Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hackers Dual-Boot Chrome OS With Ubuntu Linux on CR-48

Posted by timothy on from the this-sounds-delicious dept.

jbrodkin writes "Google's Chrome OS makes Web surfing an incredibly pleasant and secure experience, but most of the knocks against it relate to what it can't do — namely, nearly everything traditional desktop operating systems like Windows, Mac and Linux can. The easiest solution might be dual-booting, allowing users to choose either Chrome OS or a Linux distro at startup. Google's Chromium project site is now hosting instructions for booting Ubuntu Linux alongside Chrome OS. The process is cumbersome but indicates that dual-booting Chrome OS should be possible — and hopefully a bit simpler — once Google releases commercially available netbooks in mid-2011."

40 of 148 comments (clear)

  1. This is hacking now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Following fairly simple instructions posted on the official chromium site is now hacking?

    1. Re:This is hacking now? by metrometro · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Following fairly simple instructions posted on the official chromium site is now hacking?

      If by hacking, you mean adapting a technology to the needs of the users, rather than the stated purposes of the creator, then yes, that's in the finest hacking tradition.

    2. Re:This is hacking now? by c6gunner · · Score: 2

      I remember in the pre 1.0 days when getting Linux to run at all was more involved than this "hacking".

      Yeah, I faintly remember that. Something to do with voodoo rattles and candles laid out in a pentagram, right? I think I went back to DOS because I couldn't find a virgin goat to sacrifice ....

    3. Re:This is hacking now? by Gerzel · · Score: 2

      I wonder why can't you create an OS where only part of it boots up for websurfing like Chrome OS and you can fire up more to get more features?

    4. Re:This is hacking now? by multisync · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I really don't think following instructions from the people developing the product that's "being hacked" is in any way skilful.

      The author of the article - who as you said followed instructions he found on the Chromium site - was referring to whoever wrote those instructions as hackers, not those like him who followed them.

      An Engadget post says that "certified" Chrome OS laptops, when they become commercially available in mid-2011, will not support dual booting with any non-Google operating system. I haven't been able to confirm yet whether this is true, but it is certainly very difficult to boot a second operating system onto the Cr-48 prototype version that Google has shipped to thousands of testers and journalists ... So I was happy to see that a step-by-step installation guide for booting Ubuntu on Cr-48 has now appeared. I don't think it was written by a Google employee, but it is being hosted on what appears to be Google's official Chromium project site.

      From the sounds of it, the manufacturer has every intention of making it hard for the user to duel-boot. The prototype the author has suggests this as well. So I think this more than qualifies as a hack, as it gives the user control over his hardware that he might not otherwise enjoy.

      You've just misidentified who the hacker in this story is.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
    5. Re:This is hacking now? by achenaar · · Score: 5, Funny

      You must have been living in Wales.

    6. Re:This is hacking now? by c6gunner · · Score: 2

      No, that was Jonah.

    7. Re:This is hacking now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...duel-boot...

      This is an awesome typo (hopefully?). I imagine a couple of colonial-era gentlemen, one with a Windows icon prominent on his shirt and the other with a penguin on his going for pistols at dawn to decide which OS gets to boot up.

      "You have offended my honor, sir, and I will put an end to your open-source ways!"

    8. Re:This is hacking now? by nedlohs · · Score: 2

      So I hacked my espresso machine this morning when I made a double shot?

      After all I followed the simple instructions from the people who made it.

  2. Overly optimistic by Microlith · · Score: 2

    The assumption being made here is that any commercially available hardware running ChromeOS will be in any way as open as the Cr-48 is. I suspect it will be far more like the G1/Nexus* hardware vs. every other Android based handset, in that Google provides you an easy out while all of the 3rd parties put extra effort into keeping you inside the box.

  3. Wow, really? by LordLimecat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People are being given free ChromeOS laptops for the purpose of testing ChromeOS, and theyre going to throw Ubuntu on there (and thus presumably stop testing ChromeOS)?

    Seems kind of cheap, why dont you just buy your own laptop, or actually TEST the one youve been given?

