[HN Gopher] Waydroid - Run Android containers on Ubuntu
___________________________________________________________________
Waydroid - Run Android containers on Ubuntu
Author : pabs3
Score : 472 points
Date : 2021-09-22 14:52 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (waydro.id)
(TXT) w3m dump (waydro.id)
| rd07 wrote:
| I have tried Waydroid in Manjaro Linux, and to my surprise, it
| runs smoothly. I even able to install Aurora Store and install
| Telegram from there, which also run perfectly. RAM usage was
| minimal, maybe because of it is running on a container. The only
| thing I haven't figured out is keyboard input from my physical
| keyboard directly to the android.
| piaste wrote:
| > I even able to install Aurora Store and install Telegram from
| there, which also run perfectly
|
| Why Telegram specifically, when it already offers both a web
| client and a FOSS Linux client?
| tgtweak wrote:
| Isolation probably.
|
| edit: or if it's anything like signal, the mobile app has
| some extra functionality that is omitted from the desktop/web
| client...
| slim wrote:
| Yes namely e2e encryption does not work on linux client
| rd07 wrote:
| Mainly because I want to see if : - I can install something
| from Aurora Store - The app can run - The app can connect to
| the internet without changing any config - The app can
| operate normally It is just a coincidence that the first apps
| I installed was Telegram. AFAIK, Waydroid doesn't add ARM
| virtualization, and because I installed it on a X86_64
| computer, I doubt something installed from a store (which
| mainly aimed for ARM device) can even run properly.
| andrewshadura wrote:
| In fact, if you have qemu-user-static installed and binfmt
| configured properly, it will likely just work.
| usr1106 wrote:
| I intended to write the same in reponse to some other
| comment. But then I got unsure. It would only work if
| Android has no native ABIs to the system at all. On a
| Gnu/Linux system you would need a libc in the emulated
| architecture at least. Applications won't typically bring
| their own. I have never not looked at Android
| development, so no idea whether such ABI exist or whether
| all APIs are Java.
| davidgerard wrote:
| Quite a lot of stuff from the Play Store has an x86
| version, because then they get users on Chromebooks.
| piaste wrote:
| Makes sense, thanks.
| Dhrhdhxbxbx wrote:
| If it's simple to set up, I'd like to use this for verifying and
| accessing private app data from Android backups without having to
| use a 2nd phone.
|
| Does it support arm64 emulation on an x86_64 host? That way I
| could just run the backed up apks directly.
| genewitch wrote:
| Other comments specify this is not a virtual machine, it's a
| container, so there's no emulation.
|
| You may need qemu.
| coolspot wrote:
| Waydroid is a containerized Android, not emulated, so it would
| run same arch as the host.
| deknos wrote:
| without snap and other propretiary stuff? then i would take it.
| coolspot wrote:
| Snapd is opensource
| blendergeek wrote:
| While snapd is open source, it's main (sole) purpose is to
| run (proprietary) software sourced from a propietary store.
| lanyusea wrote:
| looks amazing, wondering if it is possible to run NDK programs?
| didn't find any related info in docs
| tgtweak wrote:
| What's different between this and anbox (other than support,
| focus, etc)?
|
| How good is the 3d support, ie: Does it support a modern version
| of OpenGL ES? Can it process that via host hardware support (a la
| angle or similar)? Can it do that headlessly without an window
| server running on the host? Can the video output of the app be
| easily captured by nvenc or intel/amd equivalent?
|
| Is arm translation supported natively or does it require plugins
| for the abi translation?
|
| Are google's libraries (play services, play store, webview) or
| alternatives easy to install/supported?
|
| Can the app data and system volume be mounted externally?
|
| Can the system details (cpuid/flags, device name/mfg/model,
| android OS specifics) be provided/spoofed?
|
| Can sensor inputs (gps location, tilt, multi-touch gestures,
| battery level, network status, camera/s) be easily simulated or
| passed from host sensor to the guest app? Can bluetooth be passed
| through from the host?
|
| Would love for somebody to crush this space and not pivot
| immediately into commercial offering.
| seba_dos1 wrote:
| > Can it process that via host hardware support (a la angle or
| similar)?
|
| You don't need ANGLE for that, Mesa supports OpenGL ES
| natively.
| moritonal wrote:
| I'm sorry if this is rude, but this comment reads really
| strangely. You seem to acknowledge that you really want
| something, whilst also accept you cannot do it for a lack of
| time|skill and then seem annoyed that the people who do ask for
| some kind of payment for their work?
