postmarketOS on the Pyra ?


well, we'll already have GNU/Linux with phone functionality...

sounds like he's trying to get GNU/Linux onto old smart phones, which sounds tricky... (perhaps i didn't read carefully enough though?)
 
So, it's pretty much Alpine Linux for touch-based devices. I mean, if you still hate systemd that much these days and/or you want to get as lightweight as possible, then...the more the merrier, I guess? There's always a certain threshold of what constitutes a "lightweight OS" with every computer/device, and the Pyra's threshold isn't so ridiculously small that you need Busybox+musl just to get the most out of it...nor is Debian ARM so ridiculously large that it requires a small set of core utils just to function normally.

If you want something light for games, then I don't see why libretro+RetroArch can't be ported over.
 
I found that in most hardware reported by people as "old" (starting from ca. 2003) there is no significant speed improvement when changing distributions. On a P4/2GHz with 512MB of RAM Debian with LXDE works as fast as Arch with LXDE, yet Arch has for some reason slightly smaller performance by the cost of slightly better responsibility. For the sake of finishing comparison in reasonable time I haven't tried Lubuntu :). The key here is installation of the distro from command line by the user - then junk added to system is minimized.
But this is my opinion, I recently found that this 900MHz Eee PC is sufficient for 80% of my tasks. 2-core 1.3GHz Dell is for 95%. For the rest I use a 64-core HPC machine I have at work.

And about PostmarketOS... they need to develop keyboard some way to make it usable. This is Linux - There is the shell and it is used extensively. Typing commands using on-screen keyboard will not be fast and in some cases may be risky... Maybe these BT small ones?
 
PCXT said:
On a P4/2GHz with 512MB of RAM Debian with LXDE works as fast as Arch with LXDE, yet Arch has for some reason slightly smaller performance by the cost of slightly better responsibility.
Click to expand...

The most important difference is drivers and latest stable kernel vs. LTS kernel, assuming Testing/Unstable aren't used. You can easily match Lubuntu's graphics performance with Arch's by opening the Padoka PPA and getting the latest Mesa version or NVIDIA/Radeon drivers or what-have-you.

Of course, if using something that "just works" without having to deal with it too much is all that's necessary, then finding a distro within a certain threshold of CPU+RAM usage and with a less fancy DE is all that matters. Be it Arch or Solus or Gentoo or Alpine.
 
tigerroast said:
Of course, if using something that "just works" without having to deal with it too much is all that's necessary, then finding a distro within a certain threshold of CPU+RAM usage and with a less fancy DE is all that matters. Be it Arch or Solus or Gentoo or Alpine.
Click to expand...

And this is the thing I like in Linux! For You, the distro that "just works", is Arch. For me, it's Debian. There's a Tux for any requirements and any definitions.
 
There seems to be a theme in Linux circles that the more obscure the version the higher the nerd credentials it's user has. Every few weeks someone pulls out the name of a half supported distribution from far, far down the Linux lineage trees and presents it as a potential 'better' solution. There are so many 'possible' distributions that it is almost silly.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Linux_Distribution_Timeline.svg

PostmarketOS is so obscure or new that it doesn't even make that list. It barely exists as a prototype. Despite their utopian vision, they still haven't really gotten off the ground yet. There isn't anything resembling an install base or support community. It is an attempt to build a Linux OS version specifically rolled to work on a phone. Although the Pyra can use some telephony capabilities, those are so secondary that it sells in a version without them. At it's core it is a general purpose personal computer.

The more obscure the release, the harder it is to market. I nearly didn't purchase a Pandora because I was not familiar with Angstrom Linux. I got over it. Not everyone would. I understand -why- the CC Pandora needed a niche OS. It simply did not have the storage or RAM to support a mainstream distribution. The Pyra will not have those limitations.

Anyone should feel free to install whatever they want to their own Pyra. However, for the sake of the product itself and the sanity of the community in trying to support it, a mainstream Linux distribution is required. In the case of the Pyra, that has been decided to be Debian - which is a very solid choice.
 
PCXT said:
And this is the thing I like in Linux! For You, the distro that "just works", is Arch. For me, it's Debian. There's a Tux for any requirements and any definitions.
Click to expand...

You right. Debian's always been very "plug-n-play." Fantastic distro. With barely any extra work, it performs pretty close to Arch, even if Arch is more straightforward in that regard.

To tell you the truth, I don't really see the point in swapping Debian out on the Pyra, as long as I can get any new shiny that comes along.

Grench said:
There seems to be a theme in Linux circles that the more obscure the version the higher the nerd credentials it's user has. Every few weeks someone pulls out the name of a half supported distribution from far, far down the Linux lineage trees and presents it as a potential 'better' solution.
Click to expand...

That's something I've never understood. Something that almost turned me off to Linux entirely. Not to say that some smaller projects can't do the same as bigger projects and do it better (Solus v. Mint) or have a scope that's so tight and well-focused that it doesn't force needless overhead (KaOS).

Grench said:
Although the Pyra can use some telephony capabilities, those are so secondary that it sells in a version without them. At it's core it is a general purpose personal computer.
Click to expand...

A solid foundation to build upon. It could either remain just a small PC, or become the center of someone's digital life in the same way many Android power-users do with their smartphones.
 
tigerroast said:
You right. Debian's always been very "plug-n-play." Fantastic distro. With barely any extra work, it performs pretty close to Arch, even if Arch is more straightforward in that regard.

To tell you the truth, I don't really see the point in swapping Debian out on the Pyra, as long as I can get any new shiny that comes along.



