вс, 19 авг. 2018 г. в 12:28, Mathias Kresin <d...@kresin.me>: > > 18.08.2018 14:01, David Bauer: > > Sysupgrading to ath79 from ar71xx currently fails because of mismatching > > supported_devices. ar71xx is expecting "tl-mr3020" which is missing in > > the ath79 image. Upgrading from ath79 is unaffected, as the image > > contains the old string for ar71xx and the new one coming from the > > device-tree. > > > > Signed-off-by: David Bauer <m...@david-bauer.net> > > --- > > target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > index 6ccc9d7dba..dadcd24b42 100644 > > --- a/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > +++ b/target/linux/ath79/image/tiny-tp-link.mk > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ define Device/tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > > DEVICE_TITLE := TP-LINK TL-MR3020 v1 > > DEVICE_PACKAGES := kmod-usb-core kmod-usb-chipidea2 > > kmod-usb-ledtrig-usbport > > TPLINK_HWID := 0x30200001 > > - SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020-v1 > > + SUPPORTED_DEVICES += tl-mr3020 > > endef > > TARGET_DEVICES += tplink_tl-mr3020-v1 > > I was the opinion it's the ar71xx boardname and it's added to allow an > update from the ar71xx image. But lets do the obvious and ask the > author. > > Dmitry, was the SUPPORTED_DEVICES added to allow an update from the > ar71xx image? > > Mathias
Exactly. The idea was to allow updates. We are moving to ath79 and I don't think that this is nice to create problems in upgrade for users. When we are ready to release with ath79 images, we'll need to add the supported devices back. Now only those who can build images themselves are using, si I see no reason why don't we leave the easy upgrade path. _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