| nalanda wrote:
| agreed
| numpad0 wrote:
| I can understand how he ended up with that kind of accusatory
| tone. Existing solutions either come with severe
| compatibility issues(official Emulator, QEMU, etc.), or
| vaporwares with great demos(Project Astoria) or are really
| sketchy borderline malwares(rest of it - my presumptions)
| that does wonders.
| ev1 wrote:
| Not just borderline. Most of the ones that can feasibly run
| a game for example are basically real malware.
| htrp wrote:
| Do you mind elaborating on this? Is it just because the
| use case turns into something like app install fraud?
| ev1 wrote:
| It's everything from a mix of cryptominers being deployed
| quietly (since of course anyone installing these will
| have a low end or better GPU), app install fraud, review
| fraud, Play token theft, spyware-tier telemetry. Even on
| the ones that don't install anything bad at all, they
| tend to auto-install the lowest common denominator apps
| via advertisements or paid placement that then have their
| own absurdist SDKs or whatever for data collection and
| mining.
|
| Pretty much any of the closed source emulators that can
| feasibly run games (i.e., be horribly abused en masse for
| botting games) are festering piles of crap.
|
| Another super common thing in those low tier trash apps
| is using your computer as a proxy ala Hola. Pay-per-
| install for using you to run stolen card traffic.
| tgtweak wrote:
| Just looking for the delta between this and anbox free/anbox
| cloud/genynotion cloud. No quams about paying for it
| honestly, just inquiring if any of these formerly paid-only
| (or build it yourself) features are being offered in the open
| here.
| ajvs wrote:
| From what I understand this is aimed only at ARM, so
| there's no emulation. This is therefore targeting Linux
| phones, but not Linux on desktop (which is usually run on
| x86).
| tgtweak wrote:
| From what I saw on docs, it seemed to be agnostic to host
| linux architecture (x86 or arm host), but it did say (on
| the desktop guide):
|
| > The apk files you will sometimes find on the internet
| tend to only have arm support, and will therefore not
| work on x86_64.
|
| Suggesting that they don't provide cross-abi
| compatability. If/when they move to Android 11 as the
| underlying image - it has both x86 and arm translations
| built into the packaged abi. I suspect that it will be on
| the user to install any abi translation packages
| (libhoudini for example) in order to get arm apk's to run
| on x86 host without qemu.
| blfr wrote:
| That's one way to look at it. Another is that we have this
| beautiful open source commons that most devs make use of and
| we would like it to be richer.
| AtlasBarfed wrote:
| THis guy wants to run containers of Android games, such as
| the various Pay to Win Machine Zone games (they are just one
| example).
|
| I played one of these once (some Final Fantasy thing) and the
| amount of manipulative social engineering, dopamine
| triggering sidegames, and manipulation by devs or employed
| super-players to "mix things up" to try to provoke people to
| fork over money was appalling.
|
| Thankfully I used almost no money, I paid up for one or two
| things to see if they would be worth it (they weren't) before
| I could fully recognize the money extraction treadmill they
| were trying to get you one.
|
| The games are a fascinating example of hyperinflation too.
| antiframe wrote:
| > The games are a fascinating example of hyperinflation
| too.
|
| Can you elaborate on what's fascinating?
| AtlasBarfed wrote:
| Aside from the social engineering aspect of constantly
| undermining the value of "currency" such as "gold" or
| resources like "food", etc.
|
| The game devs have complete control over the value of
| things be it buildings, soldiers, items, etc. The ability
| to constantly release new tiers/soldiers/etc that
| instantly devalue previous invested time and work all in
| service to wring more real-world money from addicts...
|
| Of course once too many new shiny things are released,
| suddenly the climb/intro for new players is too high.
|
| So suddenly, new players are given far more of the
| original "currency" of gold and resource to skip past the
| beginning steps so they can come within shouting distance
| to where investing money would keep them alive.
|
| Well, it's kind of like a perverse fiat currency and a
| central government with the power to impose regulations
| and print currency at will.
|
| The fact that the "central government" started printing
| money / resources once several more tiers of
| buildings/soldiers/defenses were introduced devalued all
| that previous investment and work to startling degrees.
|
| To me it was reminiscent of fiat currency and
| hyperinflation due to printing money.
| nmstoker wrote:
| Did they edit their comment after your reply? I'm not seeing
| aspects you refer to (esp the time/skill point)
| cto_of_antifa wrote:
| This is just my personal conspiracy theory, but I feel as
| though a really good android desktop container system hasn't
| been made available to Developers because it would make it a
| lot easier to pull back the curtain on all the shady native
| advertising and tracking shit everybody is getting up to.
| Even with a rooted device there's still a lot of open
| questions for me.
