11 ms·

Depthboot – Your Chromebook, your way

247 points by lwhsiao 3y ago

amilios 3y ago
Anyone able to give a quick rundown how this works without modifying the firmware?
- CameronNemo 3y ago
  I have no idea. I was under the impression that only google could sign images that the firmware will boot.
- jojobas 3y ago
  And why sharing what exactly is "illegal" as per their FAQ? Edit: apparently anyone can build their image, but distributing a ready image would be in breach of trademarks (not licenses).
  - shultays 3y ago
    it is as if linux desktop people hate having users
    - prmoustache 3y ago
      WTF are you both talking about? and why legality/illegality is even mentionned here?
      - jojobas 3y ago
        Their FAQ has a "why is distributing our images illegal" section. Not sure why that would mean hating users, distributing modified software while keeping their trademarks is always a no-no, at least with Linux it's possible to just rebrand (which these guys don't want to do). I guess they could ask to merge their stuff upstream and get away from these roundabout ways.
        prmoustache 3y ago
        Well it depends of the distro. - Archlinux has clear trademark policies that allows you to distribute derived product as long as it is not done with a commercial intent. - Ubuntu policies mention asking them for permission, I guess Eupnea just didn't bother. - Debian trademark policy do not mention derived work, my wild guess is it would be allowed as they say you can use their trademark to promote debian and distributing a lightly modified version that works on more devices looks to me like promoting debian work. In doubt I would still ask. - Pop!OS do not have a public trademark policy, so Eupnea would have to ask. - Fedora trademark says you can do it if you are using their secondary mark: Fedora Remix. And they facilitiates this with the existence of 3 packages generic-logos, generic-release, and generic-release-notes that need to replace fedora-logos, fedora-release, and fedora-release-notes packages in your distro (you can also do your own derivatives). Not a huge deal. So basically Eupnea is lying. They just don't want to bother. In 1 or 2 cases, it is clear that it can distribute it as is, in 2 cases it needs to ask permission before arguing it is or not possible and in the last case they can distribute it as is but need to advertise it differently (fedora remix instead of fedora and replacing 3 packages).
        jeroenhd 3y ago
        This sounds like a pretty annoying thing to keep on top of. I would do the same thing in their position to be honest.
    - igravious 3y ago
      They add some of their own sauce to each of the distros. (This you're allowed to do (and do very easily because it's free (as in freedom) software). What you're not allowed do is build an ISO of the result and distribute and still call it Arch or Pop!_OS or whatever (because … drumroll … it isn't any more). You can't expect Distro makers to be getting user support requests from users from custom versions of their distros that a 3rd-party made. All this is obvious and perfectly reasonable when you think about it. And without free software it'd be difficult for a non mega-corp to create and maintain a project like this. So what you see as user hostile is actually users being allowed an able to try shiny new software on their proprietary hardware/software combo. So your snark is unnecessary.
  - igravious 3y ago
    That's answered in the FAQ: https://eupnea-linux.github.io/faq#why-is-sharing-depthboot-images-illegal https://eupnea-linux.github.io/faq#why-is-sharing-depthboot-... “The Depthboot base distros all allow image/iso/rootfs sharing, but only in an unmodified form. The Depthboot script customizes some internal distro behavior (for example it adds our eupnea packages) and thereby creates modified images. To allow modified images to be shared, all trademarked content would have to be removed, i.e. all Distro logos.”
- war-is-peace 3y ago
  chromebooks can boot from other sources in developer mode, pressing ctrl + u on startup brings up a generic SeaBIOS when certain flags are enabled from crosh
- chronogram 3y ago
  By enabling developer mode and running "sudo crossystem dev_boot_usb=1 dev_boot_signed_only=0" to allow booting alternative images. Then you can boot USB based images and they don't have to be signed.
bhaney 3y ago
> Does the Eupnea Project collect any telemetry? > No, setting up telemetry services is too much work. Ha
- moffkalast 3y ago
  Security through laziness is a principle I can get behind.
nextos 3y ago
Very interesting, seems to support fairly new devices (e.g. Jasper Lake). Although newest ones tend to have unsupported boot or audio (e.g. Lenovo 100e Chromebook Gen 4, codename rusty): https://eupnea-linux.github.io/docs/project/supported-devices https://eupnea-linux.github.io/docs/project/supported-device... Mapping between devices and codenames: https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-for-chrome-os-devices/ https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-f...
asimovfan 3y ago
Somehow this doesn't work in my tiger lake chromebook. Actually it works, but the final "install-to-internal" script fails, it somehow gets stuck at the wipefs command.
politelemon 3y ago
Can you share what Chromebook you have, and do you use it for light programming or something else? The other day I read that there's an Android Studio for Chromebook, which kind of surprised me, in a pleasant way.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  Given the experience of using Android Studio on regular computers, and the hardware of most Chromebooks, that is most likely targeted for people that like to suffer.
- mdhb 3y ago
  I’ve been doing full stack web and mobile development on a Chromebook for about 18 months now. It’s actually the best developer experience I’ve ever had. Everything is nicely sandboxed, things work well by default. I probably spend about 50/50 of my development time either locally in the integrated Linux developer environment or remotely using GitHub Codespaces where I’m just using a PWA essentially as my IDE.
