Developer Gets OpenSUSE Running On $249 Google Chromebook

Why not Debian? by YurB · 2012-10-25 07:52 · Score: 1

Just curious, why would one try to port a distribution if there's already a ported one? Or the debian's ARM is something different (unfortunately I know very little about processor architectures)?

Re:Why not Debian? by marcello_dl · 2012-10-25 08:04 · Score: 5, Insightful

I guess the feat is not to redo some porting of code to arm, which debian has done, but to configure the system/add drivers to support the chromebook.
IMHO if chromebook wants to sell more than a tablet it must work as a real laptop, and a linux distro is at the moment the only way to have a complete personal computing experience on arm.

--
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
Re:Why not Debian? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 08:23 · Score: 1

Google is explicitly selling the Chromebook as being different from a "real laptop". Why would they suddenly change that just because you want a cheap Linux machine?
Re:Why not Debian? by xtronics · 2012-10-25 08:27 · Score: 1

Yes - please give credit to where credit is due.
Debian ARM port
Re:Why not Debian? by lkcl · 2012-10-25 08:39 · Score: 5, Interesting

IMHO if chromebook wants to sell more than a tablet it must work as a real laptop, and a linux distro is at the moment the only way to have a complete personal computing experience on arm.
this is only really going to happen when ARM SoC vendors get out of the "vertical market" mentality, and stop trying to control everything. this is a really in-depth topic so i'll describe it briefly (yes, briefly - despite appearances)
the problem is that ARM SoCs have typically come from the "embedded" space, as "appliances", where android is now also considered to be an "appliance". what that means is that typically a device is designed by the SoC vendor themselves (a "reference design"), the software is written by the SoC vendor themselves, and the whole package sold, usually as a GPL-violating product, to factories who do NOT have ANY software expertise AT ALL.
these factories receive a set of instructions:
1) make PCB
2) assemble PCB in case
3) insert "boot sd/mmc card" to flash OS onto device
4) pack in box
5) sell box.
the chromebook is absolutely *no* exception to this.
what we're doing with the Rhombus Tech initiative, through the EOMA-68 hardware specification, is drawing a line in the sand, where the CPU is now on a Credit-Card-sized "module" along with the RAM and NAND Flash, but that's only half the story. because the CPU Cards can go into literally *any* EOMA-68-compliant mass-volume device, the CPU *has* to be considered to be "General Purpose". every CPU *has* to be "open" (or, alternatively, the burden is on the proprietary software vendor (e.g. apple or microsoft) or on the GPL-violating vendor to support literally every possible combination of devices that could possibly be out there or imagined).
so we're turning things around: turning SoCs back towards where they ought to be (and are already in the x86 world): general-purpose processors that can run any OS.
Re:Why not Debian? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 08:59 · Score: 0

Why not RISC OS?
Re:Why not Debian? by DragonWriter · 2012-10-25 09:15 · Score: 1

Just curious, why would one try to port a distribution if there's already a ported one?
So, once Chromium OS runs on the Chromebook, there's no reason for any other Linux-based OS to run on it.
Re:Why not Debian? by Hillgiant · 2012-10-25 09:22 · Score: 1

Why not NetBSD? Oh, wait. It probably already does.

--
-
Re:Why not Debian? by mmontour · 2012-10-25 09:54 · Score: 2

Maybe he just prefers SuSE?
Several years ago, I ported SuSE onto my PowerPC iBook G3 because I liked it and it was the distro I ran on my main desktop machine.
("porting" in this case mostly meant bootstrapping a build environment and working around a few bugs. The source RPMs already had PPC build targets.)
Re:Why not Debian? by fm6 · 2012-10-25 11:08 · Score: 4, Interesting

The point of the Chromebook is not to sell hardware. The point of the Chromebook is to sell the Google model of doing everything on the cloud. Selling cheap systems running a "real laptop" OS is an unprofitable low-margin business that's of no interest even to hardware companies, never mind a services company like Google.
Hackers are hacking Chromebooks because they're hackers. The commercial viability of the combination is nil.
Re:Why not Debian? by petermgreen · 2012-10-25 12:54 · Score: 1

Afacit google's goal isn't necessarily to offer a "complete computing experience" it is to offer tools that encourage people to use their services. While they don't seem to mind letting (and sometimes even helping) us techies re-purpose their kit to run things that aren't associated with google services it's not the primary goal of the devices.

--
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Re:Why not Debian? by petermgreen · 2012-10-25 12:55 · Score: 1

RISC-OS was a nice OS for it's day but while it's quick afaict it is still a cooperative multitasker allowing any one process to lock things up. There is also the issue that running older software requires a third party emulation layer which is only available for a handful of devices (and costs money for some of them).

