pull down to refresh

Rumour: Google intends to discontinue the Android Open Source Projectwww.osnews.com/story/142553/rumour-google-intends-to-discontinue-the-android-open-source-project/
443 sats \ 6 comments \ @k00b 21h tech
From Calyx team on reddit:
Android 16 was released to AOSP yesterday but with a one big difference than typical releases: * Google did not publish any device-specific source code for supported, modern Pixel devices. * In previous years, Google released full device trees alongside new Android versions. This allowed developers to build and boot AOSP on Pixel hardware relatively easily. * With Android 16, only the platform/framework code has been released. The device trees are missing, at least for now.
This means AOSP 16 cannot currently be built or run on any recent Pixel device easily just using official source. It’s unclear whether this is a delay or a policy change. Either way, it seriously disrupts custom ROM development and our porting efforts.
Google later issued something like a denial:
We’re seeing some speculation that AOSP is being discontinued. To be clear, AOSP is NOT going away. AOSP was built on the foundation of being an open platform for device implementations, SoC vendors, and instruction set architectures.
AOSP needs a reference target that is flexible, configurable, and affordable – independent of any particular hardware, including those from Google. For years, developers have been building Cuttlefish (available on GitHub as the reference device for AOSP) and GSI targets from source. We continue to make those available for testing and development purposes.
write
preview
related posts
105 sats \ 2 replies \ @nichro 20h
I learned of this from GrapheneOS devs. Apparently it makes their work (and custom ROMs in general probably) a hell of a lot harder now, which sucks... especially since the future-proof alternative would be making dedicated GrapheneOS devices, which is a lot more expensive and involved of an operation
reply
33 sats \ 0 replies \ @79c9095526 11h
it does suck, but this has always been the biggest realistic threat to GrapheneOS's long term survival.
this is what you would generally call, a critical supply chain vulnerability. I'm not saying Graphene didn't try, but you always want to eliminate or minimize these types of vulnerabilities. Graphene has spoken for years about thinking about partnering with other vendors, potentially developing their own phone in collaboration with someone, etc... but perhaps those efforts fell through or it was decided not to pursue them.
life comes at ya fast sometimes. google becoming more evil shouldn't surprise any of us.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nitter 20h bot
https://xcancel.com/GrapheneOS/status/1933279905631924448
reply
15 sats \ 1 reply \ @LibertasBR 18h
A question from someone who doesn't understand systems very much. Why don't we have so many system options out there? I mean, not versions like Graphene, Lineage that are based on android, I mean raw/core versions like Android, iOS, Tizen, Windows phone etc.
reply
17 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b OP 18h
Same reason there’s more than one fast food chain. People want different thing and other people want to provide different things.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nitter 21h bot
https://xcancel.com/seangchau/status/1933029688202703062
reply