Although it would be good to have this hardware supported aren't we all forgetting something such as BETTER alternatives without extra work and headaches ?
I have seen this router costing from $279 to a typical price of $352 and more which ends up for being close to 400 bucks after taxes (sometimes more). For this amount of money we could pick up two minnowboards or, 7 raspberry pi's with wifi or 10 normal home wifi routers or for example or even much better hardware like eeepc's. One of my network servers is an eeepc 1015 4 core Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU N550 @ 1.50GHz with 2gb of ram and 250gb of hd. Cost me $200 brand new (153 Euros in 02/04/2012) and has been active for 2 years. Power consumption is 4w minium, 5W average, 8W maximum with a 12v PSU and size is not much bigger than these type of routers. Much better hardware in every single way, for way less money, less trouble, less headaches, much more functionality. A have 4 of them. One has been working for 2 years now non stop. These can easily be found online used or new and are much better options in every way possible rather than a router which Belkin/Linksys purposely have used openwrt as an excuse to try to sell it under the supposed opensource support (which fully lacks of) and slowly have been releasing more source code just because it got caught trying to sell a cat for a tiger and putting lipstick on a pig. I think openwrt devs have better things to do at the moment and other things to improve that not only need the improvement as well as are easier to deal with, rather than WASTING time "helping" belkin selling this hardware. These corporate giants will give a sausage to who gives them a truck full of pigs and hope that we do all the work for them. I think openwrt should ditch the support for now. Let belkin bend over and do what they should have done a while go and have them understanding the lesson. After all they were the ones that advertised it the way they did. At this stage there are MUCH BETTER alternatives by far. On 04/23/2014 10:13 AM, José Vázquez wrote: > 2014-04-23 14:27 GMT+02:00, Zoltan HERPAI <wigy...@uid0.hu>: >>>> I don't know if any of the OpenWRT developers or contributors have >>>> this router. If yes, my opinion is to add support for the board using >>>> the patches sent by Matthew Fatheree as base, reworking them and drop >>>> wireless support for now until they (Marvell or Belkin) develop a >>>> cfg80211 or mac80211 compatible wireless driver. In other >>>> circumstances maybe would be a good idea to spend time developing a >>>> driver for the Avastar family but i think that if they say that the >>>> WRT1900ac has support for OpenWRT, DD-WRT, DebWRT or any other it >>>> should be their job. >>> Correction: if nobody have this router another option could be take >>> Matthew's patches >>>> (without the binary blob), correct them, test if can be compiled without >>>> problems, include >>>> them and add initial support marking @BROKEN. >>>> Of course this is my own opinion and i don't have all the information, >>>> so, if this is the case my apologies to OpenWRT developers, Matthew >>>> Fatheree and Belkin International,Inc >> >> Note that while having the wireless driver source released (or partially >> released), is a big win, I don't see any uboot source in the package. >> >> Regards, >> -w- >> > Yes, it is a big win, but as Felix noted before the driver needs to be > rewrote and it doesn't use the standard Linux Wireless API. > "This means that work on supporting this device can theoretically > continue, although I expect it to take quite a bit of time. As I > anticipated, the code quality of the driver source code is abysmal. > This looks like rewrite (not cleanup) material, ugly enough to cause eye > cancer or frighten small children ;) > > There are also still some pieces missing: Since this driver does not use > standard Linux Wireless APIs, it can only properly function with custom > hostapd/wpa_supplicant hacks. I don't see those in the release." > > I think that is too much job and efforts for a single and not very > popular, as far i know, wireless family chips. I repeat that it is my > not totally informed opinion because i don't know a lot of details. > > Off topic: for me are more interesting the ath9k and ath10k drivers. > > José > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel > _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
