Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
On 25/01/2020 12:53, a wrote: > Does it change anything regarding if > the pinephone is suitable to get > a ported version of replicant? It seems suitable for Replicant. Although not ideal. It will have similar issues to the currently supported phones, like non-working WiFi and Bluetooth, due to the need for non-free firmware. However, it is an improvement: it can run a free software bootloader and has a strong community that is mainlining everything into u-boot and Linux. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
> - the non-free firmware blobs needed for the PinePhone; > - the type of data connections between the main CPU and the chips that > run non-free firmware. Does it change anything regarding if the pinephone is suitable to get a ported version of replicant? pEpkey.asc Description: application/pgp-keys ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
Lukasz Erecinski from PINE64 just wrote a blog post where he explains in detail: - the non-free firmware blobs needed for the PinePhone; - the type of data connections between the main CPU and the chips that run non-free firmware. https://www.pine64.org/2020/01/24/setting-the-record-straight-pinephone-misconceptions/ I've updated the Replicant's PinePhone wiki page with the info from that post: https://redmine.replicant.us/projects/replicant/wiki/Pinephone signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
Hi there, On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 11:10 PM Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli wrote: [...] > To understand better what is possible or desirable we would need to get > more information on the PinePhone, for instance: > - What chip will it use for the WiFi, Bluetooth? > - What is the modem protocol? > - Is the bootloader fully free software for the A64? > In u-boot, board/sunxi/README.sunxi64 has more information about > that but we also need to look into it. The conversation in https://fosstodon.org/@PINE64/102298904508977317 might be of interest. Best regards, -- Marcos Marado ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 15:04:27 +0300 "ni nhar" wrote: > > I would wait until it starts being mass produced. > > That would be one way to deal with the pinephone. > A hesitant > approach. To me the pinephone is a move against > established manufactures. Free software people have > an interest in promoting the phone, assuming it > works. One > part is providing as many software systems and as > fast as > doable. In my opinion there is no hurry to port Replicant to the Pinephone right now unless new developers volunteer to do it: - Most of the current developers are involved in porting Replicant to Android 9 in a way or in another. This is required to get the Pinephone working on Replicant. The first device(s) that will be supported in Replicant 9 will be devices already supported by Replicant 6 and mainline Linux, like the Galaxy SIII (i9300). There are many different reasons for that: - We started working on it this way, and we even got funding for that. - It enables to spot some regressions: we have no automated testing infrastructure yet. So here users testing Replicant 9 might be able to find new bugs that weren't present on Replicant 6. It also enable to test some of the changes on Replicant 6 (I need to do that for the modem protocol code for instance), and even to look at both source code to compare, do graphics performance benchmarks, etc. - The device can easily be bought and many contributors already have them. - Many users probably expect to still be able to upgrade to Replicant 9 on their smartphones. - Wiki Pages, installation instructions, etc already exist for Replicant 6 devices and they are better known. - Adding support for the Pinephone on Replicant 6 makes no sense, as it will be way harder than adding support for it on Replicant 9. A big part of the work done for porting Replicant to Android 9 will be easily reusable for the Pinephone. The same applies to other smartphones and tablets that have good upstream Linux support. - Also the Pinephone is not released yet, and some hardware details might change. It may also have production issues or delays, as manufacturing hardware is hard. Once we have something working on Replicant 9 with the Galaxy SIII (i9300) and/or similar devices, we will very seriously consider looking into the Pinephone, especially if it has been released at that point. If it's not released yet at that point we might also consider trying to get some funding for working on other devices, in a way that enables to reuse the code for the Pinephone and other similar devices, for instance to support their modem, in order to minimize the amount of work required to make it work once such devices are released. In the meantime we plan to have some discussions in the Replicant meeting that will happens this weekend[1] on topic indirectly related to the Pinephone such as: - How to add support for modem that are already supported in GNU/Linux, in Replicant 9. - What will be, in the long run, the minimum freedom requirements for the devices supported by Replicant? - How do we deal with upstream GNU/Linux and Android? Do we use Ofono in Replicant? Do we write librils to interface with lower level libraries? etc. References: --- [1]https://redmine.replicant.us/projects/replicant/wiki/ReplicantContributorsMeetingJuly2019 Denis. pgpb_W3RS_6eF.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
