我理解是抄考了 國外的 anbox…
Is there any relationship to Google’s effort to bring Android applications to Chrome OS?
Google is implementing support in Chrome OS for Android applications in a very similar way as we do. Both approaches are quite similar as both put Android into a lightweight system container based on Linux namespaces and keep a small bridge to allow communication with the host system.
In contrast to Google’s implementation, Anbox doesn’t allow any direct access to hardware devices. For example it bridges Open GL ES to the host. In Chrome OS the container gets access to the host kernel side of the graphic subsystem to allow fast rendering. In our case, we decided against this to keep an easy way to port Anbox to different platforms. All a host operating system needs to provide is a Open GL / Open GL ES compatible driver to provide proper integration with the graphics subsystem. Other hardware devices like WiFi or Bluetooth will be abstracted in the future via a dedicated APIs between the container and the host.
Does Anbox need a specific Android image for every device?
No. Anbox does not need a specific Android image for every device as it is specifically built in a device independent way. Anbox will ship with a single Android image per architecture (amd64, armhf, arm64) and no device specifc modifications are required.