this post was submitted on 23 May 2025
86 points (95.7% liked)

homeassistant

14315 readers
257 users here now

Home Assistant is open source home automation that puts local control and privacy first. Powered by a worldwide community of tinkerers and DIY enthusiasts. Perfect to run on a Raspberry Pi or a local server. Available for free at home-assistant.io

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Shadow@lemmy.ca 41 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This seems reasonable to me?

If you're running it that way you still can, they're just not going to accept bug reports or have end user docs anymore. All the developer docs will still cover it.

It's an open source project and they need to focus their energy on known good configs.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It's reasonable for an engineering standpoint. Bummer for people who don't want to run HASSIOS or install HA on an already provisioned system without having to fuck with docker.

[–] traches@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Docker is so much easier to fuck with than python

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world -4 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Docker is the same thing as executing the runtime of the same program.

WITAF are you even talking about?

[–] traches@sh.itjust.works 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

From a fuckery standpoint? Docker is way easier, and it works the same way for everything.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world -4 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

It's literally the same thing as running the app from base repo. There is no "fuckery". The entrypoint of a container is the same as just running the python runtimes for any project. You have zero idea what you're talking about.

[–] traches@sh.itjust.works 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

No it’s not and yes I do you goober. How are dependencies handled in each scenario?

[–] sxan@midwest.social 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Home Assistant has so many moving parts, so I don't complain. I do wish containers would become first class citizens like the OS, because some stuff is just harder in containers. The only thing I can think of as to the "why" is because of how the OS project installs software, but that's an easily addressed problem so it must be something else.

Still, it's nice to know the container method is moving forward; I'm so done with installing specific OSes just to use some given piece of software.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I do wish containers would become first class citizens like the OS, because some stuff is just harder in containers.

Like, for instance, security and validation against a SBoM. And that's why this container shit needs.to.die . But, downvote and move on, and hope by the time you need it the machine that goes 'beep' by your hospital bed is built using methods better than "this will look great on my resume."

[–] chaospatterns@lemmy.world 5 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Containers can provide SBoMs too and in comparison to HA OS, which is what the comment was referring to, container and core give you better control over the application allowing for more security mechanisms. Comparing container vs core for security is interesting cause container gives you some security features for free like seccomp, cap drops, namespacing, etc. which you don't get for free with core.

I find the claim that core is more secure than a container because it has an SBoM as dubious, but maybe you're talking generally about containers vs distro package managers, which is a different point, but SBoM isn't the only thing that makes some secure/stable.

[–] Cyber@feddit.uk 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Gotta admit, it was a bit difficult to get my head around all the different installation types when I was a new user, so simplification is probably well over due

[–] TVA@thebrainbin.org 2 points 14 hours ago

They've done this once before and walked it back.

Out of that decision and the backlash came the metrics, so they'd be able to make informed decisions before depreciating something.

Last time, I used Core (IIRC, it wasn't even called Core back then) and was quite upset. Before they walked it back, I switched to the OS version and don't really regret it. If their metrics now tell them that core isn't worth supporting, it probably isn't, but I definitely understand being upset about it.

It definitely sucks that the system that's supposed to be about giving users freedom and options is removing some.

ETA: Backups also make this whole thing so much easier now. Back then, backing up and restoring core meant manually copying a bunch of files, but now, it's a completely different and easier experience.

[–] lemming741@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I jumped through all their hoops for a Supervised Debian 11 install. It was a massive pain in the ass, and they dropped support for 11 back in October. 0/10 would not recommend.

[–] claude_flammang@dju.social 4 points 20 hours ago

@lemming741
Absolutely!

If your first priority is having a Supervised Debian 11install.

I wanted to have Home Assistant in my house and my RV and my perspective is more like using it like an appliance, as I still had a Raspberry 3 lying around, i downloaded an HA-OS imageand was up and running within minutes. Once I was convinced that it was what I needed I went for the Pi 5 with SSD.
So 10/10 for me.

[–] Successful_Try543@feddit.org 20 points 1 day ago

Fortunately:

No support for Core or Supervised—can I still use them?

You can still use them even if we no longer support them. There are many users running Home Assistant in all kinds of unofficial ways. This change just means we are removing it from our end-user documentation and will no longer recommend using these installation methods from an official standpoint.

Will the developer documentation on these things remain?

Yes, those will remain. The developer documentation for running Home Assistant’s Core Python application directly in a Python virtual environment will remain. This is how we develop. This proposal is about removing end-user documentation and support.

[–] amelore@slrpnk.net 1 points 20 hours ago

I am running it in docker and thought that wasn't official. The ideal for me would be if someone competent packaged it for Debian.

[–] kokesh@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I'm on supervised install on Ubuntu server. All worked fine for many years, except Supervisor being bitchy about me having Portainer installed for no reason. Last week or so, my machine started acting weird. After reboot I couldn't access it via local ip, only via external hostname. What keeps happening is after reboot Supervisor creates new network config for my ethernet, that causes this. It uses the network-manager to do this. I have netplan doing the config. Nyone else?

[–] nroth@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Wait, does this mean they're deprecating the docker image?

[–] funkajunk@lemm.ee 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

You didn't even read the article, did you?


We have deprecated the following installation methods:

Home Assistant Core installation method, where you run your system in a Python environment, not to be confused with Container (for example, running your system in Docker).

Home Assistant’s Supervised installation method, which involves running your own operating system, then installing the Supervisor and other requirements on top of that.

[–] nroth@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago

I skimmed the article. Home Assistant Supervised seemed like it may be branding for the Docker edition, which apparently it is not.

[–] chaospatterns@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Nope. Docker and Home Assistant OS will be the only supported installation strategies