Hi ni nhar, Writing that email to pine64 is a good first step. Then, if you get positive feedback, you can start looking for a developer that is willing and skillful to do the port. You do not have to act as a middleman forever, you just have to do the bridging and connect people. I am stressing this part, because, perhaps harder than getting the funds, is finding the right person, with the skill and perseverance to take the porting work to fruition. Depending on what's already available, porting Replicant to a new device can be a really long and hard task. As GNUtoo pointed out in a previous email, there are many unknowns with the way that pinphone's hardware works, and that must be addressed once the porting effort starts for real: Wifi/BT firmware, modem protocol, cameras firmware, etc. You are indeed correct. Hosting a crowdfunding campaign outside Replicant's of FSF's website would be a bad move. Try to follow GNUtoo's pointer about Snowdrift and check if there is a crowdfunding solution compatible with Replicant ideals. You can surely ask FSF for support while organizing the crowdfund, specially on how to deal with the funds. Though, do not expect FSF to do the heavy lifting. FSF only employs a minimal amount of staff. Projects under its umbrella are pretty much independent and must fend for themselves. You will have to dedicate some time to plan, write, organize and run the crowdfunding campaign yourself (I bet that at least a few people from Replicant's community would help you). I have only minor contributions to Replicant. Regards, David On 21/07/2019 13:04, ni nhar wrote: > > > >> Thank you for not dodging when facing criticism. > > >> I actually believe they will be more than happy >> to provide a phone or a >> devboard. > > Maybe. > On armbian's forum a person I believe is the chief of > pine64 has given away soc computers for > free. > >> I see that you have a deep interest on getting >> Replicant support for the >> pinephone. > > Not in pinephone. In getting a new replicant phone > available for > people. Do you know a better option than the > pinephone? > >> If that's so, I believe that there is nobody >> better suited >> than yourself to take on the task. > > I disagree. Because I do not have the technical > skills, there are better > people to approach pine64. If none of you are > prepared to > email the chief of pine64 I can do it. But I will > tell him about my > limited knowledge on the matter. Then he may get > piqued asking himself, why doesn't a qualified > person from replicant > write me? > >> If you feel that you do not have the >> necessary technical skills, you can always do the >> following: > >> 1. Ask around and find a developer that is willing >> and skillful to take >> on the porting effort. > > How can that be effective having me as a > middleman? > >> 2. Create the crowd funding yourself to fund the >> development effort. > > I can look into how to plan a crowd funding. I can > ask fsf if > they want to contribute? Fsf has the required > software and knows how to organize > a crowd funding. One version I like is when a > main sponsor declares he will double paid amounts > up to > a set limit. It motivates people to pay and > ensures the > main sponsor only has to pay if people show > interest in a given crowd funding. > >> I >> bet you will get the consent from the Replicant >> project to use their >> name on the crowd funding page. > > That is irresponsible if you say replicant would > endorse a crowd funding outside their > own or fsf's website. And I would want people to > ignore such an endorsement. You do > not know if the money gets stolen. The crowd > funding must either be on fsf or replicant's > website. Receiver of > the money should be a cashier in fsf. > >> On a personal note. I wouldn't focus my time and >> attention on pinephone >> right now. Mostly because it is still a promise >> and not an actual device >> people can buy. As you can be seen at: >> https://www.pine64.org/pinephone/ >>> This item is not yet available for purchase from >> the PINE64 store. > > It is a valid consideration. > >> I would wait until it starts being mass produced. > > That would be one way to deal with the pinephone. > A hesitant > approach. To me the pinephone is a move against > established manufactures. Free software people have > an interest in promoting the phone, assuming it > works. One > part is providing as many software systems and as > fast as > doable. > > >> However, if you >> believe that pinephone will be successful, then >> please give it a push. >> GNUtoo already did the initial review and it seems >> to fit most (if not >> all) Replicant requirements. > > I suggest I write the chief of pine64 an email. > Telling him > replicant is interested in the phone. But reluctant > because of the early stage the pinephone is in. > I can ask him if pine64 would be interested in > cooperating about devising a strategy > regarding replicant.
