Linux Apps Are Not Coming To Many Still-Supported Chromebooks (betanews.com) 61
While we know that Linux app support is coming to a range of Chromebooks from Lenovo, Acer, Dell and others, a post on the Chromium Gerrit reveals that devices running Linux 3.14 or older will miss out. BetaNews: Chrome OS is able to run Linux apps through the use of containers which help to keep the rest of the operating system safe from harm. As container support requires features that are only found in more recent versions of the Linux kernel, it means that many Chromebooks -- whose kernels are usually not updated -- will not be able to run Linux apps.
Here's the full list of Chromebooks that won't be getting the Linux love: AOpen Chromebase Mini (Feb 2017; tiger, veyron_pinky), AOpen Chromebox Mini (Feb 2017; fievel, veyron_pinky), ASUS Chromebook C201 (May 2015; speedy, veyron_pinky), Acer C670 Chromebook 11 (Feb 2015; paine, auron), Acer Chromebase 24 (Apr 2016; buddy, auron), Acer Chromebook 15 (Apr 2015; yuna, auron), Acer Chromebox CXI2 (May 2015; rikku, jecht), Asus Chromebit CS10 (Nov 2015; mickey, veyron_pinky), Asus Chromebook Flip C100PA (Jul 2015; minnie, veyron_pinky), Asus Chromebox CN62 (Aug 2015; guado, jecht), Dell Chromebook 13 7310 (Aug 2015; lulu, auron), Google Chromebook Pixel (Mar 2015; samus), Lenovo ThinkCentre Chromebook (May 2015; tidus, jecht), Toshiba Chromebookk 2 (Sep 2015; gandof, auron).
Here's the full list of Chromebooks that won't be getting the Linux love: AOpen Chromebase Mini (Feb 2017; tiger, veyron_pinky), AOpen Chromebox Mini (Feb 2017; fievel, veyron_pinky), ASUS Chromebook C201 (May 2015; speedy, veyron_pinky), Acer C670 Chromebook 11 (Feb 2015; paine, auron), Acer Chromebase 24 (Apr 2016; buddy, auron), Acer Chromebook 15 (Apr 2015; yuna, auron), Acer Chromebox CXI2 (May 2015; rikku, jecht), Asus Chromebit CS10 (Nov 2015; mickey, veyron_pinky), Asus Chromebook Flip C100PA (Jul 2015; minnie, veyron_pinky), Asus Chromebox CN62 (Aug 2015; guado, jecht), Dell Chromebook 13 7310 (Aug 2015; lulu, auron), Google Chromebook Pixel (Mar 2015; samus), Lenovo ThinkCentre Chromebook (May 2015; tidus, jecht), Toshiba Chromebookk 2 (Sep 2015; gandof, auron).
Open source? (Score:2)
So? Why would not you just download the source-code and compile it yourself?
Was not this ability the point of Linux — and the rallying cry for its fans — for 20+ years?
Lrf, V'z gebyyvat. Gunax lbh sbe znxvat na rssbeg gb ernq guvf.
Would require developer mode (Score:3)
So? Why would not you just download the source-code and compile it yourself?
Because you would have to put a Chromebook into developer mode to install an unofficial kernel. A security feature in the Chromebook firmware allows anybody who turns on a Chromebook in developer mode to powerwash it by turning it on, pressing Space as prompted, and pressing Enter as prompted. This causes you to lose the day's work that you haven't yet been able to back up remotely and lose the use of the modified Chrome OS until you have a chance to reinstall it. (See "Chromebook Developer Mode Warning" [slashdot.org].)
Re: (Score:1)
Goodness gracious, "unofficial" kernel? Does not that imply, there is also an "official" kernel? What is that, and just how "open source" is that very concept?
Chromebook firmware is partly Tivoized (Score:4, Insightful)
"unofficial" kernel? Does not that imply, there is also an "official" kernel? What is that
The official kernel for a device is the one that stock firmware loads without having to be put into developer mode.
and just how "open source" is that very concept?
