Loading replies...
×
Incidentally, a friend with an old Samsung mentions their Samsung has this second option for nav gestures, where the three standard nav bar buttons are replaced with three swipe-up-from-bottom areas. For the tablet environment, that is actually really nice! I would enable that if I could! It is apparently 100% Samsung exclusive and also, on the newer Samsungs it's been removed.
*Gosh*, I wish Android were actually open source.
The Android evil-genie promise: You may have an open source phone OS. But if you actually compile it from source yourself, you will be banned from running any software. Or at least, they'll try as hard as they can to ban you from running software. Also, if you decide you want to build or even *download* the source, you're going to need to purchase a dedicated 1 TB SSD to check out the repo, and also download our forked version of git to check it out with
Note: You may argue I'm being unfair to Android by saying you need a dedicated 1TB drive to check out the source tree with, when in fact, the AOSP instructions https://source.android.com/docs/setup/start/requirements say only *400 GB* is required to check out and build the repo. However IMO, for any serious project you'll eventually want 2 live checkouts, in case you want to compare 2 branches side by side. Also you'll need space for Android Studio, which on every computer I've ever installed it on took up "all the space I had"
Set up for AOSP development (9.0 or later)  |  Android Open Source Project

Android Open Source Project
The most frustrating thing about these problems I'm having is they ultimately come down to "Android lets userland have *some* freedom, but you're not allowed to replace the nav bar". & it's infuriating because *Android used to allow this*. There used to be an entire ecosystem of "hide nav bar then add a custom nav bar replacement/gesture system". Around Android 10 Google summarily blocked this. And now I'm maybe gonna return a perfectly good tablet just because Lenovo botched their navbar tweaks
(Also, for the record, the feature they killed that allowed navbars to exist was *also* the same feature that would have allowed me to escape my most hated thing about modern phones: Rounded screen corners. Used to you could shrink the screen and add black bars at the edges, which would have allowed me to shrink the screen past the curves and have what I want, have a rectangular screen. Google finds this entirely unacceptable.)
(I *think* the reason Google did this is because they realized that if people were able to customize or replace the nav bar, they might wind up disabling Google Assistant or— horror of horrors!— replacing Google Assistant with an alternative made by a competitor. That had to be stopped, so the alt-navbar economy had to be executed, and the way they did this was killing `wm overscan`, so this meant also taking away my ability to hack my screen to be rectangular. Infuriating.)

I'm being informed my Google conspiracy theory makes no sense because Android allows you to replace Google Assistant with an alternate Assistant by simply installing one. Except wait if that's the case, why does Google make it so hard to turn Assistant *off*?!

Wondering if I should make a "Null Assistant" that when invoked does nothing but immediately quit, then enable it, so I can stop being bothered by the various offers to re-enable Assistant that Google litters around the OS like land mines

@mcc huh, but you _can_ just select another assistant app right? I've had an assistant app that treated this long press as a shortcut for years, used it to open the notification drawer so you don't have to swipe up from the top of the screen

@mcc I mean, I have assistant disabled as much as I can on my phone anyway.

But as much as I would love to fix the android ecosystem too, T&M is already way more than I can do solo...

@azonenberg Me too, but WOW does Google make it difficult.

And even if I disable it, I can't remove the "activate assistant" button (which does nothing but pop up an offer to activate Assistant) from my home screen, and I can't stop any accidentally-too-long presses on the home screen from activating an offer to activate Assistant.

@mcc Yeah I know its a huge pain.

At least I have firefox installed so I can properly adblock...

@azonenberg
Try a “VPN” blocker (unless you need to use a regular VPN), like Tracker Control or Rethink DNS.

@mcc

@mcc I do not want to speak to my computers. I do not want them speaking to me except in the single, narrow case of me using voice navigation on the infrequent occasions that I'm the sole occupant of a car going somewhere I've never been before.

This is apparently difficult for companies to understand.

@azonenberg @mcc So much this. I want lights when my hands are full in one specific instance, and if they're actually really good at it, to add things to my shopping list. Otherwise, fuck offffff
@aredridel @azonenberg @mcc it’s funny; one grows up watching Star Trek fully anticipating a future where one mostly interacts with one’s computers by voice, but the future arrives and I just don’t want to. And it’s not about how well it works, it can be perfect but I *fundamentally* don’t want to.

@StrangeNoises @aredridel @mcc It's a low bandwidth, error prone, imprecise, broadcast medium.

Compared to typing or clicking exactly what I mean.

@azonenberg @StrangeNoises @mcc Yeah!

honestly I thought Star Trek was mostly voice because it works better on standard def TV :P

@azonenberg @mcc …and in the kitchen to set a timer…
@ErikJonker @azonenberg That's what the microwave's for!
@azonenberg @mcc If people wanted conversational interfaces the command line would have widespread adoption, it wouldn’t be limited to specialists
@mcc @azonenberg alternative home screen? Such as Nova?