|
| Anyway, this is to say that I'm also a little bit angry about
| wanting such a product without the primary purpose of
| catering to corporate whims instead of developer tinkering
| kowlo wrote:
| That's quite the shopping list
| tgtweak wrote:
| Real use cases/requirements.
| kowlo wrote:
| Perhaps! My point was that it's quite a large order for the
| desired price of 0.
| fsflover wrote:
| Those are just questions. I think the OP would accept the
| answers "no".
| alex_smart wrote:
| I mean sure he would accept the answer "no", but why even
| ask the questions in the first place?
|
| That is like going to a used car lot, looking at a car
| with a tag price of 1000 dollars and asking is it
| electric, does it have doors that open like wings, does
| it have level 2 autonomous etc. Sure, you will take no
| for an answer, but why you be even asking that?
| Lerc wrote:
| To me those questions are more like; Does it have wheels,
| do the wheels have tyres, does it have brakes, is it road
| legal?
|
| Asking about the existence of such things is not a
| suggestion that they must be provided at that price. It's
| simply the baseline criteria for some people to want to
| use it.
| alex_smart wrote:
| >To me those questions are more like; Does it have
| wheels, do the wheels have tyres, does it have brakes, is
| it road legal?
|
| Considering the availability of the demanded product at
| the respective price points, I think that my analogy is
| much more accurate than yours.
|
| >Asking about the existence of such things is not a
| suggestion that they must be provided at that price.
|
| Sure, it is up to you to choose what product you want.
| But you should still have some awareness about the price
| of that product in the market. If someone offers a car
| for 5$ on ebay, I am going to assume it is a toy, not the
| real thing.
| RussianCow wrote:
| > If someone offers a car for 5$ on ebay, I am going to
| assume it is a toy, not the real thing.
|
| The whole point of the OP's questions is that they didn't
| want to assume anything! I don't see the harm in asking
| these types of questions, even if the most likely answer
| to each of them is "no".
| alex_smart wrote:
| I am not saying that the questions are outright harmful,
| just supporting another person's remark that "this
| comment reads really strangely".
|
| There is no harm in asking whether the 1000$ car at the
| used car dealership comes with cars that open like wings
| either, but it would sound strange.
| jcuenod wrote:
| > What's different between this and anbox
|
| I believe Waydroid was originally "anbox-halium"--a rewrite
| with LXC to get closer to the metal.
| tathisit wrote:
| Why would anbox need lxc? For Ndk support? How good is it on
| waydroid?
| jcuenod wrote:
| Ahh, I think I was mistaken. I think Anbox already used LXC
| (which was good because it wasn't emulating the whole OS).
| The key difference that Waydroid brings is that it is
| written for Wayland. I guess this is an advantage over X
| because of how Wayland exposes device hardware.
| amir-h wrote:
| It will be interesting to see how these kind of solutions compare
| with emulators for e2e testing of Android apps locally and on CI.
| zekrioca wrote:
| I do not know why they do not give credits, nor mention that they
| use LXC behind the scenes [1].
|
| [1]
| https://github.com/waydroid/waydroid/blob/bullseye/tools/hel...
| gizdan wrote:
| Why do they need to? Sure it'll be nice, but depending on your
| market, maybe that's an unnecessary implementation detail.
| zekrioca wrote:
| They do mention
|
| "Waydroid uses Linux namespaces (user, pid, uts, net, mount,
| ipc) to run a full..." [see main page]
|
| when in fact they simply use LXD, which uses all these
| features. Besides, it is a project dependency, which is not
| mentioned anywhere.
|
| Edit: clarity.
| aritmo wrote:
| LXC, not LXD.
| zekrioca wrote:
| Oops, yes, LXC.
| [deleted]
| jrm4 wrote:
| I am, of course, not naive enough to think that there's a good
| chance of it happening -- but I nevertheless strongly feel this
| way about _every_ large tech company that isn 't Microsoft not
| mentioning that they use Linux.
| sodality2 wrote:
| Title should be changed to Linux - thought this was Ubuntu-only
| at first (like if it were only in Ubuntu repos)
| blendergeek wrote:
| Yeah. This title should be reverted to the title on the page.
|
| A container-based approach to boot a full Android system on a
| regular GNU/Linux system like Ubuntu.
|
| This could be simplified to:
|
| WayDroid: Containerized Android for GNU/Linux
|
| But as it is now, the title has been changed to be confusing.
| jrm4 wrote:
| Name strongly implies it requires Wayland? (which, eww)
|
| But the front page doesn't make this too clear, can anyone
| confirm?