  - balder1991 3y ago
    What’s the specs of your Chromebook? I’m thinking about buying one and sell the crappy tablet I almost never use. But I have the impression from reading the subreddit that 4GB isn’t enough to use Android apps on it. Also I’m not sure how to know if Linux container is available from random Chromebooks in local stores.
- cj 3y ago
  I’m using 4-5 year old Pixelbooks. I think they’re discontinued now probably because the high price point ($999). But they last an extremely long time, durable, fast, simple. I don’t use it for development, more so for day to day web browsing and when traveling since it’s smaller and thinner than average laptop. I really don’t know what chromeOS hardware I would go with once the pixelbook dies. Edit: anyone try the Pixelbook Go? Same price point as the original pixelbook and upgradable to 16gb ram.
  - 3y ago
pjmlp 3y ago
Or better, never buy a chromebook to start with.
- thriftwy 3y ago
  If it's cheap, good and you can make a real PC out of it, why not?
  - arcanemachiner 3y ago
    Gallium OS worked great... until it got abandoned. Then, those seeking updates were stuck finding a distro that worked well, with available drivers, had to deal with the stupid keyboard and remapping the keys, etc. I'm not going down that road again.
    - thriftwy 3y ago
      If it's cheap (and shabby) enough to reason once in 3 years upgrade, that is no longer a problem. And that's exactly how long my Lenovo laptops tend to survive these days.
      - pjmlp 3y ago
        Just what the world needs right now, throw away hardware every 3 years.
        jraph 3y ago
        Yeah, that's crazy. 3 years is barely what we ought to aim for phones, let alone laptops. If only software didn't get more and more heavy.
    - jraph 3y ago
      A relative still uses an Asus C200 Chromebook. When GalliumOS was abandonned, we were able to successfully install Linux Mint. Mainline Linux now works correctly, we took some packages related to the keyboard from GalliumOS and pinned them. A bit annoying but workable. The sound has always been capricious though, but it was also the case on GalliumOS.* I think buying this machine was a good call at the time, almost 10 years ago. Very good battery life, lightweight, cheap and now we know, incredibly durable. But I'm with you. It definitely was a maintenance burden and it's good that this relative is patient with the flaws that it exhibits, and its slowness. Today, it would make more sense to just buy a refurbished pro laptop and put Linux on it and be done with it. It'll be as cheap, but the whole experience will be way better. That's what I do for me, and that's what we'll probably do with this relative when they or the machine gives up, which does not seem to want to happen. Good for the environment I guess.
madduci 3y ago
I find depressing that there aren't binaries available, as everyone is required to build their own distribution from scratch. Why don't they use some hosted workers (GitHub Actions, GitLab Runners) to do the job?
- igravious 3y ago
  That's answered in the FAQ: https://eupnea-linux.github.io/faq#why-is-sharing-depthboot-images-illegal https://eupnea-linux.github.io/faq#why-is-sharing-depthboot-... “The Depthboot base distros all allow image/iso/rootfs sharing, but only in an unmodified form. The Depthboot script customizes some internal distro behavior (for example it adds our eupnea packages) and thereby creates modified images. To allow modified images to be shared, all trademarked content would have to be removed, i.e. all Distro logos.”
rollcat 3y ago
I always loved the premise of the Chromebook: disposable device with a disposable OS; secure by default; your data is always backed up; if you have any doubts or problems you can always restore to the factory image and be back in action within minutes, etc. I would love to see these principles implemented in a privacy-respecting manner: bring your own device, choose your identity provider (including self-hosted options that integrate with e.g. email or even plain old SSH), choose your storage backend (including other clouds but also e.g. Syncthing, SFTP...). Immutable / secure-by-default OS would also be interesting, but nothing else out there is quite like ChromeOS. NixOS/Guix would be good candidates, but the underlying scaffolding is quite complex. Alpine & OpenBSD are both radically simpler, but lack the aspect of trivially reproducible builds. Then of course there's the question of providing a good UX on top of that base: I want to connect to Wifi, select the ID provider, type my username/password, and start working. That's an enormous gap to close.
- varispeed 3y ago
  > I always loved the premise of the Chromebook: disposable device with a disposable OS; secure by default; your data is always backed up; if you have any doubts or problems you can always restore to the factory image and be back in action within minutes, etc. As long as device can be reused, wiped completely and supplied with new OS etc. otherwise "disposable device" we should avoid at all cost as that is not green.
  - ikurei 3y ago
    I see disposable as having several meanings here. If it means crappy quality and unreparable, something that will last for a couple of years tops, I agree that is terrible. It could also mean decent quality that will last, but is cheap enough that you won't worry too much about it being damaged or lost or stolen. I love my Macbook, and my previous one is still going strong after 8 years, in the hands of a family member with lower need for computational power, but I hate carrying around a device so expensive. I don't dare eat near it, and I wince whenever my backpack bumps on something. I miss the careless freedom of carrying around a cheap, crappy linux laptop.
shortrounddev2 3y ago
I had a chromebook which required you to open it up and flip a hardware switch to allow write access to the OS. Have to open it up and push the switch with a little screwdriver.
- brocha 3y ago
  My pixelbook is the same way. However, I custom made a debug cable so I wouldn't have to pull the battery out which often destroys it because of all the adhesives they use