--
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Re:Why not Debian? by fufufang · 2012-10-25 13:02 · Score: 1

I guess the feat is not to redo some porting of code to arm, which debian has done, but to configure the system/add drivers to support the chromebook.
IMHO if chromebook wants to sell more than a tablet it must work as a real laptop, and a linux distro is at the moment the only way to have a complete personal computing experience on arm.
Google is selling Chromebook as their advertising platform... You might also get vendor lock in. You can't use the Gmail interface without using Gmail itself. Although you can indeed use Gmail via IMAP+SMTP.
Re:Why not Debian? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 14:01 · Score: 0

While I dig the principle behind it, lacking the space/ability to run external cooling, adequate power, or backwards-compatible high speed IO, it seems more like a solution in search of a problem than a truly beneficial design, at least from the consumer perspective.
And I say this as someone who's been quite unhappy with the recent trend towards integrating memory controller and external IO bus lanes directly into the CPU.
(Which has NOT, contrary to marketing promises, in ANY way reduced the price of motherboards OR cpus, but rather just ensured that multi-generational upgrades will mean buying a complete package rather than having the possibility of piecemeal upgrading.)
Re:Why not Debian? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-26 06:29 · Score: 0

i kindof said fuckyea to myself whilst reading this.
Re:Why not Debian? by lkcl · 2012-10-27 08:09 · Score: 1

While I dig the principle behind it, lacking the space/ability to run external cooling, adequate power, or backwards-compatible high speed IO, it seems more like a solution in search of a problem than a truly beneficial design, at least from the consumer perspective.
the EOMA-68 specification includes backwards-compatibility through the three key buses: USB3 (which can do all the way back to USB1.1), SATA-III (which can do all the way down to 150mbit/s if you really get stuck), and Gigabit Ethernet (which can do 10 as well as 100). all of these are through auto-negotiation.
the reason for specifying a 3.5 watt limit is precisely *because* this is a mass-volume standard. in mass-volume products you simply do *not* put in moving parts like fans. the margins are too tight to have things fail and be returned under warranty.
we're taking a bit of a risk by allowing the 8mm version to be up to 10 watts and allowing fans to be included on-board. but, we're not pursuing that right now - just concentrating on the less risky higher-volume version.
think about it, though: with geometries shrinking all the time, in 3-5 years time we'll be laughing about 3.5 watts :)

Ubuntu, too. by The+MAZZTer · 2012-10-25 07:53 · Score: 5, Interesting

Though no X yet. http://chromeos-cr48.blogspot.com/2012/10/first-steps.html

Re:Ubuntu, too. by Microlith · 2012-10-25 08:00 · Score: 3, Interesting

Yup. This is what I had a mind to do, but the stupid GPU driver situation on ARM makes life more than a little painful.
Re:Ubuntu, too. by Jmc23 · 2012-10-25 08:07 · Score: 2

Not necessary for Emacs. I'd be tempted if SBCL ran well on arm (i have no idea), might make a nice portable dev machine.

--
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
Re:Ubuntu, too. by MichaelSmith · 2012-10-25 08:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

Sorry but chromeOS led me directly to the idea of a real emacsOS when I read your comment.

--
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Re:Ubuntu, too. by lindi · 2012-10-25 08:58 · Score: 1

At least in Debian it's only for amd64 i386 kfreebsd-amd64 powerpc

Re:Over 10 mins and no first post by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 07:55 · Score: 0

everyone was trying to get to the Original Source instead of someones blog about a blog

Why haven't OEMs caught on? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 07:55 · Score: 4, Interesting

This is a great idea - a lightweight, attractive, inexpensive ARM-powered notebook running GNU/Linux. But, I wonder why Samsung and others haven't bothered to "officially" offer it? I think a system like this, running KDE, could be very appealing to a present Windows 7 user, versus switching to a higher-priced system running Windows 8 and its unfamiliar "Modern" interface.

Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by nurb432 · 2012-10-25 08:07 · Score: 1

Wait until you see KDE running on it first, i bet it will be dismal and defeat the whole purpose and turn people off of 'alternatives' permanently.
To the average guy, percieved speed is more important than openness, or even cost.

--
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by Jmc23 · 2012-10-25 08:11 · Score: 1, Flamebait

Yes, let's all wonder why Google hasn't officially offered to run another operating system on a machine made specifically for Google to run their OS on.