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| FWIW you can just run a Wayland compositor in a window on X.
| Not sure if there's a way to get it working without the root
| window to make it seamless, but it's still an option.
|
| EDIT: Actually I tried it and this doesn't want to work in an
| instance of weston running on top of X; not sure where the
| failure is.
| ZiiS wrote:
| Yes it requires Wayland.
| [deleted]
| xt00 wrote:
| One of the biggest problems with anbox and ARC was that they
| would need to do tons of work on each new android version. If
| somebody is willing to keep updating this for new versions of
| android at least every other android release then it's reasonable
| to say this will work long term, otherwise people will use of a
| year then abandon it.. so Google is now switching to using arcvm
| where they use a VM instead of trying to do a bunch of work to
| make android apps run in chromeOS running in a container that
| requires the right kernel and special compatibility libs /
| services running to pretend to be android.
| hereme888 wrote:
| I'm glad to recently switch to Linux as my primary OS with things
| like these available. Windows 11's android app integration now
| doesn't sound as appealing.
| begueradj wrote:
| Sounds better than -the dead- Anbox
| evv555 wrote:
| I hope they get this running through Termux now that it supports
| containers on the latest Lineage OS builds.
| arendtio wrote:
| Does someone know why Arch Linux doesn't come with the binder and
| ashmem modules enabled by default?
|
| Both are required to run Anbox and Waydroid so you have to switch
| to another kernel or build one yourself.
| kxyvr wrote:
| Has anyone had success getting any of these containers to work
| with a camera?
|
| Recently, my bank discontinued their website based deposit system
| for checks in favor of their app. I'm reluctant to keep an app
| with full access to my account on my phone, so a container system
| like Waydroid or Anbox would be great if I could just emulate the
| app when I need it. Has anyone else run into this issue and, if
| so, how have you dealt with it?
| npteljes wrote:
| I got by in similar circumstances with Android x86. Which is
| simply an android VM. The catch is that it's not ARM, which
| some apps lamented - but the app I needed worked just fine.
| exikyut wrote:
| FWIW/out of curiosity, I just tried poking the emulator that
| comes with Android Studio, and found an option (under "advanced
| settings") to route the emulated front or back camera to
| "Webcam0". This is out of the box on Debian.
|
| While definitely a heavyweight approach (yay, installing all of
| Android Studio - but you also install an update tool), I can
| confirm it works. (And you can fish out and save the qemu
| invocation from `ps axfww`, then launch it directly without
| needing to start anything else, although I think the idiomatic
| approach is using the `emulator` command.)
| zorr wrote:
| The emulator is part of the android SDK so you don't need to
| install the full IDE if all you need is the emulator. You can
| just install the Android SDK standalone and use that to
| install additional images and start/stop devices.
| meltedcapacitor wrote:
| What about using last year's phone for banking etc?
| knakk wrote:
| I have been trying to get my banking software to work with both
| Anbox and Waydroid for the last couple of days. So far I've had
| no success with either. I've gotten other apps to run just fine
| but not any related to banking. These apps are extremely picky
| about the environment you run them in. At least the ones I'm
| working with require Google Play Services, which is proprietary
| and have to be ripped from an Android image (if you don't want
| to take a chance on some shady download). Even with Play
| services, my app still will not start. I'm thinking it could be
| related to how Anbox and Waydroid shares the kernel with the
| host OS, and therefor it may not look like valid Android to the
| apps.
| gbrindisi wrote:
| perhaps the containerized environment looks like a rooted
| phone?
|
| Due to vague security requirements most banking apps refuse
| to run if the phone has been routed.
| tathisit wrote:
| Android is actually pretty secure. If you trust Linux kernel
| (which I think you do since you trust lxc), then you can trust
| Android.
| 1hrow_away1 wrote:
| I wish I could setup waydroid on Raspberry Pi so that I can
| finally use hotstar/primevideo and netflix on my dumb tv.
|
| I had bought firestick in past that is now stuck on boot loop for
| over a year. I have decided not buy these sticks or smart TV
| where I have little to no control over Software.
| dannyw wrote:
| There is always the Plex / seedbox / NAS route...
| jcuenod wrote:
| Why can't you?
| [deleted]
| logix wrote:
| If on Raspberry Pi OS, install libwidevinecdm0 and those should
| work.
| sodimel wrote:
| Very nice project... but why does the third paragraph has a
| contenteditable tag set to true?
| jcuenod wrote:
| Lol! How did you notice this?
| 29083011397778 wrote:
| One of the major advantages of Waydroid that I've found is that
| it's lighter than Anbox. I know some here have compute to spare,
| but it makes a big difference on my Pinephone :)
|
| It's still early days for Waydroid, but it's also decidedly a
| step forwards.
