GrapheneOS (@GrapheneOS@grapheneos.social)
grapheneos.social
@lunar_dust_463@mstdn.social We don't ban people from running the software they want to use and we don't spread misinformation about closed source software or otherwise. Not clear what you mean by libre compatible but an OS which doesn't support using the software you want to use doesn't sound like freedom. The whole point of sandboxed Google Play is that Google Play can be optionally installed as regular sandboxed apps with no special access at all. It already does work that way.

In the specified comment GrapheneOS explicitly stated that they have no opposition against non-free binaries and proprietary programs. Doesn’t Free software requires it to not host non free binaries? This is not even firmware

  • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
    0·
    1 month ago

    Is it really endorsement to offer the user upon initial setup to install it, along with fdroid?

    I’d say that’s just general compatibility, most users have at least one play store app they can’t just stop using, in my case that would be the banking apps I need to be able to pay online.

      • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
        0·
        1 month ago

        Is that a recent change? I somewhat distinctly remember being offered Fdroid during the initial setup as well.

        • paradox2011@lemmy.ml
          0·
          1 month ago

          I’ve been using GrapheneOS for about a year and I’ve never seen F-Droid bundled in their installer or app store. They’ve been vocally against F-Droid for quite some time. Other more FOSS focused projects bundle F-Droid.

          • refalo@programming.dev
            0·
            1 month ago

            I don’t think it’s about FOSS-ness as to why they don’t like F-Droid, but security and privacy. They don’t want to give up signing keys and compilation duties to F-Droid, and I don’t blame them. Even with reproducible builds, almost nobody is publicly verifying projects that claim to have them (Signal anyone?).