[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 5/5] oxnas: move gmac soc glue from mach to stmmac driver

Still a lot of kernel-version ifdef'ery, but imho that's easy to remove once obsoleted and avoids duplicate code in the meantime. Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle --- .../oxnas/files/arch/arm/mach-oxnas/mach-ox820.c | 101 .../net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac-oxnas.c | 172 ++

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 4/5] oxnas: prepare pinctrl for kernel >=4.2

Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle --- target/linux/oxnas/files/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-oxnas.c | 7 +++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) diff --git a/target/linux/oxnas/files/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-oxnas.c b/target/linux/oxnas/files/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-oxnas.c index fa5f3a9..aa76f40 100644 --

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 3/5] oxnas: prepare irqchip driver for kernel >=4.2

Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle --- target/linux/oxnas/files/drivers/irqchip/irq-rps.c | 23 +++--- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/target/linux/oxnas/files/drivers/irqchip/irq-rps.c b/target/linux/oxnas/files/drivers/irqchip/irq-rps.c index 5795406..48

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 2/5] oxnas: fix duplicate include in clk-oxnas

Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle --- target/linux/oxnas/files/drivers/clk/clk-oxnas.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/target/linux/oxnas/files/drivers/clk/clk-oxnas.c b/target/linux/oxnas/files/drivers/clk/clk-oxnas.c index 00d0f7a..4dc6c44 100644 --- a/target/linu

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 1/5] oxnas: remove obsolete __cpuinit

Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle --- target/linux/oxnas/files/arch/arm/mach-oxnas/platsmp.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/target/linux/oxnas/files/arch/arm/mach-oxnas/platsmp.c b/target/linux/oxnas/files/arch/arm/mach-oxnas/platsmp.c index c41a3d1..8e4e2d8

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 0/5] oxnas: update platform and drivers for kernel 4.3

Quite some maintainance work was needed to keep oxnas working on more recent kernels. Most notably, stmmac was restructured upstream and now enforces SoC glue to live in platform drivers. oxnas: remove obsolete __cpuinit oxnas: fix duplicate include in clk-oxnas oxnas: prepare irqchip driver

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] modules: crypto-rng changes additions for kernel 4.3

Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle --- package/kernel/linux/modules/crypto.mk | 16 +--- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/package/kernel/linux/modules/crypto.mk b/package/kernel/linux/modules/crypto.mk index 82d2ca8..1179fff 100644 --- a/package/kernel/linux/mo

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] kernel: add support for KERNEL_CGROUP_PIDS

Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle --- config/Config-kernel.in | 7 +++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) diff --git a/config/Config-kernel.in b/config/Config-kernel.in index 2572bf4..38d953c 100644 --- a/config/Config-kernel.in +++ b/config/Config-kernel.in @@ -265,6 +265,13 @@ if KERNEL_CGROUPS

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] kernel: add some missing symbols for 4.3

Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle --- target/linux/generic/config-4.3 | 9 + 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/target/linux/generic/config-4.3 b/target/linux/generic/config-4.3 index 012c57e..b3d47b7 100644 --- a/target/linux/generic/config-4.3 +++ b/target/linux/generic/config-4.3

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] x86: add EPIA subtarget

x86: add VIA EPIA subtarget Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle --- include/target.mk| 1 + target/linux/x86/Makefile| 2 +- target/linux/x86/epia/config-default | 213 +++ target/linux/x86/epia/target.mk | 10 ++ 4 files changed,

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] modules: package VIA AC97 modules

Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle --- package/kernel/linux/modules/sound.mk | 34 ++ 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+) diff --git a/package/kernel/linux/modules/sound.mk b/package/kernel/linux/modules/sound.mk index ab83103..603bb70 100644 --- a/package/kernel/linux/mod

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] modules: enable crypto hardware modules

set CONFIG_CRYPTO_HW=y to enable build of crypto-hw modules. Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle --- package/kernel/linux/modules/crypto.mk | 6 ++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletion(-) diff --git a/package/kernel/linux/modules/crypto.mk b/package/kernel/linux/modules/crypto.mk index c790