- theandrewbailey 3y ago
  That's probably the best way to "lock down" a machine while also keeping it in use after the manufacturer decides that it's not worth their time to support. Lock it down for most people, but unlock it for those who know what they're doing.
- gh02t 3y ago
  I had a Asus Chromebox that did this and I actually always thought it was a good compromise. Still let me install my own OS with minimal hassle (case was well designed, screw was easy to get to), but normal users can get the security of a locked down bootloader.
  - shortrounddev2 3y ago
    Ah yes, that was it; a screw. Asus C201 or something like that
Jeff_Brown 3y ago
This is exciting. I was shocked to discover I could not change the OS on the Dell 3120 Chromebook I bought. Nor can I update the Chrome browser it includes to a version that understands HBO Max, which was why I bought it.
- KetoManx64 3y ago
  Did you remove the write peotection screw? https://joshuawoehlke.com/galliumos-dell-chromebook-3120/ https://joshuawoehlke.com/galliumos-dell-chromebook-3120/
  - Jeff_Brown 3y ago
    Omg. I searched and searched for tricks re. ChromeOS, did not think to search for tricks specific to the laptop model I have. Thanks.
- alamortsubite 3y ago
  There's no problem changing the OS on your 3120. I have a bunch running Debian. As a sibling comment points out, the first step is to remove the write-protect screw. It's very easy to do.
hattmall 3y ago
Long Live Crouton!
ilaksh 3y ago
I have a very cheap Chromebook that I have been using for everything for the last few months since my laptop fan stopped working properly. I have Linux setup in the settings and use it a lot. For work I usually end up sshing in to a VPS. It seems like a normal Ubuntu. What benefit does the Depthboot have?
insanitybit 3y ago
I'm using a Chromebook 100% of the time. It's a great experience. The primary limitation is that the dev environment is a bit quirky - it's not running directly on the virtual machine, instead it's in a container. This can lead to some weird stuff when you're trying to do other containery things or if you need to run a nested virtual machine. I've created a script to set up an EC2 instance, rsync changes from my project directories over to it, and manage the instance state to save money. This pretty much solves any issues. I really like a couple of things: 1. It is the only OS that "just works" for me. It's the only non-Windows that I can actually plug multiple monitors into and not have it flip out and freeze for minutes. 2. It keeps risky stuff (code development) isolated from sensitive stuff (web browsing). If I SSO in my web browse and install malware in my devbox I'm actually pretty safe. 3. I get to use debian, which works well for me. 4. It's the only OS that feels truly multiuser. I can `ctrl + alt + .` to switch desktops to a totally different user and users are completely isolated with distinctly encrypted directories so if one person is logged in and another isn't you can't just access their stuff. This worked really well when I was using ChromeOS for work since my work profile was very isolated from my personal environment - I could follow 'work profile' stuff like "only install these extensions" while doing whatever I wanted in my personal profile. Basically it's everything I want in a laptop and nothing I don't want. The main limitation is the VM, but the limitations are sorta niche - I doubt many people need to run Firecracker.
- IE6 3y ago
  > 1. It is the only OS that "just works" for me. It's the only non-Windows that I can actually plug multiple monitors into and not have it flip out and freeze for minutes. This sums up my experience completely - I used linux for over a decade and finally got tired of the little annoyances that no desktop environments seemed to solve. ChromeOS wraps it all up (presumably because the hardware is known and the OS is built against that hardware). And then Crostini allows me to do all the fun full stack development things (like k8s, minikube, docker, etc.)
- ufmace 3y ago
  I pretty much agree. I'd only add that container stuff seems to work fine for me, including everything I've tried with docker and docker-compose, and I haven't felt the need to do anything on a remote instance. The only thing I haven't been able to get working locally (yet) is minikube, but I can live with that for now.
vlark 3y ago
There needs to be a way to do this same thing with MediaTek and Snapdragon ARM-based Chromebooks. MediaTek and Qualcomm need to let their firmware and bootloaders allow ARM-based Linux distros to be installed on bare metal. Too many cheap Chromebooks that schools purchase use ARM-processors and get consigned to the e-cycle bin when they can continue to be useful low-end machines if only we could easily get pure Linux on them.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
  FWIW, postmarkos supports at least some ARM Chromebooks - https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Chrome_OS_devices https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Chrome_OS_devices
- predictabl3 3y ago
  Doesn't ChromeOS still require in tree drivers? At the very least there should be some revivable lts-adjacent branch somewhere to start with.
atorodius 3y ago
Is there a Chromebook people can recommend? I would like to replace my 7y old MBP woth one for light office work and such.
- wgjordan 3y ago
  For replacing a MBP, here are some higher-end models I'd recommend (2K+ display, 16GB+ ram, 12th gen Intel i5/i7): - HP Dragonfly Pro Chromebook - i5-1235U, super-bright 1200-nit display - $999.99 - Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition - i5-1240P, upgradable (only 8GB RAM but supports up to 64GB), modular, repairable; no touchscreen - $999.00 - Acer Chromebook Spin 714 (specifically CP714-1WN-720J) - i7-1260P, solid 360° hinge - $1099.99
  - evilos 3y ago
    I had no idea people paid that kind of money for chromebooks. I was under the impression it was firmly in the three to six hundred dollar range.
    - fragmede 3y ago
      You get what you pay for, and, well, the $1,000 -$1,200 set is nicer than the $300 - $600 set.