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
> Thank you for not dodging when facing criticism. > I actually believe they will be more than happy > to provide a phone or a > devboard. Maybe. On armbian's forum a person I believe is the chief of pine64 has given away soc computers for free. > I see that you have a deep interest on getting > Replicant support for the > pinephone. Not in pinephone. In getting a new replicant phone available for people. Do you know a better option than the pinephone? > If that's so, I believe that there is nobody > better suited > than yourself to take on the task. I disagree. Because I do not have the technical skills, there are better people to approach pine64. If none of you are prepared to email the chief of pine64 I can do it. But I will tell him about my limited knowledge on the matter. Then he may get piqued asking himself, why doesn't a qualified person from replicant write me? > If you feel that you do not have the > necessary technical skills, you can always do the > following: > 1. Ask around and find a developer that is willing > and skillful to take > on the porting effort. How can that be effective having me as a middleman? > 2. Create the crowd funding yourself to fund the > development effort. I can look into how to plan a crowd funding. I can ask fsf if they want to contribute? Fsf has the required software and knows how to organize a crowd funding. One version I like is when a main sponsor declares he will double paid amounts up to a set limit. It motivates people to pay and ensures the main sponsor only has to pay if people show interest in a given crowd funding. > I > bet you will get the consent from the Replicant > project to use their > name on the crowd funding page. That is irresponsible if you say replicant would endorse a crowd funding outside their own or fsf's website. And I would want people to ignore such an endorsement. You do not know if the money gets stolen. The crowd funding must either be on fsf or replicant's website. Receiver of the money should be a cashier in fsf. > On a personal note. I wouldn't focus my time and > attention on pinephone > right now. Mostly because it is still a promise > and not an actual device > people can buy. As you can be seen at: > https://www.pine64.org/pinephone/ > > This item is not yet available for purchase from > the PINE64 store. It is a valid consideration. > I would wait until it starts being mass produced. That would be one way to deal with the pinephone. A hesitant approach. To me the pinephone is a move against established manufactures. Free software people have an interest in promoting the phone, assuming it works. One part is providing as many software systems and as fast as doable. > However, if you > believe that pinephone will be successful, then > please give it a push. > GNUtoo already did the initial review and it seems > to fit most (if not > all) Replicant requirements. I suggest I write the chief of pine64 an email. Telling him replicant is interested in the phone. But reluctant because of the early stage the pinephone is in. I can ask him if pine64 would be interested in cooperating about devising a strategy regarding replicant. > David Are you a replicant programmer? ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 15:46:41 +0300 "ni nhar" wrote: > Then let us crowd fund paying the > software programmers. Here's the status of Replicant funds: - We got some huge funding from Handshake through the FSF. Thanks to that Replicant now has about 200 000$ of funds. - Several developers applied to get some funding through NLnet. We defined tasks and once the tasks are completed we are to be paid. However the fund Nlnet got is not infinite. So once the tasks are completed, we will define new tasks and try most probably to get some funding for new tasks, as there is a lot to do to make Replicant sustainable. But at some point that fund will probably run out as a lot of other free software projects are using it as well (which is a good thing as it could fund strategic projects for instance). Once that runs out, remains the 200 000$. Depending the tax situation, that money could run out pretty quickly. At this point it might be interesting to study the various ways to do crowd funding. Snowdrift has a comparison of the various crowd funding options for projects that are under a free software license but I didn't have the time yet to study that nor the snowdrift approach to crowdfunding. Denis. pgpX1RyJ7IOoj.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
Hi ni nhar, You are indeed right, Replicant should not strong arm pine64 over the purchase of one device. However we don't know their position yet. Better contact them first and evaluate later, after getting a reply. I actually believe they will be more than happy to provide a phone or a devboard. Across all their documents they empathize that pine64 "collaborates with mobile OS developers/communties". I see that you have a deep interest on getting Replicant support for the pinephone. If that's so, I believe that there is nobody better suited than yourself to take on the task. If you feel that you do not have the necessary technical skills, you can always do the following: 1. Ask around and find a developer that is willing and skillful to take on the porting effort. 2. Create the crowd funding yourself to fund the development effort. I bet you will get the consent from the Replicant project to use their name on the crowd funding page. You should understand that Replicant is a community project. As such it goes in the direction where its community members want to go, meaning that what gets done is what people are willing do to themselves. The best way to influence Replicant is to embrace a task a give it a good push forward. On a personal note. I wouldn't focus my time and attention on pinephone right now. Mostly because it is still a promise and not an actual device people can buy. As you can be seen at: https://www.pine64.org/pinephone/ > This item is not yet available for purchase from the PINE64 store. I would wait until it starts being mass produced. However, if you believe that pinephone will be successful, then please give it a push. GNUtoo already did the initial review and it seems to fit most (if not all) Replicant requirements. (I too would love to see this come to fruition. A fully functional Replicant device running a free bootloader is something we have been wishing for ages.) Good luck! Regards, David ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