@falken @azonenberg I'm sorry, that was a typo, I meant lock screen.

EDIT: Also there actually is a way to disable longpress-on-home activating Assistant, and I've activated it; I just forgot because I only learned about it like two weeks ago. :P Disabling the lock screen button is not an option however, at least not on Sony.

@mcc @azonenberg somehow my pixel 6a doesn't do this. Must have found an option!
@mcc but you can change the assistant app in the "default app" settings
@mcc i built android on a single core laptop like 10 years ago
i think i left it running for around a month and it managed to complete a system image
@mcc no you don't need studio
@mcc Also you need 64gb of ram or your reconfigures will take 15min. Every. Goddamn. Time.
@aa Oh no :(
@mcc Soong build system my hatred

@aa in my experience whether you need Studio depends on what you're doing. i've also found Studio, even if you don't run it as a GUI, to be the most convenient way to get checkouts of specific builds of gradle and all the other tools you need.

is there a different way of downloading/managing your toolchain when building AOSP/Lineage specifically, that you'd recommend?

@mcc the aosp source tree manages it all for you in my experience, just source build/envsetup.sh, set your ccache limit, and you're good to go

@aa huh, so the idea is that it builds it's own tools before it builds the OS?

That's interesting ,I wonder what it uses as a bootstrap.

@mcc the bootstrap is prebuilt clang from some google git repo
@mcc part of the reason the tree is so big is because they have entire toolchains checked in to git history
@aa by the way, the AOSP requirements claim to build it you need an "x86-64" machine. Does this imply building on ARM is unsupported/doesn't work?
@mcc no idea, every arm host I have would become a ball of flame even trying to build android
@aa Listen if you've ever successfully checked out AOSP even once you got further than me
@mcc I work on a lineageos port to the US Samsung Galaxy s9, I'm sending this from it rn (on an older build, my current builds don't boot yet)

i also work on a custom recovery for the pixel watch using an extremely minimal aosp 11 tree
@aa Okay. So significantly further than me then!
@mcc (they use it for the whole build iirc since from what I remember llvm takes a decade to compile)
@aa llvm, I have built. Many more times than I would like to have built it. I think allowing people to avoid building LLVM is desirable.

@mcc doesn't git workspaces let you see multiple versions in separate directories while only having a single .git? should save space

*edit: it's git worktree, not workspace*

@phairupegiont By "git workspace" do you mean the third party tool I find on github?

At any rate, it won't help you because, as mentioned, you don't check out AOSP with git. Google's meta-git would have to specially support the feature to which you refer, and because of how it works I suspect it would struggle to do this.

Git - git-worktree Documentation

@enkiusz @mcc yeah, I was thinking of git worktree, but brain
@phairupegiont @enkiusz Ah, I see. Yeah, worktree would be a good fix to this, but it's *only* going to be an option if Google's complicated git wrapper supports worktrees. But also even if it does it will only help you so much on the disk space front, because (according to the AOSP requirements page) only 150 GB of the 400 GB is taken up by the repo itself, the other 250 GB is purely to perform the build.
@mcc Entirely fair. Back when I last worked on Android (in the good old days when clean builds only took 15-20 minutes on a pretty hefty workstation), I usually kept three trees around. One just to have a local up-to-date tip-of-tree clean build, one for whatever main project I was working on, and one for if I needed to stop and chase some urgent bug. Sometimes a fourth during releases for a local build of the current release branch.
@mcc I've never been able to bring myself to do Android app development outside of the OS tree. The various iterations of the SDK, Android Studio, etc have always been utter misery.
@mcc they do say all software source code ends up looking like the company that built it.
Git - git-worktree Documentation

@mcc it’s pretty telling that it’s easier to patch the bytecode in the system binaries than it is to engage with any of the source code directly.

@mcc ...did they actually fork git?

I mean, I absolutely could believe they did, just confirming. O_o

@gourd TECHNICALLY, they didn't fork it, they just wrote a wrapper script to git that changes git's behavior substantially and is thus in practice required to actually check AOSP out.
@gourd But no, I was not on any detail joking, just simplifying details a little

@mcc God, I've been calling AOSP a sick joke for years and that one still takes me aback.

Community android builds basically only exist out of heroic effort to make anything useful out of it, I swear.

@gourd Basically, Google doesn't think git submodules are good enough, so they invented their own kind of git submodule and wrote a special tool to layer it atop the basic git model. To be fair basically everyone I've ever spoken to about git believes that git submodules are not good enough, but I have yet to have it conclusively demonstrated to me that Google's cure is better than the disease