--
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 08:27 · Score: 1

The question is not why Google didn't do it. The question is, why haven't Samsung and other hardware considered it on their own, since we now see that it might be possible?
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 08:32 · Score: 2, Insightful

Because it's an even more niche product than a Chromebook that have so far sold extremely poorly.
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by partyguerrilla · 2012-10-25 08:33 · Score: 1

Why aren't they selling OSX machines, as well?
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by jedidiah · 2012-10-25 09:11 · Score: 1

> Why aren't they selling OSX machines, as well?
They would be sued by Apple for software piracy.

--
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by Microlith · 2012-10-25 09:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

let's all wonder why Google hasn't officially offered to run another operating system on a machine made specifically for Google to run their OS on.
Good thing he didn't say Google but Samsung and others.
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by gmuslera · 2012-10-25 09:16 · Score: 2

If you have 2 niches in the same hardware you have more sells than offering just one. Opening the drivers mean that it could be sold to the 2 kinds of clients, or give your clients an alternative if they don't like the bundled one or at least don't fill all their needs.
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by DragonWriter · 2012-10-25 09:23 · Score: 2

This is a great idea - a lightweight, attractive, inexpensive ARM-powered notebook running GNU/Linux. But, I wonder why Samsung and others haven't bothered to "officially" offer it?

Because there's no software vendor that is both willing and able to put the money into polishing, marketing, and supporting a "GNU/Linux" style operating system the way Microsoft is doing with Windows 8/RT or Google is with Android/ChromeOS, and hardware vendors want to stick to their core competency rather than trying to software developmenet, support, and marketing organizations, so "GNU/Linux" type of operating systems, when they are available preinstalled at all, are generally niche items either from smaller vendors or targetted to specialized market and not the mass consumer market.
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 09:51 · Score: 0

I can already get a laptop with Win7 for $249; I'm sure that soon I'll be able to get one with Win8. So for a present Win7 user, I don't see this as very appealing since their software won't run on it...
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by godrik · 2012-10-25 10:15 · Score: 1

You realize the chromebook is made by samsung? The only difference is that they installed chromeOS and not debian.
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 11:54 · Score: 0

In the early days of netbooks, most of them came with Linux. The story I heard about this is that it didn't sell as well as XP. It would not surprise me if OEMs are still afraid of Linux for this reason.
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by Chrisq · 2012-10-25 19:59 · Score: 3, Funny

Because no one but nerds actually want a Chromebopk.
I'd like any kind of bopk
Re:Why haven't OEMs caught on? by Chrisq · 2012-10-25 20:00 · Score: 1

I can already get a laptop with Win7 for $249; I'm sure that soon I'll be able to get one with Win8. So for a present Win7 user, I don't see this as very appealing since their software won't run on it...
You might change your mind when you've tried Win8

News??? by Jmc23 · 2012-10-25 07:56 · Score: 4, Funny

All this guy did was follow somebody elses directions.

Keep those quality stories coming Timothy.

--
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.

Re:News??? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 08:03 · Score: 0

Seriously. WTF?!?!? When do I get my own story about supposed ly porting coffee to a teapot using These instructions?
Re:News??? by WankersRevenge · 2012-10-25 09:01 · Score: 4, Funny

News? Of course this is news. Someone out there actually RTFM. Personally, I'm surprised this isn't the story of the decade.

Re:Over 10 mins and no first post by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 07:57 · Score: 1

I think adding either of those to anything is like multiplying by zero

This is what it takes to get in the news? by CyberKnet · 2012-10-25 07:58 · Score: 4, Insightful

Step 1. Buy a Chromebook
Step 2. Use ChromeOS for half a day.
Step 3. Follows instructions you got from SOMEONE ELSE (a Google-employed developer, at that) on how to load openSUSE onto a Chromebook.
Step 4. Enjoy being on slashdot front page getting credit for what someone else told you how to do.

Geez.

--
Video meliora proboque deteriora sequor - Ovidius

Re:This is what it takes to get in the news? by Manfre · 2012-10-25 08:06 · Score: 0

I bet your the type of person who makes outlandish claims like "Coloring a color by numbers pictures is not art worthy of hanging in the Met".
Re:This is what it takes to get in the news? by JoosepN · 2012-10-25 08:11 · Score: 1

No "Step n. Profit!" ? Who'd follow those steps without it?

Geez.

Ran it on my $189 eeePc 3 years ago by Andy+Prough · 2012-10-25 08:04 · Score: 4, Funny

Cold-start to reading Slashdot in 12 seconds flat with KDE Plasma Netbook. Because I could, that's why.