> Then we should crowd fund getting you a pinephone. there are already funds for this sort of purchases so I'm sure we can use those if a developer willing to do this work appears. Then let us crowd fund paying the software programmers. ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
> IMHO, before spending Replicsnt funds on buying this device, someone should first ask the vendor if they are willing to sponsor a phone to a Replicant dev willing to take this task. Not if pine64's financial records show that pine64 has little to give. Then we should not strong arm them. If you are knowledgeable about free software compatible hardware, you are well advised to be skeptical if a company says it will manufacture a phone emphasizing on privacy. Maybe that is the reason why replicant people seems to be reticent about the pinephone. Pine64 say they are about free software. Likely not like replicant who says free software or nothing. Unlike purism I am not aware pine64 is deceptive when they say they want to forward a free software agenda. Apart from selecting hardware which can boot on free software and supports modem isolation pine64 wants to build a phone which can be disassembled with a screwdriver. And has modem, wifi, microphone switches. These features probably does not make designing the phone easier and I see no other reason to make them other than have people getting control over their phone. Replicant is a languishing piece of software. If a person agrees, that android and iphones in principle are unacceptable due to non free software, the moment you suggest to them, they should get a used phone, being a replicant phone, they are gone. To me the pinephone is replicant's option to become relevant for more people. I do not understand why replicant is not communicating with pine64? Why hasn't replicant declared the pinephone a top priority? Which phone would be better? Why is replicant not preparing a crowd funding such that both phone and programmers can get paid? If it is because of lack of resources then do a high value crowd funding. If the goal is not reached, then we have proven to ourselves that a new replicant phone is not important. ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
Hi, IMHO, before spending Replicsnt funds on buying this device, someone should first ask the vendor if they are willing to sponsor a phone to a Replicant dev willing to take this task. Just as Necuno did. It is quite on the interest of these vendors to have support on multiple OSes. Sponsoring a phone, or even better, a devboard, shows at least a minimum commitment from their part. Such relation will come handy when the time comes to ask for documentation and other technical info. Regards, David On July 16, 2019 6:11:45 PM GMT+01:00, "Joonas Kylmälä" wrote: >Hi, > >ni nhar: >> > > Does it make the pinephone suitable for replicant? >> > It looks way more suitable than the phones >> already supported by >> > Replicant. >> >> Then we should crowd fund getting you a pinephone. > >there are already funds for this sort of purchases so I'm sure we can >use those if a developer willing to do this work appears. > >Joonas >___ >Replicant mailing list >Replicant@osuosl.org >https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
Hi, ni nhar: > > > Does it make the pinephone suitable for replicant? > > It looks way more suitable than the phones > already supported by > > Replicant. > > Then we should crowd fund getting you a pinephone. there are already funds for this sort of purchases so I'm sure we can use those if a developer willing to do this work appears. Joonas ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
> > On pine64's forum I wrote this post > Do you have a link to that? https://forum.pine64.org/showthread.php?tid=7567&page=3 You ought to read https://www.pine64.org/2019/06/06/june-2019-news-pinephone-pinebook-pro-and-pinetab/ The article mentions several software systems. postmarketos maemoleste luneos ubuntutouch sailfishos To prevent double work, you ought to coordinate with them. > > Does it make the pinephone suitable for replicant? > It looks way more suitable than the phones already supported by > Replicant. Then we should crowd fund getting you a pinephone. ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