- grrdotcloud 3y ago
  Google Pixelbook Go has been great.
omjha 3y ago
I actually picked up a Pixelbook Go off ebay this week because I wanted a really nice quality laptop for Linux. Getting things figured out was kind of hellish (I'm working on a guide) but I was looking into Depthboot yesterday as a way to see if I could get audio working (the custom kernel seemed like it had better chances). Ended up not working, as Depthboot requires you to build your own images and there's a problem where the builder gets stuck on the DE step (and also the github seems to imply the project might be getting sunset?) In my experience, follow MrChromebox's firmware utility guide to set up UEFI firmware, use a recent kernel as they have good support for most chrome os devices, and for audio the absolute amazing https://github.com/WeirdTreeThing/chromebook-linux-audio https://github.com/WeirdTreeThing/chromebook-linux-audio solved like 3 days of headache for me with one script. I'd highly recommend it. Picked up an i5/16GB/128GB config for ~$200 and it's hardware on par with my M1 Macbook Air, and the first x86 laptop I've owned with battery life to match, especially with Arch. Amazing value and I think my favorite linux device ever.
- zinekeller 3y ago
  > (and also the github seems to imply the project might be getting sunset?) It seems that the custom distro (similar to Asahi Linux for Macs with Apple Silicon) is the one being sunsetted, not this one > EupneaOS (Discontinued) > Some of you may have noticed EupneaOS has been removed from most pages, this is due to the development of EupneaOS being stopped. The sole focus will be on maintaining and improving Depthboot, for more information please checkout our Discord.
burnte 3y ago
This looks great, I'm going to try it on my Galaxy Chromebook 2, but aside from that: "git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/eupnea-linux/depthboot-builder https://github.com/eupnea-linux/depthboot-builder && cd depthboot-builder && ./main.py" STOP GIVING INSTRUCTIONS LIKE THESE. Holy crap, people will copy-paste malware right into their boxes if we let this become the new normal.
- grrdotcloud 3y ago
  Is the alternative to source every dependency and inspect for any known exploit? The (current) repo owner perhaps - is https://github.com/QuantumChilipepper https://github.com/QuantumChilipepper He describes himself as "Spicy Boi"
jordanreger 3y ago
just a note: the owner (?) of the project has gone on some sort of archiving spree, and has hacked (?) the discord and github accounts of the real owner...
- jonas-w 3y ago
  One of the former main devs posted this on discord: "Sooo here is a timeline: 1. WTT (the other core dev) left 2. I decided to also leave (see message in #announcements) 3. I gave the discord server, subreddit and github to QuantumChilliPepper 4. QuantumChilliPepper didnt really do anything, then went on a vacation, came back and went completely m.i.a. for over a month 5. Hackernews talks about eupnea 6. QuantumChilliPepper got compromised (at least eupnea email, github and discord) 7. Hacker deleted a lot of important channels and after messing a bit finally have back the server"
  - jordanreger 3y ago
    yeah i watched this all go down - it was a nightmare lol
kailiu42 3y ago
I was able to open the webpage yesterday. But today, now Jul 28 03:25 UTC time, it seems both the website and the github project (actually the whole namespace) were gone. https://eupnea-linux.github.io/ https://eupnea-linux.github.io/ --> 404 https://github.com/eupnea-linux https://github.com/eupnea-linux --> 404
- lwhsiao 3y ago
  See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36900934 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36900934 Apparently the main maintainer's accounts were compromised. Bummer, too, as this project looked promising.
  - kailiu42 3y ago
    I'm glad that whoever did this only deleted the project, instead of pushing some "rm -rf $HOME /" code into the repo...
b33j0r 3y ago
This project seems to be just gone now? All links in this post, and the repo, and the github account are 404s https://github.com/eupnea-linux/depthboot-builder https://github.com/eupnea-linux/depthboot-builder Anyone know what happened? It’s been one day
- feb 3y ago
  It disappeared without any visible explanations. Apparently, it was a a friendly fork of the Breath project (https://github.com/cb-linux/breath https://github.com/cb-linux/breath) by Apacelus (https://github.com/Apacelus/Apacelus https://github.com/Apacelus/Apacelus). But Apacelus stopped working on it on May 26th (https://github.com/Apacelus/Apacelus/commit/c84ee94310144ec933c3f8abe3eda85fa23fc92b https://github.com/Apacelus/Apacelus/commit/c84ee94310144ec9...). There's another project on Github with the same name: eupnea-linux-backup https://github.com/eupnea-linux-backup https://github.com/eupnea-linux-backup
- lwhsiao 3y ago
  See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36900934 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36900934 Apparently the main maintainer's accounts were compromised.
hiatus 3y ago
Did anyone clone the repo and can post it somewhere?
- lwhsiao 3y ago
  It seems there is a clone here: https://github.com/eupnea-linux-backup https://github.com/eupnea-linux-backup
d33 3y ago
Previously mentioned Depthboot from Eupnea Project (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36888598 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36888598), while allows you to install Linux distributions on Chromebooks, requires user to generate modified images with custom kernels, which is harder to maintain than mainline/original distribution kernels. Meanwhile Chrultrabook project is actively contributing to upstream projects, allowing for installation of Linux distributions from original images thanks to proper UEFI support with Coreboot - this makes it more future proof, despite more steps required for Coreboot installation. https://chrultrabook.github.io/docs/ https://chrultrabook.github.io/docs/
flapjaxy 3y ago
What happend to this project? It looks like the Github was deleted.