| amenod wrote:
| Wait - you can run waydroid, and thus presumably Android apps,
| on Pinephone? This is huge! How well does it work?
| josteink wrote:
| The PinePhone runs mainline Linux on a regular Arm64 SOC. Why
| shouldn't it work? ;)
| edoceo wrote:
| Because you're running an emulator on a damnd phone!! A
| PHONE! Wild!
| outworlder wrote:
| Phones have more processing power than laptops from just
| a few years ago. People aren't exaggerating when they
| call them pocket supercomputers.
| LeSaucy wrote:
| The series 7 Apple Watch has a higher resolution display
| than the original iPhone.
| CameronNemo wrote:
| Well it is a container rather than an emulator. Maybe
| some parts are emulated, like opengl, but I believe
| waydroid is a lot "closer to the metal" than anbox is.
| dannyw wrote:
| The SoC is pretty slow. speaking as a PinePhone owner.
| josteink wrote:
| Sure. I have one too. I know.
|
| But that's no reason for it _not to work_ , it will just
| work more slowly ;)
| fsflover wrote:
| If you think that Pinephone is slow, try a less cluttered
| OS (https://sxmo.org), or consider Librem 5 instead.
| smallerfish wrote:
| ...or wait for the fxtec to ship. If I'm going to have a
| command line on my phone, I want a keyboard.
| fsflover wrote:
| > If I'm going to have a command line on my phone, I want
| a keyboard.
|
| https://pineguild.com/pinephone-keyboard-first-
| impression-is...
|
| Also, you can connect via ssh and use your computer's
| keyboard to manage the phone. Or buy a Bluetooth
| keyboard.
| josteink wrote:
| The fxtec looks neat in theory, but one thing I love on
| my PinePhone is its ability to just boot any OS on any
| SD-card you insert.
|
| Do you know if the fxtec will offer the same? For a
| tinkerable Linux phone where you genuinely go distro-
| hopping, that's truly a game-changer.
| smallerfish wrote:
| I don't - all I know is that the bootloader is unlocked
| and it has a few recommended options. Agree with you that
| it's neat in theory, but am waiting for the first reviews
| before I plunk down cash.
| OJFord wrote:
| I've asked about anbox (not having heard of waydroid before
| now) on Pinephone threads before, consensus seemed to be even
| without bugs it's too slow on Pinephone hardware. (And indeed
| I've found it too buggy to be useful on my desktop anyway.)
|
| So certainly lighter sounds good, and hopefully the future's
| bright - could be very useful in bridging the gap driving
| more Linux phone adoption. Some things just can't and won't
| be available (without way more adoption), like bank apps say,
| so being able to run the Android version smoothly would be a
| huge win.
| cunidev wrote:
| Quite well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG0uAQqeqW4
|
| Here is on a OnePlus 6T running postmarketOS, for comparison:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9qaD5YIPkc
| option_greek wrote:
| Can you add a bit more on what works and what doesn't work on
| waydroid compared with regular android and regular lineageos on
| pine phone.
| shrubble wrote:
| Idea: take the open source Beagle Bone Black, which has open
| source schematics, put into (probably chunkier) phone form
| factor, add 4g phone modem.
|
| Use containers to segregate any apps, e.g. web browser, maps,
| Signal/Telegram all in a separate container from each other.
|
| Would this allow for less privacy-invasion from Google etc.?
| pinusc wrote:
| If Google privacy invasion is what you fear, then there are
| simpler solutions. Simply installing lineageOS on a supported
| android device yields a functioning, de-googlified phone.
| Install only open source apps (from F-Droid, for example) and
| you're all set.
|
| Android itself containerizes/isolates apps, with better &
| better security features in modern versions. LineageOS also
| adds their own layer of security (ex-PrivacyGuard) on top.
|
| Granted, not all phones are created equal, meaning some of them
| will have restrictive bootloaders/need more proprietary
| drivers. It's possible some of them have spyware built in their
| bootloader/recovery/hardware, although I haven't heard of it.
| And of course there's 0 fully open-source android hardware
| phones.
|
| Which, speaking of... this would be excellent on pinephone,
| which runs linux. Would allow running android apps on it, which
| is very very useful of course. I might finally bite the bullet
| and buy it...
| dvdkon wrote:
| You could just use a PinePhone, you'd probably get similar
| performance in a much more convenient form factor.
| marcodiego wrote:
| See the video comparing a pinephone to a librem-5 running
| supertuxkart: https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-
| wiki/-/wikis/Benchm...
|
| They are not on par in terms of performance.
| fsflover wrote:
| Your idea has been (in principle) implemented here:
| https://puri.sm/products/librem-5.