Re:Ran it on my $189 eeePc 3 years ago by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 09:03 · Score: 0

You sir have won... ONE INTERNET!
And now this is to satisfy the absolutely lame lameness filter. I guess that's where the name comes from...
And the captcha is "policed". How cute.
Re:Ran it on my $189 eeePc 3 years ago by kakaburra · 2012-10-25 18:56 · Score: 1

Ran it on my $189 eeePc 3 years ago
Geez.. do you have a time machine??
Re:Ran it on my $189 eeePc 3 years ago by Andy+Prough · 2012-10-26 15:43 · Score: 1

Geez.. do you have a time machine??
Nope - believe it or not, there was such a thing as openSUSE three years ago. Didn't need a time machine.

Re:Over 10 mins and no first post by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 08:05 · Score: 1, Funny

Biden, is that you?

Re:Over 10 mins and no first post by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 08:07 · Score: 0

It's compounded on sites like NetworkWorld who incessantly place links to their own articles and stories in the blog with cryptic links that should point to a company, but instead point to an article talking about said company.

Re:Shocking! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 08:19 · Score: 5, Informative

No, the Chromebook lets you turn it off. Unlike Windows ARM tablets.

Man this place is full of Microsoft shills these days.

Developer get's girlfriend wet on $249 Chromebook by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 08:21 · Score: 0

Now that would be world class unique news.

Re:Impressive. by OrangeTide · 2012-10-25 08:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

Try installing Windows XP on your Window RT device.

--
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire

citation required by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 08:29 · Score: 1

"...exact same UEFI secure boot..."

Not really the same at all. And many other ARM Chromebooks are using u-boot, not UEFI.

Re:Impressive. by nurb432 · 2012-10-25 08:30 · Score: 1

I think that was his point. It wont be so common place with upcoming hardware, so this may be one of the last 'modern' devices.

( no, we arent there yet, it was just his prediction as we are going that way.. slowly... )

--
---- Booth was a patriot ----

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these things! by jfdavis668 · 2012-10-25 08:35 · Score: 0

Just imagine!

Re:Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these things! by Required+Snark · 2012-10-25 08:38 · Score: 1

No, I will not.

--
Why is Snark Required?
Re:Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these things! by viperidaenz · 2012-10-25 10:15 · Score: 1

Not even with Natalie Portman in hot grits?

Breaking News by wonkey_monkey · 2012-10-25 09:07 · Score: 0

Computer runs Operating System. Full report at 11:00. Weather at 11:01.

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.

Re:Breaking News by flatt · 2012-10-25 11:30 · Score: 1

Joking aside, how sad is it that it is now newsworthy that someone was able to successfully install an operating system of their choice onto a device that they own?
I weep for the future.

Re:Why? by wonkey_monkey · 2012-10-25 09:07 · Score: 1

It fucking works fine for me.

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.

citation required -- yourself. by DragonWriter · 2012-10-25 09:29 · Score: 1

"...exact same UEFI secure boot..." Not really the same at all. And many other ARM Chromebooks are using u-boot, not UEFI.

There are only 2 models of ARM Chromebook, both from Samsung, and they differ only in the presence of 3G on the more expensive one, while the less-expensive one is WiFi-only. There are a few models of x86 Chromebooks that have been on the market (though, IIRC, only the Samsung Series 5 550 is still in production.)

Re:Shocking! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-25 09:38 · Score: 0

s/Microsoft shills/idiots/

I'm sure there are many times more UEFI Macs out there nowadays than UEFI PCs.

Great work by aaaaaaargh! · 2012-10-25 09:51 · Score: 1

With a decent Linux distro on it, this certainly becomes more interesting. Now give it a non-glare screen and longer battery life and I'll buy it. :-)

Re:Great work by viperidaenz · 2012-10-25 10:16 · Score: 1

... and then it won't be $249 anymore.

Re:Impressive. by OrangeTide · 2012-10-25 10:28 · Score: 1

an Linux is the outlier is my point.

--
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire

Nice! by MetalliQaZ · 2012-10-25 11:59 · Score: 2

Suddenly I care about the Chromebook!

--
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"

Re:Over 10 mins and no first post by cdwillis · 2012-10-25 14:14 · Score: 1, Offtopic

Comments like this are why I wish I could collapse comments here on Slashdot. Not only does this post contribute nothing, there are six (as of now) posts below it that I need to scroll past to see any decent comments.

Re:One small step - and that's all by Chrisq · 2012-10-25 20:05 · Score: 1

The photo shows a text console. if that's all it will do, it's worthless.

?! Computers where worthless before the Xerox star?

Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-10-26 01:18 · Score: 0

It fucking me works fine.

Wait, what?

Re:One small step - and that's all by Arker · 2012-10-26 01:34 · Score: 1

Err, wow. You are truly a technical illiterate. Have a good day.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.

Slashdot Mirror

Developer Gets OpenSUSE Running On $249 Google Chromebook

81 comments