On Sat, 13 Jul 2019 15:40:53 +0300 "ni nhar" wrote: > On pine64's forum I wrote this post Do you have a link to that? > The Wifi/BT chip is RTL8723BS. Thanks a lot for the information. We will also need to know if the OS is supposed to load the firmware or not. Replicant will not ship any nonfree firmware. On the phones currently supported the internal WiFi doesn't work because of that. So many people use external WiFi dongles. > PinePhone has the EG25 modem, which is the Global > LTE version of EC25. Thanks. This was also confirmed to me by someone at the BattleMesh conference but we didn't have enough time to gather more information on that modem. > The LTE modem connected by USB bus. This is possible to isolate. We'll just need to look into usbguard or USB peripherals whitelist to do that. We didn't look into that yet for the phones currently supported by Replicant, because, for the phones that use HSIC (which is a subset of USB) as I understand, on the HSIC on theses phones, the host has to reset the bus to enable the re-enumeration of the device, which happens when the modem firmware is loaded. Note that here the modem firmware is already on the device on a dedicated partition, and it's not shipped by Replicant. > Modem protocol is AT command set. We will need to look if that's well supported by that modem or not. The quectel-modems osmocom project[1] has probably some information on that for the EC25. For instance, I recall well, the palm pre also had AT, but the calls notifications were not sent through AT but through another custom protocol, and people ended up using that later protocol instead, because of that. Also, in the long run, if QMI is well supported by the modem, using it might be more robust and way faster than AT. > The A64 bootloader is open source and maintained > by Sunxi. There is very few probability of that code containing proprietary software but I'll still have to check by myself the mainline u-boot code for similar boards to be completely sure. > Does it make the pinephone suitable for replicant? It looks way more suitable than the phones already supported by Replicant. I've added a summary of what is known here: https://redmine.replicant.us/projects/replicant/wiki/Pinephone References: --- [1]https://osmocom.org/projects/quectel-modems/wiki/Wiki Denis. pgp6XxHeUxKu2.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
On pine64's forum I wrote this post https://www.replicant.us/ https://www.replicant.us/freedom-privacy...issues.php These post is about if the pinephone is a match for getting a replicant version? I am not technical skilled to investigate the matter but I got some pieces of information from replicant's email list. The replicant team will not make a version of replicant for a phone, if the phone does not have modem isolation. Does the pinephone have modem isolation? The replicant team does only have few resources. Therefore a replicant version for the pinephone will only get provided if the pinephone resembles already replicant compatible phones because it cuts down the effort to modify replicant. Does the pinephone get a EC25 modem? Is the modem connected by usb? What chip will it use for the WiFi, Bluetooth? What is the modem protocol? Is the bootloader free software for the A64? Thank you. I got this answer PinePhone has the EG25 modem, which is the Global LTE version of EC25. The LTE modem connected by USB bus. The Wifi/BT chip is RTL8723BS. Modem protocol is AT command set. The A64 bootloader is open source and maintained by Sunxi. Does it make the pinephone suitable for replicant? > > My understanding is replicant can run on any android phone. > > Correct? > Add support for a device in Replicant requires to have the very basic > features working in Replicant without Replicant having to ship nonfree > software. > So for many Android phones, getting to that point would require a lot > of work, whereas for some other phones that are not very different from > the ones already supported by Replicant it's probably not a huge amount > of work. > > The reason why replicant is only available for a > > few old phones is because you have a modem isolation requirement > > about replicant. > It's because the project tried to add support for phones like the > GTA04 that have free software booloaders. > This port was to use a kernel that is closely based on upstream > Linux, and at the time the Replicant port failed because it required > more time than we had at the time. Now, the amount of work to use an > upstream kernel is way lower. > After that there was also an attempt to first port the LG Optimus black > to the upstream kernel and u-boot, for then adding support for it in > Replicant but that also took quite a lot of time, so that device was > still added upstream in u-boot with some support in Linux but, it > probably still lacks an upstream display driver for instance. > So as everybody were busy working in that direction, nobody worked to > add support for more recent devices. > > Does the pinephone meet the modem > > isolation requirement about replicant? > Assuming that they will also use an EC25 modem, like they did in the > prototypes, I think it could easily meet such requirements. > On the prototypes, the modem was connected through USB. > So, good modem isolation here is probably just a matter of > configuration either within the kernel, or through something like > usbguard, if it's possible to run it on Android, to make sure that the > modem cannot become a keyboard and take control of Replicant. > > If that is the case and the pinephone becomes a functioning phone of > > quality, I see no reason why replicant should not make the pinephone > > a priority. > What I was pointing out was that we are working to port Replicant to > Android 9, with some of the phones we currently support on Replicant 6. > So if that goes well, that work would most probably be reusable > with the PinePhone with minimal effort. However since the PinePhone > modem is different, we will need to look into it to understand how much > work would be required to add support for that modem. > Some preliminary work has already been done to support the Galaxy SIII > 4G modem, which uses the QMI protocol. > I've not looked deep enough into it to know what is the best approach > in supporting that modem protocol, but if that