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] proto 'none' overwriting tun interfaces

hi Adam, I can confirm this bug. You may open a ticket on dev.openwrt.org best, lynxis pgpLsloA4JMqy.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li

[OpenWrt-Devel] proto 'none' overwriting tun interfaces

Hi all, I've been compiling OpenWRT builds for my home router (Netgear WNDR3800 and now a WD MyNet N750) for a number of years. I just recently encountered a problem with the OpenVPN tun interfaces are showing up without IP addresses after a reboot. I have the following in my /etc/config/networ

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2 4/4] kernel: add usb-mass-storage-gadget driver package

This is another useful gadget driver that can allow an OTG port to act as a mass storage device. Signed-off-by: Pushpal Sidhu --- Changes in v2: * None package/kernel/linux/modules/usb.mk | 17 + 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) diff --git a/package/kernel/linux/modules/usb.mk

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2 3/4] kernel: add mvsw61xx module package

Adds the package to select the mvsw61xx module present in the 3.18/4.0/4.1 kernels. Signed-off-by: Pushpal Sidhu --- Changes v2: * None package/kernel/linux/modules/netdevices.mk | 14 ++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) diff --git a/package/kernel/linux/modules/netdevices.mk b/p

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] kernel: add ath3k module package

Adds a package for the ath3k kernel module, present in 3.18/4.0/4.1 kernels Signed-off-by: Pushpal Sidhu --- Changes in v2: * ath3k now depends on ar3k-firmware package/kernel/linux/modules/other.mk | 19 +++ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) diff --git a/package/kernel/linux/m

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2 1/4] firmware: linux-firmware: Add ibt-firmware and ar3k-firmware packages

Some bluetooth devices require firmware. Add intel bluetooth and ar3k for now. Signed-off-by: Pushpal Sidhu --- Changes v2: * None package/firmware/linux-firmware/Makefile | 40 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+) diff --git a/package/firmware/linux-firmware/Make

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] Add several OpenWrt Packages

Patch series adds the following packages that can be selected through OpenWrt's make system: * ibt firmware * ar3k firmware * ath3k kernel module * mvsw61xx kernel module * g_mass_storage kernel module Changes since v1: * ath3k kernel module now depends on ar3k firmware firmware: linux-fir

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 23:18, Bruno Randolf wrote: > On 10/12/2015 03:22 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote: When using tags as a starting point (via git describe), somebody has to create those tags, which is cumbersome (and would mean adding lots of useless ones). >>> >>> What's cumbersome? And why wou

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

Hi All, Here are some commands to make a "full" git repo, from the "trunk" repo (the only complaint that everyone agrees on) We keep git commit sha's for the trunk, and we add all branches/tags It needs some more tunning, but it's a good start :) 1) clone the trunk repo git clone git://git.openw

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 10/12/2015 03:22 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote: >>> When using tags as a starting point (via git describe), somebody has to >>> create those tags, which is cumbersome (and would mean adding lots of >>> useless ones). >> >> What's cumbersome? And why would you have to create useless tags? >> > Many peo

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: On 2015-10-12 22:36, David Lang wrote: On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: On 2015-10-12 22:28, David Lang wrote: On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: On 2015-10-12 22:02, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: Would it be possible to track

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

So the questions to be answered to provide a build version string are. - Are you planning to use git tags for something? What are you needs for it? - What information would you like to have from the build? Examples: last upstream common commit, current commit, dirtiness, officialness. Also, I am

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 22:36, David Lang wrote: > On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: > >> On 2015-10-12 22:28, David Lang wrote: >>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: >>> On 2015-10-12 22:02, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: > Would it be possible to track the revision number in an

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: If someone checks out the source and compiles a new copy (with local modifications), reporting a SVN version is as misleading as a git hash. It may not always be accurate, but the SVN version is actually useful in most cases, even when modifications are

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: On 2015-10-12 22:28, David Lang wrote: On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: On 2015-10-12 22:02, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: Would it be possible to track the revision number in an automated way even in a git repo? So store the r numb

