• pedz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    Meh, I guess I will need to find a new way to install Home Assistant on my Orange Pi.

    The instructions I found apparently uses the supervised version even if it’s running in docker.

    It’s been a while since I looked into installing/reinstalling HA but AFAIK using anything else than a Raspberry Pi seems discouraged, which is… discouraging.

    • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      19 hours ago

      It’s been a while since I looked into installing/reinstalling HA but AFAIK using anything else than a Raspberry Pi seems discouraged, which is… discouraging.

      I don’t think that’s the case, the docker containers are still going to be officially supported, and you can run those on any hardware.

      • pedz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I’m not sure how my install works, as I just found a script that installed everything for me and it worked on different SBCs. However, when I look into “About”, HA says the installation method is supervised. And according to the article, this is precisely what is going to stop being supported.

        Home Assistant is deprecating two installation methods, meaning they will continue working for now, but support will end in six months with the release of Home Assistant 2025.12. This includes Home Assistant Core, which runs in a Python environment, and Home Assistant Supervised, which involves running your own operating system underneath Home Assistant.

        This is what I do. I have an Orange Pi 3b as a file server but it also runs HA in a docker image on top of that. I guess I’ll just wait and see if it stops working. If so I’ll try to reinstall using whatever “new/official/supported” method they want, and if not working, I’ll jut give up on HA.

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          It depends on what you’re running, but if it’s running in Docker using the official images, it will still be supported. The article explicitly says:

          The Home Assistant operating system and container images (like Docker) will be the only supported installation methods.

          You can run these images on any system/SBC, so nobody is discouraging “anything else than a Raspberry Pi”.

    • plumbercraic@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      I tried on docker but couldn’t get the USB Z wave to pass through. Simpler for me to let it live on the pi (until the SD card dies and I forget how any of the HA config works and have to do it all again)

      • F04118F@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Pi 4 + USB-connected SSD with Home Assistant OS is the best way to run HA for the vast majority of people.

        If you want to run other services beside HA and Add-Ons, you should be comfortable picking your own orchestration method and hardware.

      • y0din@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        If you want a second attempt, this might help.

        To get USB devices working inside a container, you need to map the device into the container, which can be tricky—especially if you’re running rootless containers.

        If you’re on Linux and want to avoid complicated setups with user namespaces, groups, or messing with udev rules, the easiest way to start is by manually recreating the device node inside a folder you control (like where your config is stored) using mknod.

        For example, if your USB device is /dev/ttyUSB0:

        1. Run ls -l /dev/ttyUSB0 You should see output like: crw-rw---- 1 root dialout 188, 0 Jan 1 1970 /dev/ttyUSB0

        2. Note the major (188) and minor (0) numbers.

        3. Change directory to the folder where you want to create the “clone” device node, then run: sudo mknod -m 666 ttyUSB0 c 188 0 (Use the major/minor numbers from your device — they differ by device.) This will create a device readable and writeable by anyone on the system so perhaps consider changing the mode from 666 to 660 and/or chown the file afterwards to your user and group. As I said, this is HACKY and not a secure solution.

        You will now have a device file you can then pass into your container with the Docker/PODMAN option: –device /path/to/your/folder/ttyUSB0:/dev/ttyUSB0

        I realize this is a pretty hacky and insecure workaround—feel free to downvote or ignore if you want something cleaner. But it’s a quick way to get your USB device accessible inside the container to get started. Later on, you can look into proper handling with udev or other methods if security is important.

        If you use Windows, you are on your own unfortunately, I do not have experience with podman/docker in Windows environments.