There is no hard work there at all.
>From commit messages: "Uboot: up from 3.4.0.0 sdk and fix mtd map."
So this is just a fresher Ralink SDK 3.4.0 modified U-Boot, still based on the
old U-Boot 1.1.3 version.
And the Wive license is a pure abuse, since U-Boot is covered by the GPL, which
prev
Hi,
Any chance that I could get an ACK or NAK to this trivial version bump
patch [1]?
Cheers,
Jon
[1] http://patchwork.openwrt.org/patch/4206/
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/list
Somebody seems to have done all the hard work already merging Ralink I boot
modifications back into uboot bootloader code for the rt2880/rt305x platform:
https://gitorious.org/wive-rtnl-ralink-rt305x-routers-firmware/wive-rtnl-ralink-rt305x-routers-firmware/source/e568932211ea59ff3b09bf2839859de3
Hi,
i would expect someone that installs openwrt buildroot, then builds an
image by hand and manages to flash it and on the way finds and changes
this option to know what he is doing
if we start worrying about these wording issues then we need to also add
a warning to the usb module "danger!!! us
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 11:16:34PM +0100, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Thus, while OpenWrt itself perhaps does not have much use for udev-based
> auto loading of modules (I guess modules usually are installed per-package,
> and then probably also registered for mechanical loading each),
> I'd deem th
On 13/01/2014 21:48, Gerald Matzka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed a strange behaviour of the block command of the ubox/block-mount
> package.
>
> # block info
> /dev/sda1: UUID="f1937642-358f-4b3d-9e6f-54fa904a0708" LABEL="BOOT"
> VERSION="1.0" TYPE="ext2"
> /dev/sda2: UUID="f3eded9b-8500-4a08-99f4-
Hi,
I noticed a strange behaviour of the block command of the ubox/block-mount
package.
# block info
/dev/sda1: UUID="f1937642-358f-4b3d-9e6f-54fa904a0708" LABEL="BOOT"
VERSION="1.0" TYPE="ext2"
/dev/sda2: UUID="f3eded9b-8500-4a08-99f4-1697f7cc5ee1" LABEL="ROOT"
VERSION="1.0" TYPE="ext2"
/dev/
Hi,
This patch adds journaled file system (JFS) kernel module support.
Signed-off-by: Gerald Matzka
Index: package/kernel/linux/modules/fs.mk
===
--- package/kernel/linux/modules/fs.mk (revision 39185)
+++ package/kernel/linux/mod
This patch adds journaled file system (JFS) utilities support.
Signed-off-by: Gerald Matzka
Index: package/utils/jfsutils/Makefile
===
--- package/utils/jfsutils/Makefile (revision 0)
+++ package/utils/jfsutils/Makefile (revi
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Ernesto wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm trying to add USB support to a broadcom 6328 based board, named
> 96328dg2x2. I used the definition of another board, 963281TAN, and added
> .has_ehci0 = 1 and ohci0 too, and configured gpio10 as a led. With this, I
> got to work us
On 13/01/14 12:57, Bluse wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> 3 days ago I also sent a patch to fix a bug in netifd, where the uci
> mcast_rate setting is not properly used anymore.
> See attched email I have sent to the list.
> I am not sure if Antonios patch covers the same here ?
Hi Bluse,
I saw your patch.
Hi all,
3 days ago I also sent a patch to fix a bug in netifd, where the uci mcast_rate
setting is not properly used anymore.
See attched email I have sent to the list.
I am not sure if Antonios patch covers the same here ?
Greetings Thomas
This patch fixes a bug in /lib/netifd/wireless/mac8021
Le 13/01/2014 12:12, Hanno Schupp a écrit :
Thank you for the quick reply.
What uboot version should I use? Are there recompiled binaries somewhere that
would be suitable? Is it just a matter of uploading a new boot loader file
using the uboot menu or is additional configuration of environmen
Thank you for the quick reply.
What uboot version should I use? Are there recompiled binaries somewhere that
would be suitable? Is it just a matter of uploading a new boot loader file
using the uboot menu or is additional configuration of environment variables
required? Sorry to pester with ques
I am getting this error when I try to mount my UBIFS filesytem:
mount -o remount,rw /config
UBIFS error (pid 1265): ubifs_parse_options: unrecognized mount option
"relatime" or
missing value
The content of my fstab is :
root@drgos:~# cat /etc/fstab
Hi Hanno,
Le 13/01/2014 11:39, Hanno Schupp a écrit :
I am working on improved support for the Skyline SL-R7205 Wireless 3G Router
(hence my previously submitted patches)but have struck a dead end on a
particular issue. I found that during boot the device acts like dumb switch,
allowing traff
Am 1/13/14 11:39 AM, schrieb Hanno Schupp:
> I am working on improved support for the Skyline SL-R7205 Wireless 3G
> Router (hence my previously submitted patches)but have struck a dead end on
> a particular issue. I found that during boot the device acts like dumb
> switch, allowing traffic to pas
On 13/01/14 11:26, John Crispin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ok, a prime example of why the description should state the bug that
> was fixed and not leave it as a readers exercise :)
you got a point here! :)
>
> i will pull this patch into the tree after lunch.
>
Thanks!
Cheers,
--
Antonio Quartulli
I am working on improved support for the Skyline SL-R7205 Wireless 3G
Router (hence my previously submitted patches)but have struck a dead end on
a particular issue. I found that during boot the device acts like dumb
switch, allowing traffic to pass through for a short time. I attached
serial cable
Am 1/13/14 10:59 AM, schrieb Antonio Quartulli:
> On 13/01/14 10:48, John Crispin wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> looking at the code i wonder if this is a actual bug fix or just
>> a cleanup ?!
>>
>> does the code behave different before and after the patch ?
>
> It's a bug fix (this is why we have the Int
On 13/01/14 10:59, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> $mcast_rate contains the raw value (i.e. 11), while wpa_supplicant
of course I meant 11000 here (11Mbps).
Cheers,
--
Antonio Quartulli
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
openwr
On 13/01/14 10:48, John Crispin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> looking at the code i wonder if this is a actual bug fix or just a
> cleanup ?!
>
> does the code behave different before and after the patch ?
It's a bug fix (this is why we have the Introduced-by clause and I
explicitly said "fix" in the subject
Hi,
looking at the code i wonder if this is a actual bug fix or just a
cleanup ?!
does the code behave different before and after the patch ?
John
On 13/01/14 10:45, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
Introduced by ("netifd: add wireless configuration support and port mac80211 to
the new fra
Introduced by ("netifd: add wireless configuration support and port mac80211 to
the new framework")
Reported-by: René van Weert
Signed-off-by: Antonio Quartulli
---
package/network/services/hostapd/files/netifd.sh | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/package/netwo
24 matches
Mail list logo
