I followed the instructions but I get the below:

Did you try rebasing the systemd branch onto the current master branch?

At least that's what i did and i built it successfully right now.

@calebccff @Justin_Zobel @amartinz @WhyNotHugo @craftyguy @kailueke @ollieparanoid @Arnavion @Minecrell : open letter from a freedom lover to PostmarketOS devs :

Me and my two friends, who got the Pinephone for privacy/security reasons, are all using PostmarketOS. Why? Because no SystemD. SystemD, being a 1.5 million lines of code begemoth, is written with little respect for security - as you could see by Pwnie "award" and plenty of CVEs. Therefore the security-minded people who choose a Pinephone despite its worse usability compared to the ordinary Android phones, also tend to avoid SystemD.

Currently, the primary distinguishing feature of PostmarketOS - is that, being based on Alpine, it doesn't have SystemD. However, by artificially switching this Alpine-based distro to SystemD, you are losing this competitive advantage and your priorly-outstanding distro won't be unique anymore.

One of my "Pinephone friends" (who btw uses Artix Linux on his desktop for the same no-SystemD reason) - really loves PostmarketOS (even contributed a couple of patches), and last week he told me that he is going to make a significant donation to PostmarketOS when he gets his next paycheck. But I have just made a phone call to him - and, after getting the news about that SystemD switch, he doesn't want his hard-earned money to fund the SystemD work

You really are shooting yourself in the foot with this SystemD madness, please stop before its too late and you become yet-another-soulless-non-unique-distro.

P.S. sorry for my emojis above, but lets see if you have a freedom of speech there...

I would like to test the new branch for oneplus-fajita, but i cant because i dont have the option to repo_bootstrap as mentioned above:

pmbootstrap repo_bootstrap systemd --arch=aarch64 usage: pmbootstrap [-h] [-V] [-c CONFIG] [--config-channels CONFIG_CHANNELS] [-mp URL] [-m URL] [-j JOBS] [-E EXTRA_SPACE] [-B BOOT_SIZE] [-p APORTS] [-t TIMEOUT] [-w WORK] [-y] [--as-root] [-o] [--no-ccache] [--no-cross] [-l LOG] [--details-to-stdout] [-v] [-q] {init,shutdown,index,work_migrate,repo_missing,kconfig,export,sideload,netboot,flasher,initfs,qemu,pkgrel_bump,aportupgrade,newapkbuild,lint,status,ci,log,zap,stats,update,build_init,chroot,install,checksum,aportgen,build,deviceinfo_parse,apkbuild_parse,apkindex_parse,config,bootimg_analyze,pull} ... pmbootstrap: error: argument action: invalid choice: 'repo_bootstrap' (choose from 'init', 'shutdown', 'index', 'work_migrate', 'repo_missing', 'kconfig', 'export', 'sideload', 'netboot', 'flasher', 'initfs', 'qemu', 'pkgrel_bump', 'aportupgrade', 'newapkbuild', 'lint', 'status', 'ci', 'log', 'zap', 'stats', 'update', 'build_init', 'chroot', 'install', 'checksum', 'aportgen', 'build', 'deviceinfo_parse', 'apkbuild_parse', 'apkindex_parse', 'config', 'bootimg_analyze', 'pull')

I did checkout the systemd-Branch for pmbootstrap/aports ... if that is correct. At least it seems like correct for me... Because it has the same contents as mentioned here: https://gitlab.com/postmarketOS/pmaports . But still no "repo_bootstrap"-command for me :( . What do i do wrong?

Good day everyone! Although I haven't contributed for a long time, I am a passionate user of PostmarketOS and hopefully my opinion could matter something, so just my two cents:

• Actually @qmastery16 has a good point: it will be beneficial to continue providing those "OpenRC ISOs", even if they will be 'less featured' (in this case, accompany with a note regarding the shortcomings). There is clearly a group of people (disclaimer: I am one of them) who prefers the alternative init systems for various reasons - and providing the OpenRC ISOs will certainly help the postmarketOS popularity
• Is it possible to set up some crowdfunding (Patreon or whatever) - to reward those particular people like @funderscore who are doing the OpenRC-related work at postmarketOS - for the "OpenRC branch"?

I don't believe OpenRC images are going anywhere from the blog post. The only thing that's changing is they're adding an option to use systemd.

As for funding, postmarketOS already has https://opencollective.com/postmarketos for raising funds for the development of postmarketOS and support of its contributors.

I don't believe OpenRC images are going anywhere from the blog post

@Justin_Zobel , this blog post implies that the OpenRC images will be gone and the people will have to build their own - if that's not the case, please update the blog post to clarify this

postmarketOS already has https://opencollective.com/postmarketos for raising funds

Yes, but it does not allow those who does not like systemd to avoid financially supporting it. Please add a new funding option there that will be called "OpenRC maintenance" or something, the funds of which will go to OpenRC maintainers specifically

his blog post implies that the OpenRC images will be gone and the people will have to build their own

The blog post specifically has a section about this, it's the first entry in the Q&A section:

So pre-built images of Sxmo will continue to be OpenRC based

I don't think the blog post can get any clearer than that.

If you're concerned that non-Sxmo OpenRC images will no longer be produced/published... Well, I think that's the whole point. The reason to introduce systemd is to make it the default experience for Gnome/KDE UI spins, because it's anticipated that this will result in a better experience and require less maintenance.

Yes, but it does not allow those who does not like systemd to avoid financially supporting it. Please add a new funding option there that will be called "OpenRC maintenance" or something, the funds of which will go to OpenRC maintainers specifically

I was hesitant to suggest this earlier since it might be interpreted as inflammatory and/or fracturing to the pmOS community, but given these kinds of ideas are popping up now, I think it might be worth saying: perhaps the people who feel strongly enough against systemd should consider forking pmOS. Artix Linux as a non-systemd fork of Arch has already been mentioned in this thread.

Of course it'd be a bummer to lose mindshare and maintainer energy from pmOS to arbitraryidealogyOS (there I've already named your fork for you, you're welcome!), but it might be better than dealing with constant noise from detractors that have nothing to contribute other than "systemd bad! because reasons that only barely made sense 10 years ago!"

But also, just so I don't seem like I'm being completely negative and flame-baity, might I suggest that if you really care so much about OpenRC and don't want to throw any dollars to the filthy systemd heathens that are doing most of the work to make pmOS a reality, perhaps you could approach the people(s) maintaining Sxmo packaging for pmOS and ask them to start up their own OpenCollective/Patreon/Github sponsorship, if they don't have it available already?

Yes, but it does not allow those who does not like systemd to avoid financially supporting it. Please add a new funding option there that will be called "OpenRC maintenance" or something, the funds of which will go to OpenRC maintainers specifically

Just to be clear, the money does currently not go to paying any full-time developers as it is not enough for that.