On Friday, January 19, 2018 10:06:50 PM CET Ben Greear wrote: > On 01/19/2018 01:03 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > > On Friday, January 19, 2018 9:12:04 PM CET gree...@candelatech.com wrote: > >> From: Ben Greear <gree...@candelatech.com> > >> > >> This will allow us to select the CT IPQ4019 firmware instead if > >> desired. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <gree...@candelatech.com> > >> --- > >> package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > >> b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > >> index 519e8c9..6690248 100644 > >> --- a/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > >> +++ b/package/firmware/ipq-wifi/Makefile > >> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ define Package/ipq-wifi-default > >> SUBMENU:=ath10k IPQ4019 Boarddata > >> SECTION:=firmware > >> CATEGORY:=Firmware > >> - DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x +ath10k-firmware-qca4019 > >> + DEPENDS:=@TARGET_ipq806x > >> TITLE:=Custom Board > >> endef > >> > > > > Wait! I remember talking about this here in the RFC thread: > > <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09621.html> > > |Hm, this would break the WIFI in the default configuration for the > > |FritzBox 4040 image. Currently it only has a dependency on the > > |ipq-wifi-fritz4040. (So it will end up without a firmware-5.bin) > > > > What gives? Are you trying to break the AVM FRITZ!Box 4040 image on purpose? > > Of course I'm not trying to break anything. But, I am not sure how to > fix this properly. I remember writing about this too. It's in the reply. <https://www.mail-archive.com/lede-dev@lists.infradead.org/msg09626.html> |I think there's a another way to do this. But it will require to break with |the existing convention of adding the board-2.bin that comes with the |firmware repository to the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 file. | |This way, the custom board-2.bin will stay in place when you switch/update |the firmware-5.bin. | |(The board-2.bin for the reference boards can simply be packaged just like |one of the ipq-wifi board firmwares). And furhtermore, you could provide a |"easy to use/install" custom ipq-wifi.ipk for the board-2.bin you currently |host on your webside. Of course, if you have a better idea let's hear it too. You could look into making virtual packages (Don't know, if that's a thing with opkg, or not. So watch out!) or go a different route. I'm sure there's plenty of ways to do it. If you come up with something, I'll be happy to test it.
> Does each platform need to specifically enable a firmware target instead of > depending on a DEPENDS statement to make it work? >From what I know, the platform (ipq806x) does not add any firmware packages to DEFAULT_PACKAGES in the target/linux/ipq806x/Makefile. It's all "per-device". (That said, you might want to talk to Sven Eckelmann too. As he has added the ath10k-firmware-qca4019 package to the OpenMesh a42's DEVICE_PACKAGES. So, if ath10k-ct is selected on a a42 it will also include the (now useless) ath10k-firmware-qca4019, right?) > Is there some other way I can provide an option for two different firmware > binaries? The firmware binaries (i.e. firmware-X.bin) are not the problem. It's the "board-2.bin" files that are shipped by the ath10k-firmware-qca4019/9984/.. packages. Regards, Christian _______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
