugged-in-USB.


now im tired bro, close this thread already xD

Nah it also matters how easy is to unbrick When everything is on usb you can simply unplug (even with full system/kernel crash!!!). When everything is inside you need to depend on some software mechanism to unbrick and such solution do NOT WORK in case of full system/kernel crash