| seba_dos1 wrote:
| BBB requires non-free drivers for the GPU, which are a huge
| PITA even if you don't mind them being non-free. You would end
| up with more-or-less a Nokia N9 clone.
|
| It's better to use something like i.MX 8M Quad - you may want
| to take a look at the Librem 5; or if you want something lower-
| end than that then there's also the PinePhone which is based on
| A64.
| marcodiego wrote:
| i.MX still needs binary blobs. I think the only ARM SBC today
| that can run blob-free today is Radxa's Rock pi 4.
| seba_dos1 wrote:
| Every i.MX blob combined is an order of magnitude less
| problematic in practice than PowerVR blob on OMAP.
| CameronNemo wrote:
| Why only that particular rk3399 board? My rock64 runs blob
| free, as I would imagine most rk3328 boards do. The rk3399
| type c port does require a blob, but I guess that is
| optional and boards without the USB3 type c port do not
| need it. Other than that the only blob I need for my PBP is
| for the broadcom WiFi modem. Are there any ac WiFi modems
| that work without blobs? I have only seen the ath9k
| chipsets which top out at 802.11n
|
| With that said, I worry an rk3399 would run hot in a phone.
| Hopefully the thermals on the rk3588 are better. But
| rockchip is dedicating die space to a poorly supported
| "neural processing unit" now, so we will have to see.
| marcodiego wrote:
| The USB-c port on the rock pi 4 is for power only, no eDP
| or any blob required for HDMI. The model A has no wifi,
| so no blob required for that too.
| fsflover wrote:
| > i.MX still needs binary blobs
|
| Which ones? Librem 5 runs an FSF-endorsed OS and is
| recommended by the FSF:
| https://www.fsf.org/givingguide/v11/.
| marcodiego wrote:
| AFAIK fsf recommending a distro doesn't says much about
| the hardware it runs on. With regard to the blobs still
| required, see
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28189184
| fsflover wrote:
| FSF recommends hardware which runs purely blob-free OSes.
| Such hardware can still have proprietary components,
| which can be considered "hardware, not software", i.e.,
| have no access to RAM, CPU or network and do not require
| updates.
|
| Purism solved the problem with the RAM here:
| https://puri.sm/posts/librem5-solving-the-first-fsf-ryf-
| hurd....
| marcodiego wrote:
| This was posted a long time ago. The phone has been
| available for a more than a year now and it still is not
| ryf-certified. I don't think it will ever be.
| fsflover wrote:
| Have a look at my first link. FSF did not certify the
| phone, because they did not receive the units yet. Purism
| is struggling with delivery due to the supply chain
| problem. Nevertheless, FSF recommends Librem 5 every
| year, and they _never_ recommend anything requiring
| binary blobs. I have no doubt it will be certified (later
| rather than sooner).
| marcodiego wrote:
| I couldn't find "FSF did not certify the phone, because
| they did not receive the units yet" in the links you
| posted.
|
| Purism has been tight-lipped about getting ryf
| certification. These maneuvers around memory and hdmi
| look more like cheating to me. According to the links I
| posted, i.MX8 cannot be deblobbed. I stand by what I say:
| I don't think the librem-5 will ever get ryf-certified.
| fsflover wrote:
| > I couldn't find "FSF did not certify the phone, because
| they did not receive the units yet" in the links you
| posted.
|
| Just below the picture of the phone, first sentence:
| _While we 're still waiting to get our hands on one, this
| device looks promising_:
| https://www.fsf.org/givingguide/v11.
|
| > These maneuvers around memory and hdmi look more like
| cheating to me.
|
| Why does it matter to you that a secondary CPU which has
| no access to anything runs proprietary blobs to train the
| RAM? Do you also care about proprietary firmware of SSDs
| (and avoid them)?
| marcodiego wrote:
| > > I couldn't find "FSF did not certify the phone,
| because they did not receive the units yet" in the links
| you posted.
|
| > Just below the picture of the phone, first sentence:
| While we're still waiting to get our hands on one, this
| device looks promising:
| https://www.fsf.org/givingguide/v11.
|
| I'd still argue that it is a bit different from "FSF did
| not certify the phone, because they did not receive the
| units yet".
|
| > > These maneuvers around memory and hdmi look more like
| cheating to me.
|
| > Why does it matter to you that a secondary CPU which
| has no access to anything runs proprietary blobs to train
| the RAM? Do you also care about proprietary firmware of
| SSDs (and avoid them)?
