Yes, it is 0.103, not HASSOS
You go to developer tools > info to find the version of Home Assistant you are running.
So, I’m still relatively new to HA, and I’ve sifted through all the posts in this thread. At first, I thought HassOS might be another name for the HA server. Now I know better. What I’m taking away from the din is that HassOS is the underlying OS, tailored and specific only to the installation method described in step 1 here:
https://www.home-assistant.io/hassio/installation/
Is my understanding correct? If so, it should be captured somewhere to make it crystal clear.
Are you being a smart-@$$ or serious?
if it’s the former…I’ve used HA for over 2 years. I know which release version i’m running. please don’t insult me and treat me like an idiot. I help people on here all the time so I think I can figure out that basic bit of information. Thanks anyway.
If you are serious then let me clarify…
there are (at least) 4 different basic ways to get a version of HA running - HA in a venv, HA in docker, hassio thru HassOS & hassio thru a “generic linux install” (GLI for short) installed in docker.
If I’m running hassio installed via GLI then what do I call the “install version” i’m running?
You are the one who “won’t let it go” so I’d like to know what the wisdom you use that is apparently hidden from the regular people in order to properly communicate which of the different installation versions we are running.
1 Like
I hate to further this thread off topic but I may as well add my +1 comment… I too would refer to HassIO as being ‘in Docker’, thus when installing via the ‘Generic Linux install’ we must:
- install OS (ie: Ubuntu, Debian, whatever)
- install Docker…
- install HassIO
… wouldn’t that make HassIO in Docker…? I think the order of installation says it all. The fact that HassIO can’t be installed without Docker is irrelevant when describing the fact that it is in Docker containers.
Again when using HassOS, the installation of HassIO is still in Docker containers, thus HassIO in Docker still describes it.
- awaiting attack…
2 Likes
the issue with calling them both (installed via from GLI or HassOS) as “hassio in Docker” (but then you could just shorten that to simply “hassio” at that point) is when someone asks “how do I do x in the cli?” Then you need to ask if they installed hassio via HassOS or via a “Generic Linix Install” (or more succinctly “in docker”) since the answer to that, if the former, might be “you can’t” and if it’s the latter then the answer is “like this…”.
If we are just upfront about adding (the apparently officially approved lingo - whatever that might be - ) it saves a bit of back & forth (and therefore time) to get the answer.
1 Like
Yes it would Dave. I totally agree…
Still no one has said what we SHOULD call it to distinguish it from HassOS install of Hass.io
Unfortunately the officially approved lingo is unknown and referring to it as the obvious Hassio in Docker is verbotten
FURTHER… HassOS is pretty much a full description for that install. Hassio in Docker is also a full description for that kind of install and is differentiated from Home Assistant in Docker… I do not see the problem of saying hassio in docker.
2 Likes
Given what all the posts above, especially cognito’s clarification, say about HA is : -
We ALL apparently run hassio.
We ALL apparently run in docker
Given this the use of the above terms almost seem superfluous.
So valid distinctions appear to me (please correct me if I’m wrong) : -
- Hardware platform (eg pi, pc)
- Base OS (raspbian soon to be withdrawn so - HassOS, Unix, or other OS with a venv layer (apparently not recommended)
- Then (they all have, but sometimes you specifically need to install) docker
- Then HA
This (to me at least) seems to boil down to 3 routes (finity says 4 but I just don’t see it)
Anyway, irrespective of all that, the people mainly arguing here (apart from me) are VERY experienced HA users who state that the terminology is confusing.
Well God help the newbies then.
Doesn’t this ‘prove’ there is a problem ?
no actually.
You can just install HA in a Venv on any linux distro.
Any variety of hassio runs in docker… be it with HassOS or a generic linux install (in docker)
You can also install Home Assistant in Docker - not hassio but Home Assistant.
The issue is there is no ‘approved’ way of referring to the generic linux install of hass.io (other than the whole sentence it seems)
I would see the install as:
HassOS
Hassio in docker
Home Assistant in Docker
Home Assistant in Linux
Home Assistant in venv.
That’s running HassIO on docker, which is not the same as running it "in* docker.
HassIO necessitates Docker, since it’s made up of docker containers.
It’s possible (but highly ill advised) to run docker inside docker; so you have HassIO running on docker, all inside docker.
Even trying to put it in words seems to get very confusing very quickly.
I honestly truly fail to see the distinction.
But as far as I know not one person means that when they say “hassio in (or on) Docker”. It seems to be generally accepted (amongst the hoi polloi at least) that Hassio in docker is simply just short hand for “hassio in a generic linux server”.
1 Like
Hmmm. I would argue that since Docker is the concept of containers (and running things in containers) then we are talking about HassIO being in Docker. We don’t normally put things on a container, we put them in a container.
In this case, we put HassIO spread out in mulitple containers 
Not unless you want them to fall off 
Yeah, I can conceptualize the distinction in my head just fine, but have difficulties easily spelling it out.
But, I easily recognise your name, I know you know what you’re doing. I’m sure you understand what “running docker inside docker” means. IE Running a VM on your host system vs running a VM inside a VM. In the same way, You can install HassIO (docker) inside a docker container, when HassIO is meant to be a set of containers running on docker on the host. Not a set of docker containers running inside a single docker container running on the host.
Oh I fully agree. I think that this particular distinction (running “on” vs running “in”) is totally pointless.
The real breakdown in terminology is Is HA Vs. HassIO Vs. HassOS.
I liked the infographic @cogneato put together for it, though I think I could use an improvement or two (For example, the boxes should be nested to show one is inside the other, not just a hierarchy, like this)
I know you’ve seen my own posts breaking down HA Vs. HassIO Vs. HassOS (since you’ve upvoted them), and think we 100% agree that something like that would be super helpful in the primary site docs.
So why did you make it? It just confuses things more.
I didn’t make it, just attempted explaining it. The OP made the original distinction.
He knows more than anyone else that HassIO runs on docker. As such, he must mean that it doesn’t run in it, it runs on it.
The thing is that some people seem to be implying that Hassio is the “ecosystem” that runs a plain HA in a container alongside another container that runs a supervisor (and recently a DNS server in a third container) but it’s not like that. I submit that that idea is wrong.
“Hassio” is a completely separate version of HA that additionally includes the ability to run add-ons by interacting with the supervisor container.
If it was just simply a dockerized version of regular non-hassio HA (see I even have to do it now to explain this…) then I could see that the distinction between saying “hassio” & “hassio in docker” would be redundant. But it’s not that way.
I have a non-hassio HA running in a docker container and my version of HA doesn’t have the ability to run add-ons from HA. so it is “non-hassio HA running in Docker”. Since I didn’t install Hassio via a HassOS image then the opposite version of that would then logically be “hassio running in docker” but since all hassio runs in docker and there are multiple and mutually exclusive ways of installing it on a machine then you need some way of distinguishing between those as well.
So the end result is that you have several distinctions that need to be made when talking about the intricacies of the technology depending on the needs of the conversation taking place.
I fail to see why the powers that be have issues with the way that the users of the software have come to “organically” refer to those distinctions.
And yes, I liked the way you described the differences in your post. It was well written and informative. But we need a way to communicate quickly when in a thread and trying to suss out which HA the user is using to most effectively give the best answer to a problem without writing out long paragraphs of explanation to get there.
1 Like
I agree.
I think most of the people here having the discussion (I think it’s unfair to call it an argument) are all mostly on the same page, but with slightly different perspectives or ideas on how to best go forward.
Overall though, Thank you @frenck and everyone else on the dev team for making this release happen, and for the great progress on the project in the past few years, and years to come.
2 Likes