247 points by lwhsiao 3y ago

amilios 3y ago

Anyone able to give a quick rundown how this works without modifying the firmware?

CameronNemo 3y ago
I have no idea. I was under the impression that only google could sign images that the firmware will boot.
jojobas 3y ago
And why sharing what exactly is "illegal" as per their FAQ? Edit: apparently anyone can build their image, but distributing a ready image would be in breach of trademarks (not licenses).
- shultays 3y ago
  it is as if linux desktop people hate having users
  - prmoustache 3y ago
    WTF are you both talking about? and why legality/illegality is even mentionned here?
    - jojobas 3y ago
      Their FAQ has a "why is distributing our images illegal" section. Not sure why that would mean hating users, distributing modified software while keeping their trademarks is always a no-no, at least with Linux it's possible to just rebrand (which these guys don't want to do). I guess they could ask to merge their stuff upstream and get away from these roundabout ways.
      - prmoustache 3y ago
        Well it depends of the distro. - Archlinux has clear trademark policies that allows you to distribute derived product as long as it is not done with a commercial intent. - Ubuntu policies mention asking them for permission, I guess Eupnea just didn't bother. - Debian trademark policy do not mention derived work, my wild guess is it would be allowed as they say you can use their trademark to promote debian and distributing a lightly modified version that works on more devices looks to me like promoting debian work. In doubt I would still ask. - Pop!OS do not have a public trademark policy, so Eupnea would have to ask. - Fedora trademark says you can do it if you are using their secondary mark: Fedora Remix. And they facilitiates this with the existence of 3 packages generic-logos, generic-release, and generic-release-notes that need to replace fedora-logos, fedora-release, and fedora-release-notes packages in your distro (you can also do your own derivatives). Not a huge deal. So basically Eupnea is lying. They just don't want to bother. In 1 or 2 cases, it is clear that it can distribute it as is, in 2 cases it needs to ask permission before arguing it is or not possible and in the last case they can distribute it as is but need to advertise it differently (fedora remix instead of fedora and replacing 3 packages).
        jeroenhd 3y ago
        This sounds like a pretty annoying thing to keep on top of. I would do the same thing in their position to be honest.
  - igravious 3y ago
    They add some of their own sauce to each of the distros. (This you're allowed to do (and do very easily because it's free (as in freedom) software). What you're not allowed do is build an ISO of the result and distribute and still call it Arch or Pop!_OS or whatever (because … drumroll … it isn't any more). You can't expect Distro makers to be getting user support requests from users from custom versions of their distros that a 3rd-party made. All this is obvious and perfectly reasonable when you think about it. And without free software it'd be difficult for a non mega-corp to create and maintain a project like this. So what you see as user hostile is actually users being allowed an able to try shiny new software on their proprietary hardware/software combo. So your snark is unnecessary.
- igravious 3y ago
  That's answered in the FAQ: https://eupnea-linux.github.io/faq#why-is-sharing-depthboot-images-illegal https://eupnea-linux.github.io/faq#why-is-sharing-depthboot-... “The Depthboot base distros all allow image/iso/rootfs sharing, but only in an unmodified form. The Depthboot script customizes some internal distro behavior (for example it adds our eupnea packages) and thereby creates modified images. To allow modified images to be shared, all trademarked content would have to be removed, i.e. all Distro logos.”
war-is-peace 3y ago
chromebooks can boot from other sources in developer mode, pressing ctrl + u on startup brings up a generic SeaBIOS when certain flags are enabled from crosh
chronogram 3y ago
By enabling developer mode and running "sudo crossystem dev_boot_usb=1 dev_boot_signed_only=0" to allow booting alternative images. Then you can boot USB based images and they don't have to be signed.

bhaney 3y ago

> Does the Eupnea Project collect any telemetry? > No, setting up telemetry services is too much work. Ha

moffkalast 3y ago
Security through laziness is a principle I can get behind.

nextos 3y ago

Very interesting, seems to support fairly new devices (e.g. Jasper Lake). Although newest ones tend to have unsupported boot or audio (e.g. Lenovo 100e Chromebook Gen 4, codename rusty): https://eupnea-linux.github.io/docs/project/supported-devices https://eupnea-linux.github.io/docs/project/supported-device... Mapping between devices and codenames: https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-for-chrome-os-devices/ https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-f...

asimovfan 3y ago

Somehow this doesn't work in my tiger lake chromebook. Actually it works, but the final "install-to-internal" script fails, it somehow gets stuck at the wipefs command.

politelemon 3y ago

Can you share what Chromebook you have, and do you use it for light programming or something else? The other day I read that there's an Android Studio for Chromebook, which kind of surprised me, in a pleasant way.

