Re: [gentoo-user] any one using ubuntu phones?

[Rich Freeman]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 11:44 AM, behrouz khosravi
<bz.khosravi@×××××.com> wrote:
>> It sounds like your problem isn't with Android (which is mostly FOSS -
>> or at least the parts you're dealing with here are), but with the
>> bootloader on your phone (which is proprietary).
>
> No, actually my problem is that why an operating system
> can have decision on what types of apps can I have on my computer.
> if it is foss enough why I am not able to remove everything from my system
> easily.

If you build/install Android on a device, then it only contains what
you put there, and you can just as easily remove it.  If you let
somebody else build/install android on a device and not give you root
access, then it is painful.

If you build/install Gentoo on a device, then it only contains what
you put there, and you can just as easily remove it.  If you let me
build/install Gentoo on your device and not give you root access, then
it is painful.

If you let me reflash the firmware on your Gentoo system so that it
uses my UEFI keys and firmware update keys and doesn't let you change
them, and I set it up with a bootloader that checks your
kernel+initramfs signatures and decrypts the rest of your hard drive
using a TPM-supplied key and a verified boot path, and an initramfs
that checks the signature on your /usr and mounts everything else
noexec, then you're going to have some serious headaches.  And yes,
you actually can do all of this with Gentoo, though almost nobody
bothers (ChromeOS is based on Gentoo and does use a variation on this,
with licensed devices having a switch to disable the signature
checks).  I'd have to check but I think Linux actually supports (maybe
via a patch) signature verification on execing images, in which case I
can let you mount whatever you want +x and you still won't be able to
run your own stuff.

Your problem isn't with Android the OS.  Your problem is with the
experience your phone vendor is giving you.  All that lockdown stuff
that you seem to hate is 100% supported by the Linux kernel - you're
just not turning it on with a typical distro install.

>
>> FOSS developers seem to mostly be stuck in X11-land - it scratches
>> their itch which tends to be on the desktop.  While touch screen is
>> "just another input device" the fact is that you need to design your
>> entire application UI around it. ...
>
> why do you thinks some foss user interfaces can not be created for this
> situation?
>

I'm not saying that they cannot be created.  I'm simply pointing out
that nobody is bothering to do so.  Anybody can write a web-based MUA
comparable to Gmail or a web-based replacement to Google Docs, and
release it as FOSS.  However, it takes a lot of work and for various
reasons most seem content to use an X11-based version of each.  In the
case of LibreOffice I think the origins are actually in software that
was intended to be sold commercially, but failed (which is probably
why they've been trying to cleanup the code for years).

For a mobile OS your life is made even more difficult by Android,
since many who would tend to write a competing OS probably consider it
good enough.

I'm really not interested in yet another android so much as more open
hardware to run android on.  Vendors are getting better about allowing
unlocking, but driver support/etc is still a mess.

Oh, and I don't like the general move of APIs into Google Play
Services.  That really needs to be split into two applications.  One
would provide APIs for stuff actually related to Google (like Google
authentication, buying stuff on the Play Store, Google Wallet, and so
on), and that could be closed.  The other would provide all the stuff
like WebView APIs where rapid updates are desirable, and it should be
FOSS.

-- 
Rich