    1. Re:Wow, really? by metrometro · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Testing the boundaries of the cage is among the OS tests I care most about. Already, we know it's superior in this respect to, say, an iPad, which isn't dual booting a damn thing.

    2. Re:Wow, really? by bem · · Score: 2

      I'd mod you up if I had the points.

      I'm actually using the cr48 for -everything- at home. That's what I agreed to, so that's what I will do.

      My only cheat is to ssh out to read mail. (It was rooted for a while, but I got bored of that... don't really need root to ssh out .. just ctrl-alt-T, and use the ssh in crosh... good enough for mutt.)

    3. Re:Wow, really? by DragonWriter · · Score: 2

      This is a cheap ass stunt that violates the spirit of the program the signed up for.

      AFAIK, the agreement for the test program is:
      1. To use the Cr-48 as your primary computer, and
      2. To provide feedback to Google.

      At least, that's what they ask you to do in the application.

      I don't think there is anything about "not installing another OS on the Cr-48 so you can dual boot it."

  4. How is that a solution? by markdavis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >"The easiest solution might be dual-booting"

    How is "dual booting" a solution? If I load Linux on a machine, then I already have access to web surfing under Chrome/Chromium, Firefox, or whatever.... in addition to anything else I want to do. I think if one finds they want to load Linux "dual boot" on a machine running Chrome OS, that makes Chrome OS a "FAIL" because the user really doesn't want to just run a web browser.

    I agree with the other articles- there is no need or demand for "Chrome OS". If you want open, fast, free, flexible, use Linux on the machine. If you want to run lots of commercial software, games, etc, run MS-Windows on the machine. If you want both, run Linux and load MS-Windows in Virtualbox, or dual boot the two. Otherwise, Android seems like the best "solution".

    1. Re:How is that a solution? by KublaiKhan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because for some usage you may not -need- full functionality, and could benefit from the very-fast boot time and snap resume that the chrome iteration offers.

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    2. Re:How is that a solution? by markdavis · · Score: 2

      Not sure how long it takes to boot ChromeOS. But this Mandriva 2010.1 Linux system is about 10 seconds. Granted, it is not a netbook. But my EEE 1000 netbook boots Unbuntu 10.04 Linux in 18 seconds. Both are pretty darn reasonable for full functionality.

      Otherwise, give me my 4.3" Evo Android phone or perhaps a 10" non-X86 tablet running Android 3.0...

    3. Re:How is that a solution? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 3, Funny

      "How is "dual booting" a solution?"

      For the same reason that Peter Paul makes Almond Joy and Mounds, or people dual boot Windows and Linux: Sometimes you feel like a nut, and sometimes you don't ;-)

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    4. Re:How is that a solution? by bgarcia · · Score: 2

      I agree with the other articles- there is no need or demand for "Chrome OS".

      You're thinking about Chrome OS the wrong way. Chrome OS allows for very cheap laptops. The cr-48 uses an Atom CPU, but the real beauty will be when ARM ChromeOS machines are sold, booting off a little 8GB flash drive. We're talking about ubiquitous < $200 laptops.

      Yes, the technically competent will prefer to install a complete Linux distro on such a machine, but the average user won't. But the average user WILL buy a "Google Laptop". This could end up being a perfect solution for your family members - the ones who treat you like tech support. There is very little that they could actually "mess up" on such a machine.

      Otherwise, Android seems like the best "solution".

      I would imagine that Android & Chrome OS will eventually be merged. But I think that Android is currently a poor experience for devices with larger screens & non-touch screens.

      --
      I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
    5. Re:How is that a solution? by dudpixel · · Score: 2

      Linux (or win xp) on the 1st generation of netbooks is not fast. chrome os may be able to run on even lower-spec hardware and still acheive decent speeds, thereby providing a net-focused laptop to a lot more people.

      Lets wait and see shall we?