pjmlp 3y ago
Given the experience of using Android Studio on regular computers, and the hardware of most Chromebooks, that is most likely targeted for people that like to suffer.
mdhb 3y ago
I’ve been doing full stack web and mobile development on a Chromebook for about 18 months now. It’s actually the best developer experience I’ve ever had. Everything is nicely sandboxed, things work well by default. I probably spend about 50/50 of my development time either locally in the integrated Linux developer environment or remotely using GitHub Codespaces where I’m just using a PWA essentially as my IDE.
- balder1991 3y ago
  What’s the specs of your Chromebook? I’m thinking about buying one and sell the crappy tablet I almost never use. But I have the impression from reading the subreddit that 4GB isn’t enough to use Android apps on it. Also I’m not sure how to know if Linux container is available from random Chromebooks in local stores.
cj 3y ago
I’m using 4-5 year old Pixelbooks. I think they’re discontinued now probably because the high price point ($999). But they last an extremely long time, durable, fast, simple. I don’t use it for development, more so for day to day web browsing and when traveling since it’s smaller and thinner than average laptop. I really don’t know what chromeOS hardware I would go with once the pixelbook dies. Edit: anyone try the Pixelbook Go? Same price point as the original pixelbook and upgradable to 16gb ram.
- 3y ago

pjmlp 3y ago

Or better, never buy a chromebook to start with.

thriftwy 3y ago
If it's cheap, good and you can make a real PC out of it, why not?
- arcanemachiner 3y ago
  Gallium OS worked great... until it got abandoned. Then, those seeking updates were stuck finding a distro that worked well, with available drivers, had to deal with the stupid keyboard and remapping the keys, etc. I'm not going down that road again.
  - thriftwy 3y ago
    If it's cheap (and shabby) enough to reason once in 3 years upgrade, that is no longer a problem. And that's exactly how long my Lenovo laptops tend to survive these days.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
      Just what the world needs right now, throw away hardware every 3 years.
      - jraph 3y ago
        Yeah, that's crazy. 3 years is barely what we ought to aim for phones, let alone laptops. If only software didn't get more and more heavy.
  - jraph 3y ago
    A relative still uses an Asus C200 Chromebook. When GalliumOS was abandonned, we were able to successfully install Linux Mint. Mainline Linux now works correctly, we took some packages related to the keyboard from GalliumOS and pinned them. A bit annoying but workable. The sound has always been capricious though, but it was also the case on GalliumOS.* I think buying this machine was a good call at the time, almost 10 years ago. Very good battery life, lightweight, cheap and now we know, incredibly durable. But I'm with you. It definitely was a maintenance burden and it's good that this relative is patient with the flaws that it exhibits, and its slowness. Today, it would make more sense to just buy a refurbished pro laptop and put Linux on it and be done with it. It'll be as cheap, but the whole experience will be way better. That's what I do for me, and that's what we'll probably do with this relative when they or the machine gives up, which does not seem to want to happen. Good for the environment I guess.

madduci 3y ago

I find depressing that there aren't binaries available, as everyone is required to build their own distribution from scratch. Why don't they use some hosted workers (GitHub Actions, GitLab Runners) to do the job?

igravious 3y ago
That's answered in the FAQ: https://eupnea-linux.github.io/faq#why-is-sharing-depthboot-images-illegal https://eupnea-linux.github.io/faq#why-is-sharing-depthboot-... “The Depthboot base distros all allow image/iso/rootfs sharing, but only in an unmodified form. The Depthboot script customizes some internal distro behavior (for example it adds our eupnea packages) and thereby creates modified images. To allow modified images to be shared, all trademarked content would have to be removed, i.e. all Distro logos.”

rollcat 3y ago

I always loved the premise of the Chromebook: disposable device with a disposable OS; secure by default; your data is always backed up; if you have any doubts or problems you can always restore to the factory image and be back in action within minutes, etc. I would love to see these principles implemented in a privacy-respecting manner: bring your own device, choose your identity provider (including self-hosted options that integrate with e.g. email or even plain old SSH), choose your storage backend (including other clouds but also e.g. Syncthing, SFTP...). Immutable / secure-by-default OS would also be interesting, but nothing else out there is quite like ChromeOS. NixOS/Guix would be good candidates, but the underlying scaffolding is quite complex. Alpine & OpenBSD are both radically simpler, but lack the aspect of trivially reproducible builds. Then of course there's the question of providing a good UX on top of that base: I want to connect to Wifi, select the ID provider, type my username/password, and start working. That's an enormous gap to close.

varispeed 3y ago
> I always loved the premise of the Chromebook: disposable device with a disposable OS; secure by default; your data is always backed up; if you have any doubts or problems you can always restore to the factory image and be back in action within minutes, etc. As long as device can be reused, wiped completely and supplied with new OS etc. otherwise "disposable device" we should avoid at all cost as that is not green.
- ikurei 3y ago
  I see disposable as having several meanings here. If it means crappy quality and unreparable, something that will last for a couple of years tops, I agree that is terrible. It could also mean decent quality that will last, but is cheap enough that you won't worry too much about it being damaged or lost or stolen. I love my Macbook, and my previous one is still going strong after 8 years, in the hands of a family member with lower need for computational power, but I hate carrying around a device so expensive. I don't dare eat near it, and I wince whenever my backpack bumps on something. I miss the careless freedom of carrying around a cheap, crappy linux laptop.

shortrounddev2 3y ago

I had a chromebook which required you to open it up and flip a hardware switch to allow write access to the OS. Have to open it up and push the switch with a little screwdriver.

brocha 3y ago
My pixelbook is the same way. However, I custom made a debug cable so I wouldn't have to pull the battery out which often destroys it because of all the adhesives they use
theandrewbailey 3y ago
That's probably the best way to "lock down" a machine while also keeping it in use after the manufacturer decides that it's not worth their time to support. Lock it down for most people, but unlock it for those who know what they're doing.
gh02t 3y ago
I had a Asus Chromebox that did this and I actually always thought it was a good compromise. Still let me install my own OS with minimal hassle (case was well designed, screw was easy to get to), but normal users can get the security of a locked down bootloader.
- shortrounddev2 3y ago
  Ah yes, that was it; a screw. Asus C201 or something like that

Jeff_Brown 3y ago

This is exciting. I was shocked to discover I could not change the OS on the Dell 3120 Chromebook I bought. Nor can I update the Chrome browser it includes to a version that understands HBO Max, which was why I bought it.