|
| To makes things clear: I'm not opposed to the "secondary
| processor exception". In this case specifically, the
| firmware was artificially stored on a ROM chip, and
| copied from there to "a secondary processor" by the main
| processor to unlock a feature (train the RAM) to allow
| the main processor to work properly. This is a bit too
| much for me. Also, I'm not sure the HDMI initialization
| runs on a secondary processor.
|
| Also, librem-5 getting ryf-certified would make me very
| very happy. I really would love to see this happen.
| spansoa wrote:
| This could be useful for web development. You could download a
| bunch of Android browsers and test your site(s) with them,
| without having to do that on a finicky phone (for those who want
| to do everything on a desktop PC)
| Jiejeing wrote:
| You know you have been able to do that for ages using the
| official android emulator, right?
| underscore_ku wrote:
| so now we have waydroid and anbox
| xt00 wrote:
| It sort of looks like these guys said hey if anbox folks aren't
| going to update their android version, let's fork it and do our
| own thing? There are some random anbox files in the repo for
| waydroid.
| chrismorgan wrote:
| Waydroid was formerly known as anbox-halium; I believe it was
| a rewrite of Anbox to use system capabilities more or
| something, but I'm fuzzy on the details.
|
| (As to what it's _now_ known as, I'm not actually certain: in
| _most_ places it's spelled Waydroid, but there are a number
| of places where it's spelled WayDroid instead. Waaaaah! I
| can't cope!)
| xt00 wrote:
| oh super interesting to know about the anbox-halium
| history, thanks for that info.
| marcodiego wrote:
| Doubts:
|
| - Is it better/faster/more compatible than anbox?
|
| - Runs on ARM?
|
| - Does it allows me to watch DRM streaming services on my linux
| box?
|
| - Can I install google play on it?
| judge2020 wrote:
| > - Does it allows me to watch DRM streaming services on my
| linux box?
|
| It doesn't include a HSM, so if it does allow you to watch DRM
| content, it'll only be Widevine level 3 content, which most
| services restrict to 420p or sometimes 720p streaming.
|
| https://support.google.com/widevine/answer/6072714?hl=en
| chrismorgan wrote:
| Waydroid has Android use your actual Linux kernel, so on an
| x86-64 host you'll run x86-64 Android, and on an ARM host, ARM
| Android. This means that there will be some apps that won't run
| on your Intel/AMD computer. I have no idea at all how common it
| is for Android apps to be tied to ARM, but I imagine that ARM64
| will have helped with architecture-neutrality.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| > but I imagine that ARM64 will have helped with
| architecture-neutrality.
|
| What would have helped a lot more here is the default
| emulator in Android Studio is currently, and has been for a
| while now, x86. Since of course x86 to x86 virtualization is
| a _lot_ faster than ARM to x86 virtualization.
|
| ARM64 didn't do much to help with architecture-neutrality
| just like X86_64 didn't.
| bogwog wrote:
| If the app doesn't use any native libraries, it should be
| able to run on any architecture. Otherwise, I don't think
| you'll find many developers shipping x86/x86_64 binaries
| nowadays considering there are no real devices that use it.
|
| I think Intel has (or had?) a tool/library for translating
| ARM to x86 called Houdini. Can't seem to find it though, and
| it might require a license anyways.
| oynqr wrote:
| Aren't x86 chromebooks real devices?
| CameronNemo wrote:
| If you mean x86_64 then yes certainly. They are about as
| common as ARM64 Chromebooks these days.
| bogwog wrote:
| Can Chrome books run Android apps?
| lights0123 wrote:
| Yes they can. It's been an advertised feature for a few
| years.
| bogwog wrote:
| TIL! In that case, x86 builds are probably more common
| than I assumed.
| gizdan wrote:
| > This means that there will be some apps that won't run on
| your Intel/AMD computer.
|
| Should be able to still run them if you use binfmt_misc. Of
| course it will be slower but it's possible.
| westurner wrote:
| > _binfmt_misc_
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binfmt_misc
|
| > _binfmt_misc can also be combined with QEMU to execute
| programs for other processor architectures as if they were
| native binaries.[9]_
|
| QEMU supported [ARM guest] machines: https://wiki.qemu.org/
| Documentation/Platforms/ARM#Supported_...
|
| Edit: from "Running and Building ARM Docker Containers on
| x86" (which also describes how to get CUDA working)
| https://www.stereolabs.com/docs/docker/building-arm-
| containe... : sudo apt-get install qemu
| binfmt-support qemu-user-static # Install the qemu packages
| docker run --rm --privileged multiarch/qemu-user-static
| --reset -p yes # Execute the registering scripts
| docker run --rm -t arm64v8/ubuntu uname -m # Test the
| emulation environment
|
| https://github.com/multiarch/qemu-user-static :
|
| > _multiarch /qemu-user-static is to enable an execution of
| different multi-architecture containers by QEMU [1] and
| binfmt_misc [2]. Here are examples with Docker [3]._
| westurner wrote:
| Why the heck isn't there just an official Android
| container and/or a LineageOS container?