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
  5. Why dual-boot Chrome OS and traditional Linux? by DragonWriter · · Score: 2

    Google's Chrome OS makes Web surfing an incredibly pleasant and secure experience, but most of the knocks against it relate to what it can't do — namely, nearly everything traditional desktop operating systems like Windows, Mac and Linux can. The easiest solution might be dual-booting, allowing users to choose either Chrome OS or a Linux distro at startup.

    The easiest solution for people who need the power of a full traditional OS but want to be able to have the Chrome experience would be to just boot Ubuntu with the Chrome browser. If you take one desktop and maximize Chrome on it, you can easily toggle back and forth between the regular Ubuntu experience and Chrome.

    Since Chrome OS is essentially Linux stripped down to what is necessary to support the Chrome browser + the Chrome browser, dual-booting Chrome OS and a full Linux distro, while it might be useful in a very small set of circumstances, seems to mostly be the hard way to achieve, well, almost anything you might want to achieve by doing that.

    1. Re:Why dual-boot Chrome OS and traditional Linux? by Lennie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The whole idea of ChromeOS is that it is automatically updates OS, with your settings and everything saved 'in the cloud' and the only personal things that are saved locally are cache files (as I understand it, what is locally saved is encrypted and what is replicated to the cloud is just the encrypted data. So there is nothing for anyone else to see. So you need to use your username and passprase to decrypt it). The 'web apps' from the 'app store' are connected to your account.

      If the hardware breaks you just login to an new device and everything should be 'there', ready to use.

      I think that is something else then what Ubuntu is.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
  6. Can't see this standing by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I imagine that by the time the final hardware is ready, it's going to be a lot more locked down. There's always been some speculation that Google may subsidize the cost of these devices and make it up on ad revenue. If that's the case, they're not going to want people to supplant ChromeOS in favor of something else.

    If they're unsubsidized, why bother buying a ChromeOS device? Just install ChromeOS on a netbook/notebook that you already have.

    1. Re:Can't see this standing by KublaiKhan · · Score: 3, Funny

      To give to grandma, so she can have an email appliance just like the one she used to have that hooked up to the TV and the phoneline, back in the late '90s.

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    2. Re:Can't see this standing by andyr86 · · Score: 2

      I think your making the assumption that the majority of users should be locked in due to their knowledge of technology. Neglecting that, IMO, the vast majority want to grow into their technology and have it open up as and when they have the knowledge and confidence.

    3. Re:Can't see this standing by sensei+moreh · · Score: 2

      Assuming Google chooses to subsidize ChromeOS devices, and assuming that ChromeOS devices are capable of running Linux, what fraction of Verizon/AT&T/T-Mobile/Sprint customers is going to supplement/replace ChromeOS with Linux? I can't believe it's going to be a significant number

      --
      Geology - it's not rocket science; it's rock science
  7. Chrome OS would make an awesome boot loader by bitsofbytes · · Score: 2

    I think Chrome OS needs to be focused on something that would make it unique and useful... not trying to replace the desktop.
    Chrome OS would make an awesome instant-on boot loader replacing GRUB, LILO, or Windows Boot Loader.
    Surf the web while your OS of choice boots in the background.

  8. Crippleware has its place. by couchslug · · Score: 2

    Crippleware has its place, and I hope Google sells (other people) a metric shitload of these things so I can get a (used) one for almost nothing after (inevitably) enough people buy them expecting them to be a "regular compyooter".

    Here's an archive of sorts for some niche products of yore and a reminder of the business models they served:

    http://www.linux-hacker.net/cgi-bin/UltraBoard/UltraBoard.pl

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  9. The worst part ? I believe you are serious. by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2

    "Who in the world would dual boot a machine just to use a web-browsing-specific OS?"

    Uhmmm .... that is almost enough to blow my mind. They wouldn't . They would boot into Linux when they wanted to do more than just browse the web and email.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  10. Re:Virtualizing Applications by couchslug · · Score: 2

    Just boot an .iso image of a live distro with a persistent home partition for storage. No need for a VM.

    http://www.pendrivelinux.com/boot-multiple-iso-from-usb-multiboot-usb/

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  11. Splashtop anyone by jisom · · Score: 2

    Goes by expressgate on Asus products boots in like 5 seconds and it dual boot linux and windows.

