on
Fork of DivestOS
There is a need for privacy forward mobile OS alternatives for people who cannot use GrapheneOS
Android Alternative Distributions
EDIT:
I have changed the title to specify the slim flavor as @phnx points out the regular flavor is pre-rooted which would not meet PG criteria.
Github
Sounds like a non-starter to me.
They moved from GitHub to their Gitea.
They requiring creating an account to see the source code.
Very weird.
The AXP.OS public organisation contains content which is available without any registration.
All other content can be found in the regular AXP.OS organisation after logging in first.
They (and others) have also still been unable to match the kernel patching work DivestOS did.
Due to several open questions the builds will not receive any kernel related patches for January.
Fair enough. I canât tell if thats true for the slim flavor as well.
It doesnât appear to be, but it gives a poor impression of their attitude towards security in general.
I agree. Although I think its worth at least discussing considering the utter lack of alternatives but, signs donât look great so far.
Why isnât the main repo public? source
On codeberg clearly this was a choice of developper which is very odd and doesnât inspire confidence. hope this is a genuine error.
Iâm gonna be extremely biased but DivestOS has a really special place in my heart. In my opinion this operating system kinda failed to be documentative as DivestOS. DivestOS openly documents its flaws and since this is a fork, they do have the old DivestOSâs FAQ, but despite that I find their own addition kinda meh, not bad but not good either. DivestOSâs main quote sums it up quite nicely âTake back (some) control of your deviceâ which reflect quite nicely of the project being doing the best with limitation of your device. However this operating system has this on the main page " The main goal of this project is to strive for a balance between a privacy and security-oriented yet usable Operating System - and last but not least ⌠even for advanced* users. i.e. including full control over your own device - if desired". I find this to be a very marketing phrase and IMO I donât quite like it.
As others have mentioned having root by default on images really isnât great. One of the great benefit of DivestOS is their kernel CVE Patcher and it seems like they wonât be using that either
In my personal opinion, while I donât agree entirely with using things like Treble/GKI because it doesnât really work with kernel hardening and CVE patcher (?, if Iâm wrong please correct me on this). I think a spiritual successor of DivestOS would be better off being based on a recent version of GrapheneOS instead (referring to things in this thread GrapheneOS: "Now that DivestOS is discontinued, it's possible âŚ" - GrapheneOS Mastodon) and incorporating harm reduction feature like the kernel CVE patcher from DivestOS
thanks for bringing this up.
here some statements from my site and sorry already for the non-clickable links but I am not allowed to post more than 2 links.
They requiring creating an account to see the source code.
it was (and is) always possible to see all sources at https://github.com/AXP-OS (which is also linked in the very first post here).
the login requirement was made during the transition phase to Gitea + Codeberg and is now (2025-02-13) limited to just a few proprietary repos (which will be moved to a specific org (https://codeberg.org/org/AXP-OS_limited) and are relevant for reproducible builds ONLY.
If you do not plan to make a reproducible build or want to monitor/verify what the deblobber removes/changes within the vendor repos simply skip / ignore that part.
In any case you can build AXP.OS without these repos. You just need to provide the vendor repos on your own or just use the normal AXP.OS manifest (hint: almost no one provides vendor repos for obvious reasons and the reason why github/gitlab muppets exists).
As an example here the AXP.OS manifest (https://github.com/AXP-OS/manifest/blob/b097d7879912722be03fb3d3fb773520c62bff02/axp.xml) for A13 (the vendor/ paths in there).
They (and others) have also still been unable to match the kernel patching work DivestOS did.
not exactly. while it is not finished yet (around 60% atm) it will come. I am still in contact with Tad and so can get answers to my questions if any.
The process itself is was far away from straight forward and is mainly a manual one. The key here (for me) is automating whole parts of it as I cannot work full-time on AXP.OS. I almost did the last 4 weeks though to get things to the current state but I think⌠I need to start earning money again as well 
So due to the new automation layer the time bringing up the kernel patching solution takes longer (just doing everything manually as Tad did would work right now already).
Once automation is done things can run on a scheduled base and so free up time dramatically.
Fair enough. I canât tell if thats true for the slim flavor as well.
The Slim flavor is almost DivestOS. So if you do not like the Regular flavor choose the Slim one. Check out the comparison here:
Features ¡ AXP-OS/build Wiki ¡ GitHub and here: AOSâFlavors ¡ AXP-OS/build Wiki ¡ GitHub
Why isnât the main repo public?
as stated above it is and always was (github). Also mentioned above the mirror org is accessible without any registration since today. I hoped to finish the migration sooner so the FAQ was misleading and has been updated today as well (which I cannot sync atm to the website due to the current Codeberg DDoS attack (https://status.codeberg.org/status/codeberg).
and since this is a fork, they do have the old DivestOSâs FAQ
keep in mind that even though AXP.OS exists since 2023 the hard âover and outâ cut happened from one day to the other (and all this a day before Christmas ) and is just a âfew daysâ ago. I am not sure what people expect these days for projects like this. I mean yes if there were 20 contributors and all doing that not just in their free time ⌠yea then I would expect having all this done in a few days, too.
In order to have at least the old FAQ, Known issues and such I had added a copy of these and clearly stated that this will be re-worked asap.
The priorities of the project are currently enabling the same security and privacy benefits DivestOS had. Besides that the âSlimâ flavor has been made as I understand that not all care much about full data backups or other features the Regular flavor comes with.
I find this to be a very marketing phrase and IMO I donât quite like it.
I am not good in marketing but that was best describing it shortly. While the Slim flavor is almost DivestOS the AXP.OS project offers more. If you donât care about (full) backups or want to have the DivestOS - alike feeling simply choose the Slim one.
I hope that clarifies some points but in any case I am always open for suggestions, ofc there is an issue tracker (https://code.binbash.rocks/AXP.OS-public/issue-tracker/issues) to add ideas and suggestions as well.
Thanks a lot for developing this OS, while the migration to codeberg and your own Gitea instance is in progress, I couldnât find where exactly the source for the website as I found dead links like AOSmium on browser page. Can it be documented on FAQ â The AXP.OS Project ?
I was just mentioning using the old DivestOS FAQ just in case someone try to gotcha me with it, but yeah I donât expect a new FAQ especially for a new project
Anywho good luck on the project
I found dead links like AOSmium on browser page
actually those are not âdeadâ links but they require to login first to see them but yes you are totally right that this should point to the public release repo instead! will be fixed asap and thx for reporting!
Anywho good luck on the project
thx
Good to know. The (now-changed) FAQ didnât mention this clearly and everything is now clearer.
I am not sure I understand. Why are those proprietary blobs needed ? Are they from OEMs?
All devices need them to function.
Some systems have a tool to download the factory images and extract out what they need, others do it mostly manually and put the blobs in private/secret git repos to avoid potential DMCA.
DMCA really ruins everything.
Is this also the case with GrapheneOS ?
@Encounter5729
yes of course:
@steadfasterX really appreciate you weighing in!
In terms of the PG criteria for Android Alternative Distributions would you say the slim flavor meets those?
My assumption based on this comment, is that it would since DivestOS did when it was active.
all devices which are capable (not all are) of bootloader re-locking are supported with a custom AVB-key (Slim + Regular)
the focus is still on supporting older devices mainly. so actively porting all devices to a later Major Release is out of scope. As soon as AXP.OS supports a new Major Release devices which support that new release will be migrated though (as it was with DivestOS).
this depends on the definition of âreleaseâ. when the Google release date is meant (which I assume) then it might differ between the Android versions AXP.OS supports.
as soon as there is a backported sec patch available a build will be done though.
