zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. margal+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-06-12 19:41:49
If you want to define "AOSP is not dead" as "there exists a source-available AOSP repo that is not ground-up buildable for any real world device without losing major features like SecureBoot", that's fine, but that's not the definition being discussed.

Absent device trees, AOSP as of the Android 16 release is a subset of the utility of Android 15. If one sees the use of AOSP as mainly relying on the now absent functionality, then declaring "AOSP is dead" is not unreasonable.

If the Linux Foundation sold itself to Microsoft, ceased publishing kernel sources or binaries, and declared henceforth Linux would exist as WSL and nowhere else, it would be reasonable to say "Linux is dead" even if something with a subset of that functionality, named "Linux", still existed.

replies(1): >>tgma+hu
2. tgma+hu[view] [source] 2025-06-12 23:06:32
>>margal+(OP)
> Absent device trees, AOSP as of the Android 16 release is a subset of the utility of Android 15. If one sees the use of AOSP as mainly relying on the now absent functionality, then declaring "AOSP is dead" is not unreasonable.

There are a million devices out there that build on AOSP that are not Google Pixel. This is a Pixel news, not AOSP news.

replies(1): >>margal+oC
◧◩
3. margal+oC[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-13 00:35:54
>>tgma+hu
And every single one of those devices is missing features of AOSP, notably secure boot.

Google pixels were until recently the only phones able to run AOSP with 1:1 feature parity. And now there are none.

[go to top]