Yesterday I fixed the Fairphone 5 audio on my Archlinux system, just for myself (afaik I'm the only user of my FP5 stuff).

Within that day, @wrenix submitted a pmOS patch and 3 separate people already approved it (with Luca not even being one of them).

@FestplattenSchnitzel even ported the fix to the FP4 and tested it.

PostmarketOS might not be able to win me over from Arch with their software, but the community they managed to build is impressive.

#linuxmobile #postmarketos #fairphone

@UndeadLeech I have just received a OnePlus 6 (enchi) and wonder if we could get the builder to actually build releases for this device as well. I have been told it's quite popular in the community @wrenix @FestplattenSchnitzel

@Lioh On the one hand I'm definitely open to the idea, but on the other hand I never really intended to ship my own Archlinux spin.

The purpose of my repos was originally just to ship my own software while it wasn't packaged yet.

DanctNIX and Kupfer both actually *want* to make this happen, so I think it would be better to try and standardize on one of those. Unfortunately their maintenance isn't particularly active.

@UndeadLeech yes, I thought so. But covering the devices that are popular still sounds like a good idea to me. I have read a bit about this Kupfer thing and it does not really call me. Too technical, too complicated. Your builder is imho the perfect balance.

@UndeadLeech
Yes we love the idea of #fairphone and the Hardware of #FP5 is still really fancy.

And the project of #postmarketOS is also really cool, starting with the #gitlab and all the CI for multi arch.

@FestplattenSchnitzel

@UndeadLeech @wrenix @FestplattenSchnitzel

I feel kinda the same way about Arch. I'll probably never use it, but that wiki of theirs is an incredible gift to the world.

@UndeadLeech @wrenix out of curiousity: what’s wrong with pmOS’ software stack?

@hsza
Nothing, it is a fantastic community and strange how fast there is.
@UndeadLeech

@wrenix yes but the software stack. why does it not win @UndeadLeech over

@hsza apk is just pacman in worse. Anything pmos can do, Arch can do better.

The only thing pmos has going for it is out-of-box experience, which is not something I care about. I can build my own packages.

@UndeadLeech @hsza pmOS is just not for you :p

@UndeadLeech @hsza one of postmarketOS's goals is to use existing software and contribute upstream. As for postmarketOS custom software, they should be completely distro-agnostic, so they should be able to run on Arch for example, or Debian/Mobian (and indeed, a bunch of pmOS software is packaged and used in Mobian). No one likes vendor lock-in

@fun Apk being inspired so much by Pacman certainly makes it super easy to port packages over.

It would be so much more work if pmos was based on Debian/Fedora instead.

@UndeadLeech it's also inspired by gentoo and such, pacman wasn't the only inspiration ;)

@UndeadLeech
The part which is a little bit better in alpine/PostmarketOS (and maybe Debian based) agains Arch, that the packages for all the CPU architecture are compiled by one (alpine,Debian) project. On ArchLinux it is a mass to decide between archlinuxarm and manjaro and for the different devices sub/private project. Just because archlinux itself compiles just against x86_64 (and not for arm).

Second reason against Arch is, that you could only use an bleeding-edge version, which breaks sometimes (because there is "no stable" version).
@hsza

@wrenix Well I use my own Kernel and I've never had the desire to run anything but bleeding edge (I can always downgrade if there's issues). So this really doesn't affect me.

@wrenix @UndeadLeech @hsza ime arch isn't terribly unstable either

@UndeadLeech @fun You're thinking APKBUILD being similar to PKGBUILD (they're so similar it kinda bothers me that they'll never converge!).

pacman and apk are very different, and have really different philosophies. apk just keeps a list of packages which you want, and ensure they and their dependencies are installed, removing anything else. Nothing stale ever lingers. It's declarative not imperative.

https://whynothugo.nl/journal/2023/02/18/in-praise-of-alpine-and-apk/

@whynothugo @UndeadLeech @fun That's something I wish more "classical" (non-Nix) package managers had.

Also the "apk add docs" thing. Bonkers.
I tried to use Nix on my Chromebook and quickly realized that pmOS will be ideal for it, because they and Alpine aggressively split up packages, which is supremely useful when you are tight on space, or when you want updates to be quick, or decrease your attack surface / system complexity.

@UndeadLeech
You could select version for packages with pacman? That is new

@wrenix It's not new, it's just a well guarded secret. :)

You can always install previous versions from your local cache, but there's also a mirror hosting an archive of previous package versions.

Where Archlinux is definitely is lacking is when you need to downgrade an entire tree of packages, but for those kinds of atomic changes you probably want to look at nix anyway.

@UndeadLeech
Okay I was a user of (in chronocal order): feedora, Debian, Ubuntu, Debian, archlinux, manjaro, nixos and alpine/postmarketOS user today.

The atomic updates on nixos has other problems, like non compileable packages on nix-edge/-master which stop all other tool updates (and a "big" cache of old version on disk).

@wrenix I've used Archlinux today. Same as every day.

Part of it is just keeping things simple and consistent on all (or most) of my devices.

@fun
That not the point what I wanted to make. Just the arch-project mass between CPU architecture and that there is no much more stabilzed channel on arch without breaking changes on software (not pacman)
@UndeadLeech @hsza