This thread is as old as dirt. The sad thing is the problems with Bluetooth are just as old, and as of this date they remain ignored in the RPi OS Lite
distribution. Whether through carelessness or neglect, the lack of clarity with respect to differences in the default Bluetooth installation in the Lite, Full and Desktop versions of RaspPi OS is, IMO a disservice to the Raspberry Pi user community.
I am not an expert, but I have made some observations. Based on these observations, the central problems are:
1. There is one set of Release Notes http://downloads.raspberrypi.org/raspio ... _notes.txt
for all three distributions. There is no clear explanation as to the diffs in the as-installed
Blutooth capabilities between these distributions.
2. There is no "official" documentation outlining differences in the default Bluetooth installation for the 3 distributions, nor is there any documentation explaining how to get from the default Blutooth installation in the Lite distribution to one that has minimum functionality.
3. Consequently many users read answers in this forum (and others), and assume that they apply to all RPi OS distributions (Lite, Desktop & "Recommended Software"). They do not.
This Q&A illustrates the issue: Some users fail to reach a responsive Controller using the bluetoothctl
command; some claim sudo bluetoothctl
is required; some dispute that assertion, claiming that is unnecessary on the "latest Raspbian". This is easy enough to verify: Try starting bluetoothctl
on a "Lite" system, and on a "Recommended Software" system. The difference is readily apparent: The "Lite" system cannot access the Controller without additional privileges. It seems that the reason for this is the default pi user
is not made a member of the secondary group bluetooth
on the "Lite" system, but does belong to that group on the "Recommended Software" system.
On the "Lite" system, I have found adding the default pi user
to the secondary group bluetooth
will also make the Controller responsive in bluetoothctl
app (i.e. sudo
is not required); REF: https://stackoverflow.com/a/53738121/5395338
But of course this is only the "tip of the iceberg"; users face a challenging maze to gain even minimal Bluetooth capability of the "Lite" system. This should be addressed, and there are two obvious alternatives:
1. Augment the official documentation to include "recipes" for making Bluetooth useful in the "Lite" system.
2. Make it clear on the RPi.org website that the "Lite" system supports no Bluetooth services in its default installation, and that there is no "official" documentation to add those services.
In other words, either improve Bluetooth function and/or documentation on the "Lite" system, or admit that it needs an unspecified amount of effort to be useful.