It's the phenomenon that Free Software Foundation has referred to as Tivoization [wikipedia.org]: the user has the legal right to modify a computer program, but the hardware it's shipped on has technical measures to block use of a modified version. A Chromebook's stock firmware is partially Tivoized in the sense that though the blocking can be disabled, disabling it puts the user at risk of accidental data loss every time the machine starts.
Re: (Score:1)
But we are still proud it is called "Linux", aren't we?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, okay. But wasn't one of the main selling points of ChromeOS the fact that it's seamlessly self-updating? Why does that not include the kernel? Certainly the latest linux kernels are capable of supporting old ChromeOS hardware - but does the A/B upgrading scheme make it impossible for their seamless upgrade process to update the kernel? And even if so, couldn't they provide a less seamless alternative method of bringing your Chromebook up to date? I assume they could, and the only thing preventing
Compare to Android 8's Project Treble (Score:3)
But wasn't one of the main selling points of ChromeOS the fact that it's seamlessly self-updating?
Chrome OS seamlessly updates its userland. For comparison, Android has been working toward this since version 8 "knOckoff of Hydrox". Just as Android 4.x largely separated Google Play Services from AOSP to update the former faster, Android 8 introduced a frozen kernel and device driver ABI called Project Treble [androidauthority.com] to separate AOSP from the hardware support to update the former faster.
Why does that not include the kernel? [...] I guess the OEM's would have to get involved to do a kernel upgrade
Bingo.
The following applies to both Chrome OS and post-Treble Android: Because hardware manufacturers customize the kernel with
Re: (Score:2)
Is there a way to pull driver modules out of the Linux kernel? Don't they have to provide source for the kernel they compile to run on the device? Obviously IINAL so these are genuine questions that I would assume be "Yes", In which case you should just be able to load the modules into the newer kernel, work may be involved but I'm sure the OSS Community is up to it?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't they have to provide source for the kernel they compile to run on the device?
My interpretation of GPL 2.0 says that yes, they have to provide the complete source code, including for device drivers. Alas, the companies disagree with me. I'm not going to sue them to force them to accept my interpretation. Are you?
Default firmware (Score:2)
The *default* firmware requires dev mode.
But because the firmware is coreboot based, it should be possible to find an alternate firmware,
file the hardware switch to enable flashing (usually a screw I've heard) and get yourself a full blown linux laptop that doesn't complain and risk self-destructing on each single boot.
Re: (Score:3)
oh, you've just noticed that some vendors lock down things contrary to the open source intent and spirit? are you a dumb-ass?
Try to tell it to chip manufacturer (Score:2)
So? Why would not you just download the source-code and compile it yourself?
Was not this ability the point of Linux — and the rallying cry for its fans — for 20+ years?
Yes, that was the point, but it looks like most of the chipset manufacturer completely missed the point and only provide blob drivers.
Thus, on hardware like smartphone, tablet and chromebook, you're basically stuck with whatever the company that made the SoC decided to use (and never to update there after).
--
Well, in theory. :
In practice, *YOU CAN* actually recompile it your self, but you might have some problems
- You might not have working graphics (and maybe a few other proprietary stuff like touch screen
ROT13 (Score:2)
By the way, you should have used double-ROT13, I've heard it's more secure :-P
Re: (Score:2)
PS Console I would assume still runs a UNIX based OS. Also AMD based
Re: (Score:1)
So? Why would not you just download the source-code and compile it yourself?
Because it's not as simple as
Download source
Compile
Done
That's the myth of open source software.
Was not this ability the point of Linux — and the rallying cry for its fans — for 20+ years?
Yes, that's true. But (most) Chromebooks are a locked down bastardized Linux. Getting a newer version of the Linux Colonel to run on them involves a very long list of
If ..... ....
Maybe
Most Chromebooks, in actual practice, are no more "open" than an iPad. And if you were stupid enough to buy one, well, it sucks to be you.
Re: (Score:3)
So? Why would not you just download the source-code and compile it yourself?
You can. Put it in dev mode and go nuts. You'll lose all of the nice Chromebook security guarantees, of course, and your machine will be running a system that is custom, untested and therefore likely to be less reliable, but that's a perfectly acceptable tradeoff for many power users.
