▲ 134 ▼ Play Store blocks AuroraStore, hurting GrapheneOS users (gitlab.com) submitted 1 month ago by cm0002@toast.ooo to c/opensource@programming.dev 32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] BrickEater@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (3 children) AuroraStore is working fine on my lineageOS phone permalink fedilink source hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] gankouskhan@bookwyr.me 3 points 1 month ago (2 children) The article didn't even mention graphene. The user has a fairphone. It's also only impacting anon users it seems. So just like its working for you it does on graphene too. It does not work for anyone if they are using an anon account (according to the link). Not even sure why they said graphene. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BrickEater@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (1 child) Anon account? I never signed into aurora so I'd assume mines anon as well? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] gankouskhan@bookwyr.me 1 point 1 month ago It's just what the article said. I do not use Google play services or its alternative implementations. There is nothing blocking graphene anymore than any other ROM on this specific issue. If anything graphene is one or the only roms that has an option to use the sandbox Google play. tl;dr my original response was made for one reason, to respond to your statement with what the article said and some flavor text around that. The title to this thread was not only misleading, but a full on red herring. The OP the article did not even say graphene once. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] gankouskhan@bookwyr.me 3 points 1 month ago (2 children) The article didn't even mention graphene. The user has a fairphone. It's also only impacting anon users it seems. So just like its working for you it does on graphene too. It does not work for anyone if they are using an anon account (according to the link). Not even sure why they said graphene. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BrickEater@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (1 child) Anon account? I never signed into aurora so I'd assume mines anon as well? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] gankouskhan@bookwyr.me 1 point 1 month ago It's just what the article said. I do not use Google play services or its alternative implementations. There is nothing blocking graphene anymore than any other ROM on this specific issue. If anything graphene is one or the only roms that has an option to use the sandbox Google play. tl;dr my original response was made for one reason, to respond to your statement with what the article said and some flavor text around that. The title to this thread was not only misleading, but a full on red herring. The OP the article did not even say graphene once. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BrickEater@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (1 child) Anon account? I never signed into aurora so I'd assume mines anon as well? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] gankouskhan@bookwyr.me 1 point 1 month ago It's just what the article said. I do not use Google play services or its alternative implementations. There is nothing blocking graphene anymore than any other ROM on this specific issue. If anything graphene is one or the only roms that has an option to use the sandbox Google play. tl;dr my original response was made for one reason, to respond to your statement with what the article said and some flavor text around that. The title to this thread was not only misleading, but a full on red herring. The OP the article did not even say graphene once. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] gankouskhan@bookwyr.me 1 point 1 month ago It's just what the article said. I do not use Google play services or its alternative implementations. There is nothing blocking graphene anymore than any other ROM on this specific issue. If anything graphene is one or the only roms that has an option to use the sandbox Google play. tl;dr my original response was made for one reason, to respond to your statement with what the article said and some flavor text around that. The title to this thread was not only misleading, but a full on red herring. The OP the article did not even say graphene once. permalink fedilink source parent