I remember fondly reading that (and about his work in general), which is why when I saw the video thumbnail I immediately had a feeling "wait no it can't be".
Full title: ‘Everything LTS’ – Canonical will build distroless Docker images to customer spec that include upstream components not packaged in Ubuntu, and fix critical CVEs within 24 hours, supported on RHEL, Ubuntu, VMware or public cloud K8s for 12+ years.
Geez, it's one message, there was more after it, when no mods were around. I can't speak on behalf of Nick of course.
I woke up, saw it, and banned those people. We don't allow people to do this for any project, ever. What else can even be done, there's thousands of people on the channel, and moderation is hard and time consuming.
People on the internet say things, you can't keep attributing it to us always.
Somebody joins our channel, your channel, posts on twitter, etc - how are we responsible for what they say anywhere else, we don't control their speech.
Learn how the internet works - this has been the crux of the problem all along, you attributing things to us, and then using that as justification of your behaviour doing exactly what you're accusing us of doing. All those threats :(
Some compression stats from my local setup. I work with a lot of source code (Android / AOSP), and big output directories (hundreds of gigabytes)
ZFS compressratio:
source: 1.40x (Separate pool)
output: 1.68x-2.49x (Multiple datasets to make management easier)
The output compression allowed me to use a 1TB drive as a 2TB drive effectively, allowing me to store a lot more output and not have to wipe away build output from x to build y.
That alone makes zfs worth it for me (and I know many other Android devs who use it in a similar fashion)
> GrapheneOS does not include any form of Play services and has no support for the OS using it. If a user installs Play services, the OS detects it and intercepts the attempts it makes to use privileged APIs and instead returns placeholder data.
Isn't that shipping an integration for a proprietary service?
How can you claim that we're the ones shipping proprietary service integrations when we ship an open source implementation, and you're the ones shipping an integration for the proprietary implementation.
I'm done here, there's no point arguing with you, you don't see reason.
> Not actually true. Do you claim that stuff like firmware cannot be shipped too?
It's the sole reason why there exists the concept of flashing gapps are installing other custom ROMs, and that cannot be supported without verified boot.
The other way is what you're doing, which is impressive, not questioning the code / implementation, just the way you're trying to present it here.
> CalyxOS has a leaky firewall which apps can bypass and a leaky VPN tethering implementation.
We're working on fixing the one bypass. I don't know what you mean by leaky VPN tethering implementation.
We have a patch (from LineageOS) that allows tethered devices to connect over the VPN. By default in AOSP a tethered device ignores the VPN.
Wouldn't this be the opposite of leaky? It prevents leaks, especially when you have always-on VPN enabled.
> GrapheneOS has a Network toggle without those leaks and prefers the approach of fine-grained VPNs rather than using the same tunnel for everything.
We evaluated the network toggle and found it to cause crashes in apps when the permission got taken away from them unexpectedly, which is why we've gone with the solely network-level implementation.
We also do not have anything that'd make you think 'use the same tunnel for everything'. Multiple users work just fine, and in fact we now have a built-in work profile feature which lets you run another VPN in that (since that's how Android works) out of the box.
> CalyxOS includes a lot more proprietary services (Google, WhatsApp, etc.)
We do not include any proprietary services. We have microG which is open source, and the WhatsApp integration is done in open source code in the Dialer, it does not rely on anything proprietary.
In fact, you're the one who's brought up your play services approach which involves running the proprietary binary. Don't you see the irony?
I specifically avoided commenting on the comparison threads solely to not have to see this. You will not find me doing that anywhere, anytime (unless perhaps when we were on good terms)
I've done that all this time, the only time I comment on something is when somebody asks us to integrate it into CalyxOS, and that's only within our context.
You're the one here who're responding in a hostile manner, and doing exactly what you're accusing us of. Please stop.
> Does Calyx really include WhatsApp out of the box? That would indeed be a very negative point for me. As I mentioned I haven't used either.
We do not, we would never ship a proprietary app like that.
What we have is a small patch to the open source Dialer / Phone application that lets you make WhatsApp calls directly.
It only shows WhatsApp as an option if you have it installed already, if you don't you won't see it, we don't want to promote using proprietary services.
This was done after a lot of back and forth with our UX team.
> They present it as a firewall app with a fancy name, but it's just a UI for the AOSP firewall and it doesn't really work as they present it.
There is no AOSP Firewall, this is all based on code which originated in LineageOS, and we've been maintaining and extending it since about a year now. We make changes, send patches back upstream (LineageOS), and are talks in that developer.
The bypass is serious, we're looking into it and will have a working patch available shortly. It will work.
We do not muck around with the INTERNET permission and change the android permission model since that has known to crash apps, we did evaluate it before putting effort into this.
The beauty of doing this network side is that apps are unaware and keep working, unlike some apps which crash when you take away their INTERNET permission - that is why we didn't go with that approach.
What use is a toggle if it crashes the app and makes it unsable.
> The fastboot.js library powering it is a project we funded.
> Google's Play client libraries are still used on CalyxOS by the apps using Play services.
They'd also be used on GrapheneOS, and anywhere else basically.
> WhatsApp is clearly a proprietary service too, and CalyxOS is integrating that into the Dialer app.
The integration is entirely done into the open source Dialer app and generic enough that it could be extended to any apps that have phone numbers. Signal and WhatsApp are simply the most popular amongst those.
I did not want to get into this, but you're simply spread falsehoods.
> GrapheneOS doesn't ship integration of proprietary services like CalyxOS, whether that's WhatsApp or Google services.
We do not ship anything proprietary. We ship microG, which is "A free-as-in-freedom re-implementation of Google’s proprietary Android user space apps and libraries." - see https://microg.org/
We ship an integration with WhatsApp in the Dialer, which is entirely open source code. It is based on the existing contacts mechanism (anyone who has WhatsApp or Signal on any Android will see entries for those in the Contacts app - that is what we expose to the Dialer to make it easy to use those to make end-to-end encrypted calls.
In fact, WhatsApp is not listed by default, it only shows up if you have it installed. We believe that end-to-end encrypted calls are important, and while this would leak some metadata, if one has it installed already presumably they're fine with that. The network effect is strong!
In fact, you're the one who's promoting your approach of being able to run the proprietary Play Services - and yet you say you don't ship integration of proprietary services. Which is it? You can't ship Play Services legally anyway.
> or example, they give special unattended installation privileges to Aurora Store and F-Droid.
Aurora Store does not get unattended installation permission, it never has. It can only update installed apps, which is what Google is allowing in Android 12.
F-Droid Privileged Extension is extended, and both that and F-Droid have received security audits in the past which haven't found issues - and the Privileged Extension itself hasn't changed much since then. We're very careful about making any changes there.
It is one thing to give constructive criticism to projects, it's another to attack them directly based on falsehoods.
Android 16 has been highly unusual though, with the only source code release done 3 months ago in June, when it was initially released.
https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/base/+r... - only two "16.0.0" hits here, both from June 10.