work is advanced enough, > adding support for that protocol might also be done faster by using the > Galaxy SIII 4G to do it. > It's also very difficult to know in advance if we will be able to add > support for a given device. To do that: > - We would need to be able to predict that some developers will have > the time to work on it. > - We would need to make sure that the hardware doesn't have issues > preventing it from being easily supported by Replicant. > To understand better what is possible or desirable we would need to get > more information on the PinePhone, for instance: > - What chip will it use for the WiFi, Bluetooth? > - What is the modem protocol? > - Is the bootloader fully free software for the A64? > In u-boot, board/sunxi/README.sunxi64 has more information about > that but we also need to look into it. > And as I understand, the PinePhone is not yet released, so some things > may change between the prototypes and the final device. I think it'
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
Hi, On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 12:43:29 +0300 Joonas Kylmälä wrote: > I think it is more lack of contributors. Also the fact that I think we > have not had anybody yet receive payment for working on replicant so > nobody knows how to do it. As far as I know, there has been only > reimbursements of costs for something like a development phone. Reimbursements were done for several phones and tablets. For instance it was used to buy Replicant compatible devices to the at the time current Replicant main developer, to enable that developer to make a new release. If my memory is good, it was also used to buy new devices to port Replicant on. Some part of the fund was also used to reimburse travel and accommodation costs to go speak to several conferences. This enabled to spread the messages about issues encountered with mobile devices, with the goal of finding new developers. On my side I didn't use any money of that fund yet. Denis. pgpIEdQpzhgL7.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
Hi, ni nhar: > You say, likely there are several new phones > which have the replicant required hardware modem > isolation and therefore qualifies > for getting a replicant version? > Those phones do not get a replicant version > because of lack of money to > get replicant ported? That would be a new piece of > information for me. I think it is more lack of contributors. Also the fact that I think we have not had anybody yet receive payment for working on replicant so nobody knows how to do it. As far as I know, there has been only reimbursements of costs for something like a development phone. Joonas signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
Thank you. > So as everybody were busy working in that direction, nobody worked to > add support for more recent devices. You say, likely there are several new phones which have the replicant required hardware modem isolation and therefore qualifies for getting a replicant version? Those phones do not get a replicant version because of lack of money to get replicant ported? That would be a new piece of information for me. > To understand better what is possible or desirable we would need to get > more information on the PinePhone, for instance: > - What chip will it use for the WiFi, Bluetooth? > - What is the modem protocol? > - Is the bootloader fully free software for the A64? > In u-boot, board/sunxi/README.sunxi64 has more information about > that but we also need to look into it. I want to ask the pinephone team these questions in order to determine if the pinephone can become a replicant phone putting the required work, modem isolation and difficulty into the calculation. Can you write an exhaustive list of questions I should ask the pinephone team? > And as I understand, the PinePhone is not yet released, so some things > may change between the prototypes and the final device. I think it's > important for the Replicant project to review the PinePhone once it's > released. I prefer if we could start now to investigate if the pinephone is a viable candidate to get a replicant version. ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 12:24:10 +0300 "ni nhar" wrote: > My understanding is replicant can run on any android phone. > Correct? Add support for a device in Replicant requires to have the very basic features working in Replicant without Replicant having to ship nonfree software. So for many Android phones, getting to that point would require a lot of work, whereas for some other phones that are not very different from the ones already supported by Replicant it's probably not a huge amount of work. > The reason why replicant is only available for a > few old phones is because you have a modem isolation requirement > about replicant. It's because the project tried to add support for phones like the GTA04 that have free software booloaders. This port was to use a kernel that is closely based on upstream Linux, and at the time the Replicant port failed because it required more time than we had at the time. Now, the amount of work to use an upstream kernel is way lower. After that there was also an attempt to first port the LG Optimus black to the upstream kernel and u-boot, for then adding support for it in Replicant but that also took quite a lot of time, so that device was still added upstream in u-boot with some support in Linux but, it probably still lacks an upstream display driver for instance. So as everybody were busy working in that direction, nobody worked to add support for more recent devices. > Does the pinephone meet the modem > isolation requirement about replicant? Assuming that they will also use an EC25 modem, like they