  12. sequence of events by __aaqvdr516 · · Score: 2

    1. Get ChromeOS laptop
    2. Dual Boot Ubuntu
    3. Realize Ubuntu does everything ChromeOS does and more
    4. Never boot into Chrome again
    5. Profit???

  13. Virtualized Modes by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2

    If a virtualization host can be installed first on the HW, why dual boot? Why not just run both Ubuntu and Chrome OS simultaneously? If you can share the clipboard, "Chrome OS" could be just what's for browsing, and Ubuntu is really your OS for doing more serious (interactive) work on what you find while browsing. Indeed, if the two could share a desktop, it might not even look like two OSes, but rather just one with two personalities.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  14. just another x86 notebook by keeboo · · Score: 2

    From the installation instructions:
    ubuntu-10.10-desktop-i386.iso

    So this CR-48 is just a x86 notebook with a custom firmware. I was expecting something based on ARM instead.
    Meh.

  15. Re:but by TangoMargarine · · Score: 2

    If all you want to do is offered by a different OS with a better interface, you go with that OS. At least, that's in theory what the case is with Apple.

    I dual-boot Ubuntu. I use GNOME, not KDE, because I don't plan to ever utilize the option to set a bazillion different little things about my desktop manager, and I don't want said options to get in my way if all I want to do is move the taskbar to a different side of the screen (have you ever *seen* how many sliders their are when you unlock that thing in KDE?). Does that mean that, since I can do so with KDE, I shouldn't use GNOME? Sometimes simpler is easier to use. The whole point is that the people this is marketted to don't want the capabilities of a normal laptop. Again, at least if they did their homework and know what they're buying.

    --
    Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
  16. Now if only Chrome could run a VM... by John+Sokol · · Score: 2

    Then we could run Ubuntu in a VM under Chrome.

    --
    I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. - Pablo Picasso
  17. Re:but by walshy007 · · Score: 2

    (have you ever *seen* how many sliders their are when you unlock that thing in KDE?).

    I just did it now to check, I count two, one that indicates bar minimum length, one maximum. and buttons to click to adjust height.

    I've never adjusted any settings in kde, because I have never needed to, just as you have not in gnome.

  18. Google, take this is a sign... by pRtkL+xLr8r · · Score: 2

    I think it's rather telling about a product when it's not even out yet and people are already trying to circumvent it's OS because it doesn't do what's desired...

  19. It's not that bad... by ewok85 · · Score: 2

    I run Chromium OS on an old Thinkpad X41 running of a tiny micro-SD USB memory stick. Want Chromium OS? Boot with the USB stick in, ready to rock in about 10 seconds. Want Ubuntu? Pull the USB stick, boot normally.

  20. This shows exactly what Google forgot. by pslam · · Score: 2

    This neatly demonstrates what's wrong with Chrome OS: Google forgot the hardware, as usual.

    The fact that you can run Ubuntu on it without any hassle is exactly what's wrong. Chrome OS only makes sense if it: makes the hardware cheaper, makes the battery last longer, and lets you optimize the form factor (as in, more compact).

    It makes sense it's tested on a machine which is way overspec for what they need, but it makes absolutely no sense to demonstrate the platform on it. It should have been something more like: an ARM, a tiny amount of storage (less than they have now), half thickness, half the battery (lower power consumption), and much more compact. This is just a netbook dressed up with a different OS. It should have been a new OS enabling more precisely targeted hardware. That seems to have been lost.

    So I can't see why anyone would buy a device with Chrome OS on it, or convert one to it. If this was on hardware that was significantly cheaper than a netbook/laptop, people would buy into it. But this - an Atom and the associated mess of components with it - is going to be the same as everything else. So nobody will understand why they should buy a netbook that only browses.

    And that's the theme from every reviewer, blogger and journalist: they don't get it. In it's current form, it just doesn't make any sense.