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 22:19, David Lang wrote: > On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: > >> On 2015-10-12 22:06, David Lang wrote: >>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Jonathan Bennett wrote: >>> His point is that users don't ever do an SVN checkout. Because the r number is baked into the image, it's a

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

> > We currently don't have any tags for mainline trunk, since we usually > don't directly release from it. > I would like to know how you usually release. Can you map a commit to a release, if you can't, then we may use another simpler method. $parent-$commit$dirty That would give you info enou

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 22:28, David Lang wrote: > On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: > >> On 2015-10-12 22:02, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: >>> Would it be possible to track the revision number in an automated >>> way even in a git repo? So store the r number, and automatically >>> inc

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 14:04:09 +0200 Felix Fietkau wrote: > If we do everything in git, we either have to constantly remember to tag > revisions, Only some milestones would have to be tagged on a regular basis. This could even be done automatically with a daily tag or such. git describe will do th

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: On 2015-10-12 22:02, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: Would it be possible to track the revision number in an automated way even in a git repo? So store the r number, and automatically increment on commits. Not sure if that's an option, but i

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: On 2015-10-12 22:06, David Lang wrote: On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Jonathan Bennett wrote: His point is that users don't ever do an SVN checkout. Because the r number is baked into the image, it's a really easy and obvious way for an end user to report the r

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 22:02, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: > Would it be possible to track the revision number in an automated > way even in a git repo? So store the r number, and automatically > increment on commits. Not sure if that's an option, but it seems > like it might address the

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 22:06, David Lang wrote: > On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Jonathan Bennett wrote: > >> His point is that users don't ever do an SVN checkout. Because the r number >> is baked into the image, it's a really easy and obvious way for an end user >> to report the revision in a bug report. I can se

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Jonathan Bennett wrote: His point is that users don't ever do an SVN checkout. Because the r number is baked into the image, it's a really easy and obvious way for an end user to report the revision in a bug report. I can see the advantage in this. If we are to move to git,

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

> > Would it be possible to track the revision number in an automated way even > in a git repo? So store the r number, and automatically increment on > commits. Not sure if that's an option, but it seems like it might address > the problem. > In git you wouldn't need such thing, the way would be

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

> > I have yet to see an approach for this that actually works and deals > with all the common scenarios where people fork OpenWrt and make a few > local changes. > I see I have not enough information on what are the common use cases. For me, these are the following: - User clones openwrt master,

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 2:11 PM David Lang wrote: > On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: > > > On 2015-10-12 16:11, Roman Yeryomin wrote: > >> On 12 October 2015 at 16:34, Felix Fietkau wrote: > >>> On 2015-10-12 15:09, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: > Right now, the revision number

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On Mon, 12 Oct 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: On 2015-10-12 16:11, Roman Yeryomin wrote: On 12 October 2015 at 16:34, Felix Fietkau wrote: On 2015-10-12 15:09, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: Right now, the revision number (r) is really useful to figure out what particular openwrt version

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 16:20, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: > I haven't seen a single instance of somebody doing this, and in my > opinion it would be kind of stupid anyway :) > We don't even advertise the SVN server URL to users anymore for a > reason. > > > This was a way to demonstrate

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 16:47, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: > Many people follow current trunk, and we need to have precise version > information for that when they report a bug. We don't want to regularly > tag stuff just to keep reported version information up to date. > > > This is already

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

> > Many people follow current trunk, and we need to have precise version > information for that when they report a bug. We don't want to regularly > tag stuff just to keep reported version information up to date. > This is already done using --dirty. I generates all the information you need. You

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 15:31, Bruno Randolf wrote: > On 10/12/2015 01:43 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote: >> When using tags as a starting point (via git describe), somebody has to >> create those tags, which is cumbersome (and would mean adding lots of >> useless ones). > > What's cumbersome? And why would you ha

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 16:11, Roman Yeryomin wrote: > On 12 October 2015 at 16:34, Felix Fietkau wrote: >> On 2015-10-12 15:09, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: >>> Right now, the revision number (r) is really useful to figure >>> out what particular openwrt version is being used, when people report >

