It’s true some things are harder to do in the container configuration; it’s easier installed as an OS, especially integrations like Z-Wave, ZigBee, RTSP, Eufy, ESP, and so on. All of these require running other software, and in containers it’s a fair bit of fussing with port and host OS device connections.
I’ve always run it in a container, without issue. It works fine, but I’m comfortable with the command line and LXC. That said, flashing an ESP hardware device and getting it connected to HA running in a container has so far defeated me, because I have to give access to the device in the configuration of the container before I run it, but the device flashing process itself is time limited and expects a process to be waiting on it when it is connected. It’s a chicken/egg problem I haven’t yet figured out which wouldn’t be a problem if I were running the HA OS.
HA isn’t the only software that just works better when it controls the while OS. Kodi is another that encourages users heavily to running it as an OS.
Regardless, it runs fine via
podman pull ghcr.io/home-assistant/home-assistant: latestand there’s a package in AUR that wraps the container up with a systemd service - it’s as close to a bare package install as you’re likely to get.
What’s a little funny to me is that, despite that I’ve been running HA in a container for the past 4 years, I’m working towards getting a dedicated device and running HA OS on it. If we ever move out of this house, I’m not going to spend weeks going around replacing all of the hardware - smart sockets, lights, garage door opener, security, etc etc - with dumb devices; and for any of that to be worth anything, it’s going to need a controller configured for it, which means, I’m planning on selling the HA server device with the house. For that case, I don’t want anything but HA running on that device, and for that, it’d just be easier and smoother to run HAOS.
My advice is to run HA in a container until you are sure that’s the direction you want to go, but not for so long that it’s going to be a PITA to migrate to a dedicated server. But - hey, just IMHO - plan on running HAOS. If I knew then what I know now, that’s what I would have done.
You should ask this to your favourite distro packagers, not to the home assistant developers.
In any case, it is such a mess of dependencies due to load of optional packages, very active development, that continuously break dependencies on the package repo.
What advantage would bring have a most of the time obsolete distro specific repo? On a maintainer POV this is the typical use case for distro agnostic deployment, maybe flatpak, maybe docker.
You should ask this to your favourite distro packagers, not to the home assistant developers.
I disagree. The Home Assistant developers are the ones who chose to create an OS. They could have chosen to create distro packages instead, or at least software which is amenable to being packaged by distros.
obsolete
What does that mean in the context of Home Assistant?
It seems to me they chose to provide a platform that vastly simplifies the installation of their software and maintenance of its code from a debugging standpoint. This seems perfectly reasonable. This appears to bother a particular community who feel entitled enough to demand multiple developers cater to their distribution’s needs. Shit needs to stop.
This appears to bother a particular community who feel entitled enough to demand multiple developers cater to their distribution’s needs.
Your reading of the situation is wrong.
Honestly I really don’t think I am.
I’ve seen a number of topics over the last few weeks that are framed as this evil developer is doing a sinister thing…. And for what it’s worth I read the “clickbait” and then did my due diligence and followed the links / git responses etc and lo and behold every. single. issue. was stemming from that community.
We aren’t reddit. This isn’t 4chan. If your community is getting cut off because, frankly, it’s being unreasonable… don’t come here looking for a personal army.
this evil developer is doing a sinister thing
Nobody has said that here.
that community
I’ve no idea what community you’re referring to. Nobody here has demanded that any developers cater to their distribution’s needs.
If your community is getting cut off because, frankly, it’s being unreasonable… don’t come here looking for a personal army.
Again, I’ve no idea what community you’re referring to. Nobody has come here looking for a personal army.
Your characterisation of the commentary on this post seems like that of an overly. dramatic. teenager.
Strange- the very tone of this thread is suggesting that the HA developers choice in how they distribute their platform is “incorrect” by your assertions. Further you seem to disagree with explanations provided as to why those choices were likely made.
Dismissing those statements and observations do not make them incorrect. Nothing I stated is dramatic: it is an observation and a comment on an increasing trend popping up around several projects. This particular topic and your responses within it align with that trend. My closing statement was directed at that. You are welcome to not like it but resorting to insults is a bit childish.
the very tone of this thread is suggesting that the HA developers choice in how they distribute their platform is “incorrect”
Not incorrect, just poor engineering. Anti-social ultimately.
you seem to disagree with explanations provided as to why those choices were likely made
I can see only two disagreements in the whole post. Only one of those is about the reasons for creating an OS rather than distro packages. I have corrected a number of factual errors and errors in reasoning but those aren’t disagreements.
Dismissing those statements and observations do not make them incorrect.
Yes, my dismissing of them is not what makes them incorrect.
Nothing I stated is dramatic
LOL “this evil developer is doing a sinister thing”
It comes down to what are the developers willing or able to support.
For smaller teams they usually don’t want the responsibility of maintaining the package for distros, and HA developers have chosen to not support that option themselves. In their case I see it - what’s the benefit or incentive to them to maintain packages and the associated support costs or headaches. Containers mean they get a known state and don’t have to try to support unknown environments.
Some interested people can maintain the packages for their chosen distro - for instance I see one for Gentoo but it’s only up to 2024.6. It’s the first that came up in a search but there are likely more too supported by the community.
In my case, I also think that using HAOS on a dedicated box has led to a more stable experience as it’s not competing for resources on my other hosts, and attaching devices to it is much simpler. I think encouraging a solid base for people means a better experience overall when to be honest it’s hard to get started with it to begin with for many people.