Re: (Score:3)
Whoah, whoah... Had anyone alluded to such a thing — that built from source makes anything "less reliable" — back in my days, Linux fan-bois would've scorched the very soil he stood on to crisp with their flame-throwers... Are we still on Slashdot even?..
Re: (Score:2)
Building from source makes software less reliable when the firmware includes technical measures to deliberately make software built from source less reliable. Chromebook stock firmware includes such a measure. In developer mode, it prompts the user to press two keys to erase the entire hard drive, which makes the device's overall data retention less reliable. Consider the following sequence of events on a Chromebook in developer mode.
*someone turns on your Chromebook*
*doesn't know what the prompt means*
*pre
Re: (Score:2)
1. Not all Apps in Linux are open source.
2. Compiling on slow systems can take a long time.
3. Compiling isn't always easy.
4. Source code doesn't guarantee compatibility. (or be readable enough to be fixed)
Should add .NET support (Score:2, Interesting)
I had suggested they use containers to add .NET support instead of straight Linux apps. Linux needs a whole underlying support system in a VM; .NET can inherit that from the local system and the .NET runtime.
Stuff .NET Core or Mono in there and provide a /home/$USER directory. Mount /home/$USER, mount local Documents to /home/$USER/Documents, and mount the Google Drive folder to /home/$USER/Drive.
When you install a .NET application, it would mount all of those things, as well as a .NET runtime for th
How to compile C++ to safe .NET IL? (Score:2)
When you install a .NET application, it would mount all of those things, as well as a .NET runtime for the app.
Would this .NET runtime allow use of mixed assemblies (which contain both native and CIL code) or other unsafe CIL? If not, read on:
You can get a Python and Java VM running on .NET, which may allow extending this to other types of native applications using the same runtime.
I read years back about something called C++/CLI, which extends ISO C++ with .NET-specific syntax for pointers and references in verifiably type-safe code. ISO C++ uses * to declare pointers and & to declare references, but C++/CLI uses those to mean unsafe pointers and references. Use of these causes verification of type safety at load time to fail. To declare pointers and
Re: (Score:2)
You can probably translate C++. Native code won't run on a different CPU IL, hence the use of .NET.
The big IDEs—Eclipse, Monodevelop, and Visual Studio—are Java and C#. Python is a common language. I had hoped to get Monodevelop 7 and Visual Studio native on Chromebook, as well as perhaps Unity3D or something like it (Unity3D is huge). Imagine if Chromebooks were a development platform for Android, IOS, Webapps, games, and cross-platform applications.
I'm not thinking so much about nativ
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Firstly, because you have to support both.
Second, because the security model is harder for a full, uncontrolled VM. An application is also a difficult security model, as it's uncontrolled and can be taken apart; .NET is mostly managed code and individual applications can have their own restricted permissions and containers.
Third, because .NET integration with ChromeOS is reasonably-achievable such that the applications all seem native. It would be like Paint.NET or Visual Studio was built for ChromeOS
Re: (Score:3)
Containers generally provide security by segmenting the outside OS from the container. They're typically unbreakable.
If you make a container by mounting your host libraries as writable into the container, you can of course modify code that runs as root on the host. Anyone with access to create a container generally is considered a root-level user because they can make a container with root as the user internally and with / as the / volume, and then they have root access.
There's a sort of advanced sett
Hence Kernel version (Score:3)
If you make a container by mounting your host libraries as writable into the container, you can of course modify code that runs as root on the host.
Actually, nope. Doesn't work.
That's partly the reason why they need a recent enough version of Linux kernel.
There's a sort of advanced setting where you map users so e.g. UID 0 is really UID 90,000. The user ID of the process creating the user namespace has all capabilities within the namespace, but none outside: it becomes root inside the container, and can't do root things outside the container. Generally, the process can only switch to another namespace if it has CAP_SYS_ADMIN in that namespace as well.
Yup, UID namespace.
Means that from the point of view of the kernel, it would be UID 90000 trying to overwrite files that belong to UID0, thus nope, can't take over root files.
But you need a recent kernel enough. The feature was introduced in 3.8 and the various filesystem started supporting it over the next few version. Hence probably the reason why Google requires 3.14
Original Configuration (Score:3)
I'm outraged that my $200 Chromebook only supports the same features it was sold with. I bought it specifically to get features that I wasn't aware existed yet.