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

> > I haven't seen a single instance of somebody doing this, and in my > opinion it would be kind of stupid anyway :) > We don't even advertise the SVN server URL to users anymore for a reason. > This was a way to demonstrate that the forking point is not actually a problem SVN solves. Not having

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 12 October 2015 at 16:34, Felix Fietkau wrote: > On 2015-10-12 15:09, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: >> Right now, the revision number (r) is really useful to figure >> out what particular openwrt version is being used, when people report >> bugs. The commit hash cannot be used as a

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH procd] cmake: use CMAKE_INSTALL_* variables

On 2015-09-17 13:54, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: > Replace hard-coded installation directories with cmake-provided > variables, which gives more flexibility on where to install > final binaries. Great simplification for usage with e.g. BitBake recipes. > > Signed-off-by: Sergiy Kibrik Doesn't work for m

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 10/11/2015 01:48 PM, John Crispin wrote: > although i see the point, out of tree fork have never been relevant to > any core decision makings I understand that this is not the main concern for core OpenWRT developers, but on the other hand you must be aware that there exist several of these "fo

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 15:09, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: > Right now, the revision number (r) is really useful to figure > out what particular openwrt version is being used, when people report > bugs. The commit hash cannot be used as a replacement, since it might be > one that isn't pres

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 10/12/2015 01:43 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote: > When using tags as a starting point (via git describe), somebody has to > create those tags, which is cumbersome (and would mean adding lots of > useless ones). What's cumbersome? And why would you have to create useless tags? I would actually take t

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

Too many voices, which blame svn and almost no advocates. So let me change this situation. As an occasional patch maker, I am fairly happy with current workflow based on git+svn mix. I *think* that this is a good solution exactly in this case and for this project. May be some random project could

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

> > Right now, the revision number (r) is really useful to figure > out what particular openwrt version is being used, when people report > bugs. The commit hash cannot be used as a replacement, since it might be > one that isn't present in the official repo. > When using tags as a starting point (

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

2015-10-12 15:04 GMT+03:00 Felix Fietkau : > While it works fine for packages, I don't think the pull request stuff > is very usable for OpenWrt core, which has a more centralized > development model. > One reason why we haven't moved the main repo to git yet is that we lose > the advantage of havi

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 14:29, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: > While it works fine for packages, I don't think the pull request stuff > is very usable for OpenWrt core, which has a more centralized > development model. > One reason why we haven't moved the main repo to git yet is that we lose

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

> > > since kernel.org was compromised. And gitlab/github > > are pretty similar. > Sure, just giving some background on where gitolite was being used and the less-known features it has. While it works fine for packages, I don't think the pull request stuff > is very usable fo

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 11:44, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: > that reminded me to check, and indeed, I only use > git://git.openwrt.org/openwrt.git > anyway :) > > ​ > I do use the openwrt mirror github hosts, and I suppose is mirroring > that one. > > I th

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2 1/3] ramips: Add DTS files for HiWiFi HC5x61 models

On 10 October 2015 at 22:04, 康 wrote: > > At 2015-09-29 10:10:41, "Yousong Zhou" wrote: >>Hi, >> >>Previously this year, there were 2 attempts to add support for HC5661 >>and HC5761 to OpenWrt trunk [1,2]. I only had a HC5661 and it was >>quite a while ago but the issues then should still remain

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

> > that reminded me to check, and indeed, I only use > git://git.openwrt.org/openwrt.git anyway :) > ​ I do use the openwrt mirror github hosts, and I suppose is mirroring that one. I think it's already given all the points in Git vs SVN, so I will speak about self hosting and git interfaces. I

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [OpenWrt-Tickets] [OpenWrt] #20473: Source lm_sensors-3.3.5.tar.bz2 for lm-sensors not available on mirror2.openwrt.org

Yes. At the time I also found mirrors. I never submitted a pull request to modify the lm-sensors makefile, because changing the URL to a mirror site did not sound very correct to me. Since the OpenWRT do not support mirror urls, I did not know what could actually be done, besides marking the packet