KetoManx64 3y ago
Did you remove the write peotection screw? https://joshuawoehlke.com/galliumos-dell-chromebook-3120/ https://joshuawoehlke.com/galliumos-dell-chromebook-3120/
- Jeff_Brown 3y ago
  Omg. I searched and searched for tricks re. ChromeOS, did not think to search for tricks specific to the laptop model I have. Thanks.
alamortsubite 3y ago
There's no problem changing the OS on your 3120. I have a bunch running Debian. As a sibling comment points out, the first step is to remove the write-protect screw. It's very easy to do.

hattmall 3y ago

Long Live Crouton!

ilaksh 3y ago

I have a very cheap Chromebook that I have been using for everything for the last few months since my laptop fan stopped working properly. I have Linux setup in the settings and use it a lot. For work I usually end up sshing in to a VPS. It seems like a normal Ubuntu. What benefit does the Depthboot have?

insanitybit 3y ago

I'm using a Chromebook 100% of the time. It's a great experience. The primary limitation is that the dev environment is a bit quirky - it's not running directly on the virtual machine, instead it's in a container. This can lead to some weird stuff when you're trying to do other containery things or if you need to run a nested virtual machine. I've created a script to set up an EC2 instance, rsync changes from my project directories over to it, and manage the instance state to save money. This pretty much solves any issues. I really like a couple of things: 1. It is the only OS that "just works" for me. It's the only non-Windows that I can actually plug multiple monitors into and not have it flip out and freeze for minutes. 2. It keeps risky stuff (code development) isolated from sensitive stuff (web browsing). If I SSO in my web browse and install malware in my devbox I'm actually pretty safe. 3. I get to use debian, which works well for me. 4. It's the only OS that feels truly multiuser. I can `ctrl + alt + .` to switch desktops to a totally different user and users are completely isolated with distinctly encrypted directories so if one person is logged in and another isn't you can't just access their stuff. This worked really well when I was using ChromeOS for work since my work profile was very isolated from my personal environment - I could follow 'work profile' stuff like "only install these extensions" while doing whatever I wanted in my personal profile. Basically it's everything I want in a laptop and nothing I don't want. The main limitation is the VM, but the limitations are sorta niche - I doubt many people need to run Firecracker.

IE6 3y ago
> 1. It is the only OS that "just works" for me. It's the only non-Windows that I can actually plug multiple monitors into and not have it flip out and freeze for minutes. This sums up my experience completely - I used linux for over a decade and finally got tired of the little annoyances that no desktop environments seemed to solve. ChromeOS wraps it all up (presumably because the hardware is known and the OS is built against that hardware). And then Crostini allows me to do all the fun full stack development things (like k8s, minikube, docker, etc.)
ufmace 3y ago
I pretty much agree. I'd only add that container stuff seems to work fine for me, including everything I've tried with docker and docker-compose, and I haven't felt the need to do anything on a remote instance. The only thing I haven't been able to get working locally (yet) is minikube, but I can live with that for now.

vlark 3y ago

There needs to be a way to do this same thing with MediaTek and Snapdragon ARM-based Chromebooks. MediaTek and Qualcomm need to let their firmware and bootloaders allow ARM-based Linux distros to be installed on bare metal. Too many cheap Chromebooks that schools purchase use ARM-processors and get consigned to the e-cycle bin when they can continue to be useful low-end machines if only we could easily get pure Linux on them.

yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
FWIW, postmarkos supports at least some ARM Chromebooks - https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Chrome_OS_devices https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Chrome_OS_devices
predictabl3 3y ago
Doesn't ChromeOS still require in tree drivers? At the very least there should be some revivable lts-adjacent branch somewhere to start with.

atorodius 3y ago

Is there a Chromebook people can recommend? I would like to replace my 7y old MBP woth one for light office work and such.

wgjordan 3y ago
For replacing a MBP, here are some higher-end models I'd recommend (2K+ display, 16GB+ ram, 12th gen Intel i5/i7): - HP Dragonfly Pro Chromebook - i5-1235U, super-bright 1200-nit display - $999.99 - Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition - i5-1240P, upgradable (only 8GB RAM but supports up to 64GB), modular, repairable; no touchscreen - $999.00 - Acer Chromebook Spin 714 (specifically CP714-1WN-720J) - i7-1260P, solid 360° hinge - $1099.99
- evilos 3y ago
  I had no idea people paid that kind of money for chromebooks. I was under the impression it was firmly in the three to six hundred dollar range.
  - fragmede 3y ago
    You get what you pay for, and, well, the $1,000 -$1,200 set is nicer than the $300 - $600 set.
grrdotcloud 3y ago
Google Pixelbook Go has been great.