did in the prototypes, I think it could easily meet such requirements. On the prototypes, the modem was connected through USB. So, good modem isolation here is probably just a matter of configuration either within the kernel, or through something like usbguard, if it's possible to run it on Android, to make sure that the modem cannot become a keyboard and take control of Replicant. > If that is the case and the pinephone becomes a functioning phone of > quality, I see no reason why replicant should not make the pinephone > a priority. What I was pointing out was that we are working to port Replicant to Android 9, with some of the phones we currently support on Replicant 6. So if that goes well, that work would most probably be reusable with the PinePhone with minimal effort. However since the PinePhone modem is different, we will need to look into it to understand how much work would be required to add support for that modem. Some preliminary work has already been done to support the Galaxy SIII 4G modem, which uses the QMI protocol. I've not looked deep enough into it to know what is the best approach in supporting that modem protocol, but if that work is advanced enough, adding support for that protocol might also be done faster by using the Galaxy SIII 4G to do it. It's also very difficult to know in advance if we will be able to add support for a given device. To do that: - We would need to be able to predict that some developers will have the time to work on it. - We would need to make sure that the hardware doesn't have issues preventing it from being easily supported by Replicant. To understand better what is possible or desirable we would need to get more information on the PinePhone, for instance: - What chip will it use for the WiFi, Bluetooth? - What is the modem protocol? - Is the bootloader fully free software for the A64? In u-boot, board/sunxi/README.sunxi64 has more information about that but we also need to look into it. And as I understand, the PinePhone is not yet released, so some things may change between the prototypes and the final device. I think it's important for the Replicant project to review the PinePhone once it's released. The Replicant project is looking forward since quite some time to support devices with free software bootloaders, as nonfree bootloaders are a huge issue for users freedom. As devices with free software bootloader often use kernels that are closely based on upstream Linux, adding support for any device with a kernel closely based on upstream Linux is already a very big step in that direction, and we are working on that. Denis. pgpGd3l5ZllGt.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
Thanks. > So assuming that the pinephone hardware gets supported in upstream > Linux[2], some work will still be needed to support it in Replicant: My understanding is replicant can run on any android phone. Correct? The reason why replicant is only available for a few old phones is because you have a modem isolation requirement about replicant. Does the pinephone meet the modem isolation requirement about replicant? If that is the case and the pinephone becomes a functioning phone of quality, I see no reason why replicant should not make the pinephone a priority. What other options about a new phone does replicant have? Once on replicant's irc paulk wrote, they had contacted fairphone in order to advice fairphone on how to pick a cpu with modem isolation, such that the phone would get applicable for a replicant version. Fairphone rejected. Still if the pinephone's modem does not meet replicant's modem isolation requirement, should replicant not contact the pinephone team and offer them their advice? ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
Re: [Replicant] replicant make comment on the pinephone
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 22:49:10 +0300 "ni nhar" wrote: > > https://www.pine64.org/2019/06/06/june-2019-news-pinephone-pinebook-pro-and-pinetab/ > > Comment on the pinephone. Is it for > replicant? We are currently porting Replicant to Android 9[1]. So while the port will be first made for the Galaxy SIII (I9300) and similar devices. It will use a kernel that will be closely based on upstream Linux. Once this is done, that work could be used by anyone to add support for other devices that use an upstream Linux kernel. So assuming that the pinephone hardware gets supported in upstream Linux[2], some work will still be needed to support it in Replicant: - First, someone will need to adapt the work done for the Galaxy SIII to the pinephone. This shound't be a huge amount of work, especially if we document well things along the way. - Then someone will need to add support for its modem in Replicant. Depending on which component makes sense to reuse it could be a lot of work. We will need to see if it's possible to reuse GNU/Linux modem support component in the future to make that easier. Does someone knows which protocol is typically used with the Quectel EC25? Is it AT or QMI? If it's QMI, then adding support for the Galaxy SIII 4G (i9305) would enable to also easily add support for the pinephone. If it's AT, we'd need to look more into the details. The GTA04 could also be interesting to support and this smartphone has an AT modem too. It would also be interesting to find more about how the modem works as it runs GNU/Linux on one of its processors[3]. References: --- [1]https://redmine.replicant.us/projects/replicant/wiki/Porting_Replicant_to_Android_9 [2]See the following status for the A64: https://linux-sunxi.org/Linux_mainlining_effort [3]https://osmocom.org/projects/quectel-modems/wiki/EC25 Denis. pgpbL1Rexvz0K.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
