The sender domain has a DMARC Reject/Quarantine policy which disallows
sending mailing list messages using the original "From" header.
To mitigate this problem, the original message has been wrapped
automatically by the mailing list software.
--- Begin Message ---
Hmm. I get what you are saying. Obviously, I never added "support-list" to the
factory_partition_names struct, since I believe we will never use it. But by
adding it, we would hopefully get rid of all hard-coded partition names outside
of device definitions, which would also clean up the "old" code at the same
time.
-But I suppose you are still happy with a "factory_partition_names" struct
within the device_info, since it is almost impossible, and may be unreliable to
try to deduce the names from the partition scheme? I can make that modification
immediately.
At the same time, I get warnings about long lines in the patch, but it looks
like there are many long lines in the file already. Do we shorten the ones in
the patch, or should I just leave them as is?
Regards,
Ole Kristian
On 12/05/2022, 16:24, "Sander Vanheule" <san...@svanheule.net> wrote:
Hi Ole Kristian,
On Thu, 2022-05-12 at 14:47 +0200, Ole Kristian Lona wrote:
> > > info->soft_ver.text, len, info->part_trail);
> > > }
> > >
> > > @@ -3055,11 +3082,11 @@ static struct image_partition_entry
> > > make_soft_version(
> > > };
> > >
> > > if (info->soft_ver_compat_level == 0)
> > > - return init_meta_partition_entry("soft-version", &s,
> > > + return init_meta_partition_entry(name, &s,
> > > (uint8_t *)(&s.compat_level) - (uint8_t
> > > *)(&s),
> > > info->part_trail);
> > > else
> > > - return init_meta_partition_entry("soft-version", &s,
> > > + return init_meta_partition_entry(name, &s,
> > > sizeof(s), info->part_trail);
> > > }
> > >
> >
> > Shouldn't you also modify make_support_list() and make_extra_para()?
>
> I believe "support-list" will never change the name, and it definitely
hasn't
> in the firmwares I have seen. It sounds more logical to me that they
always
> keep that name, so any device can check the support list for any firmware.
>
> Extra-para is only used for a very few devices, but I now added an option
for
> using a different name for that as well.
Even if they aren't modified in this particular case, I was mainly worried
about
consistency. The partition names are now all stored in the device_info
struct,
so IMHO it would be cleaner to pull them all the info from there. Even if
the
default is never changed. Otherwise it's a bit pointless to store the
partition
names in a modifiable container anyway.
Best,
Sander
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