|
| It's not a certified device, so.
|
| There are a number of ways to build "multi-arch docker
| images" e.g. for both x86 and ARM: OCI, docker build,
| podman build, buildx, buildah.
|
| Containers are testable.
| genewitch wrote:
| What streaming service doesn't work on FF ESR on Linux?
|
| Netflix and prime and Pluto do, at least. That's all I use, so
| I am curious. I don't stream anything else, no Roku or Android-
| tv or whatever.
| CameronNemo wrote:
| None on ARM. Google never offered widevine to Firefox on
| ARM64.
| marcodiego wrote:
| Exactly, AFAIK you can't watch netflix on your ARM SBC.
| JanMa wrote:
| You can, all you need to do is to extract the widevine
| binary from a ChromeOS arm build and put them on your
| Pi/ARM board.
|
| Admittedly, it's a bit cumbersome to do this, but it
| works very well. I've been watching Netflix on my
| Raspberry Pi 4 for over a year using it.
|
| Also, according to this guy [0] you now seem to be able
| to just install libwidevine in Raspberry OS. I haven't
| tested this yet though.
|
| [0]: https://lemariva.com/blog/2021/04/raspberry-pi-
| amazon-prime-...
| CameronNemo wrote:
| Right, as long as you are using Chrome (maybe chromium in
| a 32 bit chroot or container if you do not have an RPI),
| you can use widevine. But I'm not a big fan of the RPI
| devices, or chrome.
| Spivak wrote:
| I feel like you're expecting a lot from a a container running
| LineageOS with some integrations into the window manager.
|
| It's a container so the arch matches the host kernel.
|
| In general on LineageOS it's possible to install gapps.
|
| You won't be able to watch DRM streaming services that require
| Widevine higher than L3 support.
| rektide wrote:
| > _Is it better /faster/more compatible than anbox?_
|
| From the Anbox website:
|
| > _" We're reusing what Android implemented within the QEMU-
| based emulator for OpenGL ES accelerated rendering."_
|
| I'm not certain but I believe WayDroid more directly attempts
| to provide Android drawing subsystems on top of Wayland. This
| should be better/faster. Cross fingers.
|
| Compatibility wise, I'm unsure. Anbox may be a more faithful
| Android platform perhaps. Waydroid feels like it's a closer
| integration to me, with less virtualized-machinery, which is a
| much wider support target since it's running directly atop a
| wide variety of hosts. But I for one am very glad we have a
| closer integrated option, one where Android apps are running
| more within the Linux desktop context.
|
| There's probably a bunch wrong with my understandings here.
| Hoping some even better informed people can correct/supplement.
| puppet-master wrote:
| Followed instructions for 21.04 (distro = "hirsute"), greeted
| with complaint about binder missing. Found some bug report on the
| web suggesting I must rebuild my kernel to enable binder. Noped
| out of there.
|
| Looks like a nice effort though. Is this some problem specific to
| 21.04 kernel config?
| CameronNemo wrote:
| I have seen an error like that with anbox before, but it was
| not on Ubuntu. I just had to mount the binderfs and it stopped
| complaining. Might be worth a try: mount -t
| binder binder /dev/binderfs
|
| https://brauner.github.io/2019/01/09/android-binderfs.html
| iam-TJ wrote:
| In Ubuntu kernels the Android modules are named "binder_linux"
| and "ashmem_linux" so: sudo modprobe
| binder_linux sudo modprobe ashmem_linux
|
| Where $version is the kernel version, for -generic kernels they
| are in the package "linux-modules-extra-${version}-generic" and
| for -lowlatency "linux-modules-${version}-lowlatency". On
| -generic the modules-extra may sometimes not be installed by
| default.
| madushan1000 wrote:
| Also if you have secureboot on,you won't be able to load
| ashmem because it's not signed by default by ubuntu. That is
| without signing the module yourself. I have waydroid running
| in 21.04 without any issues.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| One thing I've run into with these projects is that they don't
| work well in a multi user setting. Anbox specifically assumes
| that only a single user is present in the system and having
| multiple users with multiple app profiles seems to be entirely
| unsupported.
|
| I can't find anything about that use case in the description
| here, but if anyone has tried it I'd love to hear if Waydroid
| would be a fit for my use case.
| nirav72 wrote:
| Interesting. Might have to see if this can run tasker for
| automation
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-09-22 23:00 UTC)