That's something I've never understood. Something that almost turned me off to Linux entirely. Not to say that some smaller projects can't do the same as bigger projects and do it better (Solus v. Mint) or have a scope that's so tight and well-focused that it doesn't force needless overhead (KaOS).



A solid foundation to build upon. It could either remain just a small PC, or become the center of someone's digital life in the same way many Android power-users do with their smartphones.
Click to expand...
I honestly can't tell the different between the majority or distributions other than that they include slightly different software you can download to Debian anyway.
 
Kippykip said:
I honestly can't tell the different between the majority or distributions other than that they include slightly different software you can download to Debian anyway.
Click to expand...

And with 32GB of space for the software install eMMC, we can install a pretty big chunk of, well, nearly everything Debian has for ARM. Like two different editors? Get them both. Want to try different DEs? Install them all. etc... First one to fill the eMMC with exclusively stuff that they will actually use from the Debian repositories gets a very well deserved golf clap.
 
Grench said:
There seems to be a theme in Linux circles that the more obscure the version the higher the nerd credentials it's user has. Every few weeks someone pulls out the name of a half supported distribution from far, far down the Linux lineage trees and presents it as a potential 'better' solution. There are so many 'possible' distributions that it is almost silly.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Linux_Distribution_Timeline.svg
Click to expand...

This seems to solidly be a major roadblock to the adoption of Linux as a mainstream OS for anyone but nerds. It's a robust concept in its capability, configurability, useability and compatibility within reason compared to other 'polished' OS's but what seems to hold back a lot of its mainstream adoption seems to be this 'need' to keep it as obscure as possible so that rubes and noobs can't 'ruin' it.

In my experience, Debian seems to be the best candidate for a decent mainstream marketable Linux distribution as the way it functions seems the most user-friendly when compared to others such as Red Hat or SuSe (Though SuSe was fairly robust too) and while they have their pros and cons, it seems to be that Debian is the fastest likely to be adopted.

But Linux Snobbery? Yeah, I don't get it either. It's almost worse than Microsoft vs Apple.
 
well, if anything about microsoft v. apple can be learned, making snobs out of people is good for business. how else are you going to sell them a smart watch in addition to their ipad in addition to their iphone in addition to their air, etc., unless they can feel superior to others, and superbly connected to the interwebs?

i'd like to think that (some of) linux snobbery is the right kind -- it's about ideology (free and open source), which anyone can pick up (almost) regardless of their wealth -- and not a different kind of elitism... linux = an inclusive exclusivity? ;)

but of course there's the bad linux snobbery, too. for example, the hate for Ubuntu that revolves around in the ether. ubuntu has tried to be a mainstream OS, and it is darn easy to install and get to work with.
 
ible said:
but of course there's the bad linux snobbery, too. for example, the hate for Ubuntu that revolves around in the ether. ubuntu has tried to be a mainstream OS, and it is darn easy to install and get to work with.
Click to expand...

I don't hate Ubuntu - they have done great things for Linux adoption. I do hate the Unity DE, but they have seen the light and that is going away. What I dislike about Ubuntu is that they remove or hide or obscure some of the 'power user' options that are rolled into Debian. The one that frustrated me the most was how they made it more difficult to set up and boot from a mdadm (RAID). Not that setting up a software RAID is easy under Debian, but the last time I tried Ubuntu it wasn't even present as an installer option.

Debian support for hardware RAID adapters has improved to the point where I'm not using software RAID anymore. That support has likely flowed downstream to Ubuntu too.
 
ible said:
i'd like to think that (some of) linux snobbery is the right kind -- it's about ideology (free and open source), which anyone can pick up (almost) regardless of their wealth -- and not a different kind of elitism... linux = an inclusive exclusivity? ;)

but of course there's the bad linux snobbery, too. for example, the hate for Ubuntu that revolves around in the ether. ubuntu has tried to be a mainstream OS, and it is darn easy to install and get to work with.
Click to expand...

Ubuntu is a perfectly fine OS with a perfectly fine vision, but my #1 complaint about them is the amount of fragmentation they've done just to say Ubuntu dun it (Unity, Mir, the installer, Upstart). I'm usually for not bashing free software, but Ubuntu's been ridiculous in some regards for a long time, although that appears to be changing drastically (no more Unity or Mir, but they won't use Calamares installer). And hey, at least it's easy to use, so who cares?

As for snobbery, I prefer the type of snobbery that leads to a better Linux. Striving for "the best" and giving everyone access to it. Personally, I don't care for the best, just a constant flow of new shinies
 
Or Gentoo. Bleeding edge and maximum customization.

I'm all about the Gentoo on all of my computers. It works EXACTLY how I want it to, with no bloat whatsoever. And Portage is an amazing package manager. Being able to use USE flags to compile every single package with exactly the features I want and not one single extra, is awesome.

I could go on but this would turn into a giant wall of Gentoo-loving text.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

klapse
Pyra: How to provide readable fonts?
Replies
8
Views
4K
sebt3
sebt3
jedi23
New Kernel for Buster released
Replies
3
Views
2K
matzesu
matzesu
Magic Sam
Ready for SDL 3 ?
Replies
1
Views
2K
TrashyMG
TrashyMG
Magic Sam
  • Poll
Replicant port to Pyra / Pandora ? (poll)
3 4 5
Replies
87
Views
19K
hns
hns
pmprog
Raylib on Pyra?
Replies
2
Views
2K
pmprog
pmprog
Back
Top