The LineageOS project has released version 23 of their AOSP-based Android variant. LineageOS 23 is based on the initial release of Android 16 – so not the QPR1 release that came later – because Google has not made the source code for that release available yet. Like other, similar projects, LineageOS also suffers from Google’s recent further lockdown of Android; not only do they not have access to Android 16 QPR1’s source code, they also can’t follow along with the latest security patches for Android due to changes Google made to the patch release process, and without the device trees for Pixel devices, Pixels are now no longer supported any better than other Android devices.
LineageOS 23 brings many of the same features Android 16 brought, and comes with updated versions of LineageOS’ own camera application and music player, as well as a new TV launcher. They’ve also worked hard to make it much easier to run LineageOS in QEMU, they’ve improved support for running mainline kernels, they’ve made it easier to merge security fixes and updates for various kernel versions, and much more.
Update instructions can be found on the devices page, and specifically note that if you’re using an unofficial LineageOS build, you’ll need to perform the original installation again. With LineageOS being the Debian of the Android world, you can expect a ton of these unofficial versions to pop up over the coming months for devices LineageOS does not officially support.
@Thom, this is great and all. We really need the open source “lineage” of Android continue,.
That being said, I would expect future versions of Android being ever more locked down. The dreaded “regulatory capture” is already here:
https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/10/13/governor-newsom-signs-bills-to-further-strengthen-californias-leadership-in-protecting-children-online/
In the name of “protecting children”, device manufacturers are now forced to collect age information, verify them, and provide these as a system API to apps.
They will of course grudgingly comply, while the less resourced competition will be pushed out.
(There are no exceptions in the law for open source or smaller companies. If you sell a device with an OS that can install apps, you have to do age verification).
“But it is only California?”
Yes, but they are trend setters.
Worse, this opens the floodgates to actual “slippery slope”. (“Please also verify the user does X, Y and Z”)
You want so skip online account creation? Sorry that is (almost) mandated by law now.
Great news for those who can afford to still use it. I had to say good-bye to Lineage when they stopped supporting phones that had entered the ~150€ used price range (e.g. at the moment Galaxy S20 FE – still a perfectly capable phone of which enough exist that are in mint or only slightly used condition). I know enough people who also gave up on Lineage, and so gave up on running anything even remotely community-supported and free/open. Sad but true.
sixtyfive,
Yeah, things aren’t great.
I use LineageOS, but I wish it were easier and had better compatibility too. Linux works great on x86 desktops where distros can support thousands of desktops with a standard distro. But on ARM phones every OS project needs a custom firmware for every phone, which scales terribly and results in a patchwork of support for specific devices only. There were some annoying hoops just to install LineageOS on my oneplus phone. Bring-your-own-OS may even be getting harder over time as restrictions grow. Nothing supports mainline linux, everything requires a dev to reverse engineer each phone and then we’re often stuck on the manufacturer for kernel updates. I wish I could vote with my wallet for something that doesn’t suck, but even fairphones have bad carrier support in the US. ATT for example is known to block models that they haven’t approved.
https://www.kimovil.com/en/frequency-checker/US/fairphone-5
Alas fairphone isn’t on ATT’s list of certified devices, and some customers report issues.
https://www.att.com/scmsassets/support/wireless/devices-working-on-att-network.pdf
To make things more complicated for consumers, there are other pragmatic issues like coverage and price. We had to drop tmobile over coverage issues in rural areas.
Ultimately I intend to keep using alt OS on a supported phone for as long as I can. I want my next phone to run graphene, since it has features I like. But we’re in a bad situation on mobile and I am afraid that google adding more restrictions to remove open sideloading on certified devices is just going to have a detrimental impact on the viability of FOSS & the app ecosystem, even on forks that don’t take away owner installation rights.
Disclaimer: I work with the folks who run JMP ( https://www.osnews.com/story/139475/jmp-this-weeks-sponsor/ ).
I’ve moved to using phone numbers that aren’t tied to mobile service on top of a roaming data-only mobile connection so I don’t have to care whether my device is supported by those arbitrary rules. For example, my OnePlus 6 isn’t on AT&T’s list for VoLTE last I checked but I can make and receive phone calls just fine using my data-only eSIM (that roams on AT&T most of the time, but can also roam on other networks). I think the best path forward for those who want to run more open mobile operating systems is to detach their numbers from their devices so the device can be anything with an Internet connection.
gnafuthegreat,
Well, it never occurred to me that a carrier might have different activation rules for data plans, I don’t know how to definitively find out without trial and error. It’s frustrating that carriers do these things in the first place.
I did look at JMP back then but the FAQ said (and still says) it’s not for business, which was my main interest for the service. I currently only have a 5GB plan on my phone, which is severely throttled to the point of being unusable after that. If I run out of data it’s not usually a big deal because calls are unlimited and most applications can wait till I get to WIFI. However in a scenario where I needed data for calls, I’d probably need to upgrade the plan to make sure I don’t run out of data.
Are you able to call emergency service on a data only plan? I ask because of this note on the website:
https://jmp.chat/?ref=osnews
The note about business usage primarily relates to messaging and specifically the prohibition of automated messaging. If you’re talking about using a JMP number for conducting business over voice calls, that should be fine. Or human responses to SMS sent to you in a business context is fine. It’s things like automated responses or spam that is against the policy. But giving someone your number and saying, “Text me if you want a quote,” and then responding to their text with a quote is probably fine.
Emergency calls don’t use your cell plan, which is why you’ll see “emergency services only” or the like when you’re out of range of your carrier or you have a phone without a SIM inserted. Any cell phone should be able to dial 911 without an active cell plan.
gnafuthegreat,
Yeah, I absolutely hate unsolicited marketing calls and messages. Automation does have a lot of applications beyond unsolicited marketing, like automatically notifying staff and clients about events related to services (ie something’s down, disk reaching capacity, intrusion detection, etc). Unfortunately my experience is that consumer SMS providers are not keen to provide service as soon as you mention automation.
I already have a telephony service going back decades. But there’s been massive consolidation and they were bought out twice, and in the process I lost a critical feature of being able to ring multiple lines at the same time (without an additional PBX). I opened a support ticket and they confirmed that the feature is broken and there were no plans to repair it…ugh! Anyway I don’t mean to drag us so far off topic, haha.
Does this limit the subscriber information that the 911 operator gets like home address, and the ability to call back? I don’t know how any of it works. My current provider supports e911, I suppose this information becomes less useful when you’re traveling away from home.
Alfman,
This should not even be an issue at all. However the government refuses to punish bad actors, and the phone carriers actually benefit from it.
Basically as soon as you receive a spam SMS, you should be able to “report” the message. And if the carrier received a certain threshold (absolute and/or ratio) they should notify FCC. And FCC could take significant punitive action.
And if the original sender is unknown, they should not be allowed in the system at all. All SMS should be traceable to origin.
But they can buy a “burner” phone
Yes they can. And yes it is still legal. However if you are running any sizable SPAM operation they will locate you. After all you will still be connected to a cell tower (or three, for triangulation).
Why doesn’t this happen
Because frankly the don’t care enough about SMS spam, or actually want to keep it.
sixtyfive, on the first link, they literally have a whole section called “Legacy Devices”, which addresses this question.
The short answer is, you need a newer kernel or someone has to backport eBPF.
We probably should start paying for this kind of work.