Hi,
On 31 December 2015 at 20:33, Roman Yeryomin <leroi.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 December 2015 at 14:32, Yousong Zhou <yszhou4t...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 30 December 2015 at 20:12, Jo-Philipp Wich <j...@openwrt.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Yousong.
>>>
>>> NAK - thats by design. If a network config is present then there is no
>>> point in regenerating it.
>>>
>>> I'd prefer if the Malta target would simply drop its default config and
>>> switch to board.d, this could be useful to e.g. dynamically handle
>>> different amounts of eth* devices:
>>>
>From git log, malta has been using board.d for quite a while.
>>
>> The default network config was provided by package/base-files, not
>> malta target...
>
> You can easily override it, no need to modify defaults.
>
So I thought I might have missed something, and was wondering why
malta and to this moment why still no bug reports for other targets
like ar71xx, the default network config provided by package/base-files
should have prevented the board.d mechanism from generating
board-specific network config for all of them.
Well, looks like malta misses a base-files.mk to rm the default network config.
yousong
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