Since HA depends on a lot of python packages, on external softwares and libraries it could not feasible to ensure that the versions packaged with the distribution will always be in line with those needed by HA
it could not feasible
I disagree.
Then go do it.
I’m not a Debian Developer and won’t become one: http://settrans.net/~rah/why-not-debian.html
Also, I’m not a Home Assistant user so I’ve no interest in contributing.
Then do if for your distribution then. It’s clearly not that difficult, you’ve all but explicitly stated as much.
Then do if for your distribution then.
I use Debian.
It’s clearly not that difficult, you’ve all but explicitly stated as much.
I have not said that, or anything like it.
Perhaps you missed the fact that I’m not a Home Assistant user and have no interest in contributing?
Well, good for you. Now let’s prove it
You first.
I installed it on Ubuntu server on my raspberry pi 4 and it took a couple months to fall over and become useless.
I’ve been running their OS since then and it has been absolutely rock solid. It’s been 5 or 6 years now, all I do is add more devices occasionally and update it when it occurs to me.
If you have a life and you don’t absolutely love tuning your OS for special purposes in ways that are already solved problems, the hass os image is the way to go.
Home Assistant has a lot of moving parts, all the add-ons and extra user stuff. So they provide a docker image with everything you need, they also provide a full appliance install for easy setup.
If you did all that as a package install, you would complain about all the dependancies and if you didnt install the right version of something Home Assistant might not work at all
all the add-ons and extra user stuff
You’re hand-waving the answer to my question :-) What add-ons and extra user stuff require Home Assistant to be an OS?
If you did all that as a package install, you would complain about all the dependancies and if you didnt install the right version of something Home Assistant might not work at all
That’s not how packages work. The packagers take care of all that. That’s the point.
Before I understood Docker, I used to have HA installed directly on bare metal side by side with other “desktop” apps.
To be able to access devices, HA needs many different OS-level configurations (users, startup, binding serial ports, and much more I don’t have a clue about). It was a giant mess. The bare OS configuration was polluted with HA configurations. Worse, on updating HA, not only did these configurations change, the installation of HA changed enough that every update would break HA and even the bare OS would break in some ways because of configuration conflicts.
Could this be managed properly through long term migration? Yeah, probably, but this is probably a ton of work, for which a purpose-built solution already exists: Docker. Between that and the extra layer of security afforded by dedicating an OS to HA (bare metal or virtualized), discouraging the installation of HA in a non-dedicated environment was a no brainer.
this is probably a ton of work, for which a purpose-built solution already exists: Docker
LOL Docker isn’t a “solution” to the pressure of good engineering.
Look into “install home assistant core” on https://www.home-assistant.io/installation/linux
That’s manual installation which is (a) not distro packages and (b) exactly what distro packages are created to avoid.
It is both.
Home Assistant created an OS for appliance like installations.
But there is also the docker images, repo packages (I know Arch Linux has it in the repo) and pip based packages too.
docker images
Is not distro packages.
Arch Linux
It’s not in Debian. There’s no Red Hat packages either. Or OpenSUSE. It’s not even in OpenWrt which would make the most sense. So it looks like no useful, practical distro packages.
pip
Is not distro packages.
A lot of software isn’t packaged for Debian. Especially complex ones and webapplications tend to be Docker containers or something like that. Home Assistant has a lot of Python dependencies which are a chore to maintain the Debian way. Same probably applies to some other distros. I mean it can be done, as Arch and NixOS show…
And you have Docker, you can install HA core in a Python virtual environment on any distro, or install Supervised, or the appliance (OS).
So there are many ways to install it. And I have the same complaint for other software. For example I’d like Nextcloud and a few other collaboration services to be available as distro packages. Sadly they aren’t available like that.
A lot of software isn’t packaged for Debian.
Yes, often projects which are engineered without distros in mind. Which is to say, engineered poorly.
Yeah, I don’t think I agree with you at all. Software development and operation are vastly different jobs. Packaging is yet a different story. Maintainers need different things than developers. Handling dependencies is a chore, and you need lots of them if your product speaks dozens of protocols and can interconnect with thousands of devices, each with their own quirks… All the people have something in mind. They already pay attention to deployment and support several methods. Sure it’s not the method you have in mind. But the world doesn’t specifically revolve around you. There are other factors at play. And sure. It’d be awesome if we solved software packaging, dependency hell, the supply chain of larger projects and everything. It’s just not easy. And reality has quite some limitations. It’s just… fighting reality doesn’t get you anywhere. Sometimes we have to make ends meet with imperfect solutions. Or you just live without a smart home. Or use a different software stack. I mean there is FHEM and some other projects.
And with that said, there is some merit to what you’re saying. Software should be designed with usage in mind. It’s just not easy and there are contradicting requirements. Either someone puts in all the effort to cater for your specific use-case… Or they don’t.
They already pay attention to deployment and support several methods. Sure it’s not the method you have in mind. But the world doesn’t specifically revolve around you.
It’s not my method. Writing software with distributions in mind is the standard in free software development.
It’s just not easy.
Indeed. That’s why many engineers don’t bother. Especially poor engineers.
yeah, you don’t listen. i’d say complaining is fine, generally in most circumstances. but it won’t get you anywhere in this case.
LOL
You don’t have to use HomeAssistant if you hate it so much.
You didn’t mention in your OP that it had to be debian distro packages. I just gave examples of HA being packaged in other ways than a complete OS.
I could have said: “If you want to run HA from packages, you need to install Arch!” But I didn’t. Chill out.
You didn’t mention in your OP that it had to be debian distro packages.
It doesn’t. WTF are you talking about?