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 11:27, Roman Yeryomin wrote: > On 12 October 2015 at 12:04, Holger Levsen wrote: >> Hi, >> >> (just a tiny datapoint...) >> >> On Montag, 12. Oktober 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: >>> Which part is cumbersome for you and how exactly would switching the >>> main repo to git solve it? >>

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 12 October 2015 at 12:04, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi, > > (just a tiny datapoint...) > > On Montag, 12. Oktober 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: >> Which part is cumbersome for you and how exactly would switching the >> main repo to git solve it? > > *g* > > that reminded me to check, and indeed, I on

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

Hi, (just a tiny datapoint...) On Montag, 12. Oktober 2015, Felix Fietkau wrote: > Which part is cumbersome for you and how exactly would switching the > main repo to git solve it? *g* that reminded me to check, and indeed, I only use git://git.openwrt.org/openwrt.git anyway :) I *guess* most

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

>>> What would your preferred workflow be? Please list the exact series of >>> steps for it. >> So to summarize, based on the current workflow: >> 1. Be able to send mails (and change status) from within patchwork, e.g. >> how you can do it in trac, just that it gets send out to the ML and the

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 10/12/2015 09:44 AM, John Crispin wrote: > On 12/10/2015 09:07, Steven Barth wrote: >> > And don't get me started about having a completely different Issuetracker >> > with >> > different credentials etc. > indeed there i this thing called trac which i wonder if people actually > use/look at. >

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 10:43, Roman Yeryomin wrote: > On 12 October 2015 at 10:36, Felix Fietkau wrote: >> On 2015-10-12 08:38, Steven Barth wrote: >>> Let's face it though: the current workflow wrt. core patches is crappy. >>> >>> 1. Go to patchwork, see if there is a patch >>> 2. If you want to comment,

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 10:14, Steven Barth wrote: >> What would your preferred workflow be? Please list the exact series of >> steps for it. > So to summarize, based on the current workflow: > 1. Be able to send mails (and change status) from within patchwork, e.g. > how you can do it in trac, just that

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 12 October 2015 at 10:36, Felix Fietkau wrote: > On 2015-10-12 08:38, Steven Barth wrote: >> Let's face it though: the current workflow wrt. core patches is crappy. >> >> 1. Go to patchwork, see if there is a patch >> 2. If you want to comment, switch to mail client, find thread, write reply. >

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

> > Step 5 is unnecessary, patchwork sends emails on status changes. Okay, it seems it does this only for the original submitter, right? I guess it might come in handy to send it to the ML as well, or at least make that possible in the WebUI. > I usually copy the mbox link from patchwork and do t

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] lldpd: implement a reload hook

From: Alexandru Ardelean Seems the default one is not working as expected. The way that reload should work is that the 'start' service call should return 1 (if lldpd is running) and then a normal restart would be called. However, for lldpd a reload would mean just clearing all custom TLVs (if th

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 12/10/2015 09:36, Felix Fietkau wrote: >> Sure could use pwclient and ocassionally do, however it does essentially one >> thing >> > only: save me the download step. Yes, I can also save me the click back to >> > the >> > browser to hit accept and can do that via CLI (if I remember the crypt

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 12/10/2015 09:07, Steven Barth wrote: > And don't get me started about having a completely different Issuetracker with > different credentials etc. indeed there i this thing called trac which i wonder if people actually use/look at. so we really have 3 issues at hand 1) switch the core tree

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

On 2015-10-12 08:38, Steven Barth wrote: > Let's face it though: the current workflow wrt. core patches is crappy. > > 1. Go to patchwork, see if there is a patch > 2. If you want to comment, switch to mail client, find thread, write reply. > 3. If you want to commit: download patch, go to command

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] SVN to GIT transition

>> Let's face it though: the current workflow wrt. core patches is crappy. >> >> 1. Go to patchwork, see if there is a patch >> 2. If you want to comment, switch to mail client, find thread, write reply. >> 3. If you want to commit: download patch, go to command line, see if it >> applies >> 4. T