Community WIKI for Librem 5

Good idea! I’ll try to remember that for the next update.

I’ve added a disclaimer to the wiki about the unofficial nature of it. I don’t intend to diminish anything that has already been written, I just want to make sure that casual readers know that it’s being mostly written by volunteers outside Purism. I’m sure that what gets written will be fairly comprehensive if the mega-summaries posted in the forums are any guide. :smile:


Just bringing this thread to everyone’s attention again, as Evergreen is now shipping. Tips for using the L5 are being added daily.


I have been granted “Guest access” for the Wiki pages, but I am still unable to edit/contribute to these pages (also checked sub pages), I don’t see any edit button. Anybody know how to edit these pages? Do I need to request other access rights?

I made you a Reporter, but maybe you have to be a Developer to be able to edit pages. Let me know if you still can’t make edits.

1 Like

Just checked, “Reporter” role access does not show any edit button on the wiki pages.

Probably one does need “Developer” role access. Should the “edit” button become visible next to “Page history” button?

You’re now a Developer. You should see the Edit button next to the Page history button.

Have fun!

1 Like

Should look like:

1 Like

Just to confirm: edit button is now visible. Thank you!


I recommend keeping the sections in alphabetical order to make finding things easier, especially as the list will grow over time.

1 Like

I was thinking along the same lines but a good information architecture planning of information that is going to grow needs a bit more than that. The topics and titles need a bit of uniformity and some grouping may be needed: But in addition to that, for human searchability, two or three models of content indexes can be created (as in, same things listed in different ways - say alphabetical, by different versions of topics, by interest, by complexity etc.). This is because anyone using wiki may have different perspective why and what they are looking for and what they are aiming at. It’s all about “information scent”.

It’s not going to happen now. Better get a handle on it during the next few months (which is relatively soon, considering the lifespan of a decade for L5), though. At some point it’s going to start to feel inconvenient to change the architecture (topic titles included), as everything would feel out of place and alien, and the barrier to change gets too strong.

1 Like

Just adding some thoughts about what should be in the wiki and what should be in the user/developer documentation.

The FAQ contains some basic factual information (weight, dimensions, specification of the phone) that should really be in the documentation, though it hasn’t always been easy to keep it up-to-date. For these things the wiki works well as a way of quickly updating known information. Solid, fixed, factual information belongs in the documentation and in the wiki. If you think that you would have expected to find the information in the documentation, it probably belongs in the documentation somewhere.

Having said that, some things are probably better placed on the wiki: the cellular providers page is always going to be subject to change. There are some questions related to use cases (using Bluetooth devices, convergence, Android apps) that the documentation probably should cover but are outside the core experience – these are either essential or just nice-to-have depending on your perspective. :wink: Some of these things can’t go in the documentation if they promote non-Free solutions, so that’s also a factor.

Some items in the FAQ are more like advocacy: things like the reasoning behind a decision, or how good something is. These are more opinion-based and are probably a bit borderline for an FAQ. You will collectively have to decide what you think is appropriate. I wouldn’t put those things in the official documentation, and that’s one of the reasons why there is a community wiki.

There are also technical bits and pieces that I wrote a long time ago before various features were implemented. Those were supposed to form the basis for developer documentation and were published in the wiki before official interfaces and components were created for those features.

You can always create issues and merge requests for things that should (also) exist in the documentation. The GitLab interface lets you edit files in the browser and anyone with an account on GitLab should be able to create merge requests and issues for the developer documentation and the user guide.


If people want the community FAQ to be more fact-based and less opinion-based, we can create a separate advocacy page just for those questions. I just got so tired of responding over and over to the critics, that I put all of the arguments in one page, so I could link to the FAQ and not be forced to rewrite the same answer over and over.


I changed the intro to the Cellular Providers page to make it clear that this is testing by the community, and not by Purism:

It is up to buyers of the Librem 5 to test the phone with their own cellular network provider. For people who wish to avoid testing, Purism offers its AweSIM cellular network service in the US, which is compatible with the Librem 5.

The following is a list of the cellular providers which community members have tested with the Librem 5:

Any objections to this wording?


No objections from me. I notice that there’s a mix of contributors there – even so, it’s still unofficial and best effort testing as I understand it.

Thanks for leading the charge with the FAQ. You could put the “advocacy” questions in the FAQ into their own section on the page, but it’s really up to you. I think that the idea of grouping the questions has already been raised, and that would be useful, I think. :slightly_smiling_face:


@amosbatto, this Ethernet adapter (AliExpress 1005001623728670) works with Calamares installer (with Byzantium for sure) out-of-the-box, meaning it should be working with Librem 5 and it will be useful with Librem 14 as well. Besides, it already works with the PinePhone USB Type C port.

idVendor=0bda, idProduct=8153
Product: USB 10/100/1000 LAN
Manufacturer: Realtek

Please add it to the list of compatible external devices, if no objections (or wait for another, based on Purism hardware, confirmation):

Thanks for the link. Apparently Purism had many mailing lists and Matrix channels as well.

Oh man! I am glad this discussion made its way to the top. I was trying to figure out which USB-C Hub has already been tested with the L5. :+1: :+1: :+1:

Just to let the maintainer know I found the Microsoft Surface USB-C to Ethernet and USB Adapter product page being unavailable.


Thanks for catching that. I updated the link to:

what do you mean ? why would it not work with the Calamares installer ?

While some others might not work. I meant that the Realtek RTL8153-CG 10/100/1000M Ethernet controller (chipset) is recognized (0bda:8153) from the Calamares (PureOS installer) side (no extra non-free firmware needed), to use it from/with this Live-image (and afterwards).