This is very cool – looking forward to (hopefully) fixing some bugs when I get to it in the upcoming weeks.
Email is (still) vital.
Best posts made by te-online
Latest posts made by te-online
RE: Development testers for Anbox
@gb I had to enlarge the system partition on my Nexus 5 to install everything, if I remember correctly. Maybe that's your issue? I think I followed this script https://github.com/plasma-mobile/plasma-phone-dev-setup/blob/master/usr/bin/resize-root-partition with minor adjustments, but caution I don't remember since it's been a while – do it on your own risk
RE: Anbox on Nexus 5
I was wondering: What's blocking anbox from running on the Nexus 5. Is this something ubuntu touch needs to address or is it a cpu architecture that anbox needs to support first?
I'd be happy to help with anything I can, but would have no clue where to start
Edit: I guess it's that one:
In order to support the mandatory kernel subsystems ashmem and binder for the Android container you have to install two DKMS based kernel modules. The source for the kernel modules is maintained by the Anbox project here.
Edit 2: So, I followed this manual https://github.com/anbox/anbox/blob/master/docs/install.md and came pretty far.
I had to resize the root partition with this script https://askubuntu.com/a/721296/717375 and mount it writable
sudo mount -o rw,remount /to install the new kernel modules (of which I have no idea whether they work on ubuntu touch as well...)
Then I realized that
snapdoesn't seem to be included in this ubuntu touch image (at least for the Nexus 5 on 16.04). That's why I can't continue with installing anbox through the snap mechanism.
I guess the kernel needs to be adjusted to support snaps?
Now I'm hooked, but still can't see what could be a next step...
But there is a new answer by @advocatux below – let's see
RE: VoIP app with PJSIP
Did you pursue this any further? I'm looking for a decent voip app for ubuntu phone and would not fear to develop a UI or packaged app myself, but I guess the backend library to talk to the sip/voip server would be the most important piece. And nobody wants to reinvent the wheel, right?
RE: Idea for WhatApp on ubports
From my understanding of the issues it is all due to the fast that facebook will not publish their whatsapp api's thus controlling the apps that use their service. If they did we could make something up. I might be wrong there so if I am please feel free to correct me.
Yes, you are absolutely right. This is not about the missing ability to create such an app, but about restrictions on Facebook's side that make it impossible to create a client app without reverse engineering an official client. At least this is my current state of knowledge. Hence my suggestion of the cumbersome, yet working, usage of the webapp together with a “server device”.
The communication stays by email.
And I'm guessing this didn't make you the most popular Dad in the group of parents You're absolutely right to do this and it is very idealistic and admirable – don't get me wrong! There is just the fact that WhatsApp is very convinient for many people, because they use it all the time and so they try to fit it to every use case they can find – and Facebook also tries to make the app adapt to these new use cases. Whereas you and me, not even “users” (“...and what is this Telegram, by the way?”), explaining the drawbacks and privacy implications of WhatsApp sound highly outlandish to the ears of many WhatsApp users.
RE: Idea for WhatApp on ubports
Yes, despite all difficulties, I find this topic very interesting. It's also not that people use WhatsApp because they like it so much over competitors, but that it was the first to offer free, but SMS-like services in a few markets, then acquired by Facebook.
Since the app is effectively free, and chats are now supposed to be end-to-end encrypted, the question remains how Facebook wants to monetize WhatsApp. Maybe metadata is enough for them or they are just interested in holding a good market share in this area...