omjha 3y ago

I actually picked up a Pixelbook Go off ebay this week because I wanted a really nice quality laptop for Linux. Getting things figured out was kind of hellish (I'm working on a guide) but I was looking into Depthboot yesterday as a way to see if I could get audio working (the custom kernel seemed like it had better chances). Ended up not working, as Depthboot requires you to build your own images and there's a problem where the builder gets stuck on the DE step (and also the github seems to imply the project might be getting sunset?) In my experience, follow MrChromebox's firmware utility guide to set up UEFI firmware, use a recent kernel as they have good support for most chrome os devices, and for audio the absolute amazing https://github.com/WeirdTreeThing/chromebook-linux-audio https://github.com/WeirdTreeThing/chromebook-linux-audio solved like 3 days of headache for me with one script. I'd highly recommend it. Picked up an i5/16GB/128GB config for ~$200 and it's hardware on par with my M1 Macbook Air, and the first x86 laptop I've owned with battery life to match, especially with Arch. Amazing value and I think my favorite linux device ever.

zinekeller 3y ago
> (and also the github seems to imply the project might be getting sunset?) It seems that the custom distro (similar to Asahi Linux for Macs with Apple Silicon) is the one being sunsetted, not this one > EupneaOS (Discontinued) > Some of you may have noticed EupneaOS has been removed from most pages, this is due to the development of EupneaOS being stopped. The sole focus will be on maintaining and improving Depthboot, for more information please checkout our Discord.

burnte 3y ago

This looks great, I'm going to try it on my Galaxy Chromebook 2, but aside from that: "git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/eupnea-linux/depthboot-builder https://github.com/eupnea-linux/depthboot-builder && cd depthboot-builder && ./main.py" STOP GIVING INSTRUCTIONS LIKE THESE. Holy crap, people will copy-paste malware right into their boxes if we let this become the new normal.

grrdotcloud 3y ago
Is the alternative to source every dependency and inspect for any known exploit? The (current) repo owner perhaps - is https://github.com/QuantumChilipepper https://github.com/QuantumChilipepper He describes himself as "Spicy Boi"

jordanreger 3y ago

just a note: the owner (?) of the project has gone on some sort of archiving spree, and has hacked (?) the discord and github accounts of the real owner...

jonas-w 3y ago
One of the former main devs posted this on discord: "Sooo here is a timeline: 1. WTT (the other core dev) left 2. I decided to also leave (see message in #announcements) 3. I gave the discord server, subreddit and github to QuantumChilliPepper 4. QuantumChilliPepper didnt really do anything, then went on a vacation, came back and went completely m.i.a. for over a month 5. Hackernews talks about eupnea 6. QuantumChilliPepper got compromised (at least eupnea email, github and discord) 7. Hacker deleted a lot of important channels and after messing a bit finally have back the server"
- jordanreger 3y ago
  yeah i watched this all go down - it was a nightmare lol

kailiu42 3y ago

I was able to open the webpage yesterday. But today, now Jul 28 03:25 UTC time, it seems both the website and the github project (actually the whole namespace) were gone. https://eupnea-linux.github.io/ https://eupnea-linux.github.io/ --> 404 https://github.com/eupnea-linux https://github.com/eupnea-linux --> 404

lwhsiao 3y ago
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36900934 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36900934 Apparently the main maintainer's accounts were compromised. Bummer, too, as this project looked promising.
- kailiu42 3y ago
  I'm glad that whoever did this only deleted the project, instead of pushing some "rm -rf $HOME /" code into the repo...

b33j0r 3y ago

This project seems to be just gone now? All links in this post, and the repo, and the github account are 404s https://github.com/eupnea-linux/depthboot-builder https://github.com/eupnea-linux/depthboot-builder Anyone know what happened? It’s been one day

feb 3y ago
It disappeared without any visible explanations. Apparently, it was a a friendly fork of the Breath project (https://github.com/cb-linux/breath https://github.com/cb-linux/breath) by Apacelus (https://github.com/Apacelus/Apacelus https://github.com/Apacelus/Apacelus). But Apacelus stopped working on it on May 26th (https://github.com/Apacelus/Apacelus/commit/c84ee94310144ec933c3f8abe3eda85fa23fc92b https://github.com/Apacelus/Apacelus/commit/c84ee94310144ec9...). There's another project on Github with the same name: eupnea-linux-backup https://github.com/eupnea-linux-backup https://github.com/eupnea-linux-backup
lwhsiao 3y ago
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36900934 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36900934 Apparently the main maintainer's accounts were compromised.

hiatus 3y ago

Did anyone clone the repo and can post it somewhere?

lwhsiao 3y ago
It seems there is a clone here: https://github.com/eupnea-linux-backup https://github.com/eupnea-linux-backup

d33 3y ago

Previously mentioned Depthboot from Eupnea Project (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36888598 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36888598), while allows you to install Linux distributions on Chromebooks, requires user to generate modified images with custom kernels, which is harder to maintain than mainline/original distribution kernels. Meanwhile Chrultrabook project is actively contributing to upstream projects, allowing for installation of Linux distributions from original images thanks to proper UEFI support with Coreboot - this makes it more future proof, despite more steps required for Coreboot installation. https://chrultrabook.github.io/docs/ https://chrultrabook.github.io/docs/

flapjaxy 3y ago

What happend to this project? It looks like the Github was deleted.