Re: (Score:2)
The features did exist. They just got pulled from the market back in 2012 [slashdot.org].
Re: (Score:2)
I'd have been pretty pissed if I bought a Chromebook and got a netbook. The whole point is to give the kids something they can't fuck up no matter how hard they try, and which works with all their school stuff.
If you actually do want Linux on a Chromebook (Score:4, Insightful)
Systems that are supported by GalliumOS [galliumos.org]
and the newer version based on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS is in the works
version 3.0 alpha [reddit.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Note that you do need to change to 3rd party firmware in most cases.
Re: (Score:2)
As noted in my own post, you can also set up rEFInd (or some equivalent of your choice) and have both ChromeOS and Gallium (or any other distro) installed. The only restriction is that the distro has to be set up to install to UEFI machines, which (as of a couple years ago) some still did not.
Re: (Score:3)
Security (Score:3)
"Keep the operating safe from harm". That's both hilariousand fucked up. It needs to be the other way around. Run a sandboxed chrome OS inside of a linux container that is under the OWNERS control. Is security. The definition of malware is software not under the owners control, so by definition chromeOS is a security risk to the owner of the device.
The intent was to block an evil maid (Score:2)
Say someone wants to carry a computing device but wants that device to prevent an evil maid [stackexchange.com] with physical access from installing a boot-time rootkit. How would that protection measure work while keeping the owner's control?
Re: (Score:2)
What keeps the evil maid from entering the admin interface and uploading her own public key? I guess that's why a Chromebook write-protects its firmware with a physical screw.
Jailbreak it. (Score:2)
1. Jailbreak it by installing new firmware. [reddit.com]
2. (Optional) Set it up to multi-boot with rEFInd, if you still want to be able to use ChromeOS.
3. Put any distro you want on it. GalliumOS [galliumos.org] is particularly tailored for Chromebooks, but Ubuntu and Mint also both work fine on mine.
You can also install Windows 8.1 or 10 (64-bit only) if you want. I haven't retained ChromeOS, but I do have both W10 and Gallium installed. Mostly I just use Gallium for those times Windows shits the bed and then refuses to let me clean u
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't buy the first one, it was given to me. After coming to the conclusion that it was never going to run Windows well enough, I sold it (for $75) and bought a C720 instead (for $91). At the time, development on the SeaBIOS for the C720 was already relatively mature, and they moved to UEFI just a few months after that. I bought it because I was already aware of the jailbreak, and for my $91 (plus a larger M.2 SSD) I got quite a functional laptop. The keyboard is a little bit funky, requiring "chords" t
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you deliberately buy a prison for yourself in the first place?
Possibly because it's much easier to physically carry a 11.6" Chromebook than a 14" laptop [thinkpenguin.com].
Or because all devices in a particular market segment are jailed. Between when the iPhone came out and when the HTC Dream (first Android phone) came out, which smartphones available in the U.S. market weren't jailed? (I wanted a Nokia 900 around that time, but none of the stores I visited carried it.) Or between 1987 when VGA came out and 2007 when TVs caught up with PC output resolutions, which video game player inte
Final Fantasy 9 device names (Score:2)
wtf is going on here? There are similarly named, different-branded chromebooks, and a lot of them have FF9 (and other game characters) device names.
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah Crouton is great if you're the only person that uses (and has access to) the laptop. That's a big IF.
Otherwise, someone else could accidentally hit space bar and wipe your machine clean.
it is this sort of shenanigans (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
why i would rather just buy a x86_84 laptop and wipe windows off and put Linux on it
Would you prefer a laptop on which accelerated graphics, audio, network, screen brightness, and suspend work or don't work? Because there are a lot of laptops for which these work in Windows but not GNU/Linux due to missing or broken drivers. See experiences installing Debian on an ASUS Transformer Book T100TA [debian.org] for example.
GalliumOS (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Because not everybody feels up to opening a Chromebook's case to turn its firmware write protect screw, which is what you need to do in order to ensure your Chromebook's firmware doesn't destroy the installed OS when someone turns it on and presses the Space bar.