Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
On 04/12/2018, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > > Em 03/12/2018 21:32, David Bauer escreveu: >> Hello Henrique, >> >> On 03.12.18 19:04, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: >>> Is there a viable way to "sysupgrade" from ar71xx to ath79? > >> First things first - sysupgrade is possible (be it with -F option). >> >> The wmac path however changed, it has to be adjusted from "qca95xx_wmac" >> to "platform/ahb/ahb:apb/1810.wmac". > > Yeah, this is troublesome, but at least it can be automated... > >> Another aspect was the LED configuration, as LED naming is very >> inconsistent and often differs from ar71xx. Some LEDs are now not >> included in UCI configuration. > >> So you either need to delete (and recreate) them ore just dump your >> '/etc/config/system' and recreate it using "config_generate". > > Is it possible to have uci-defaults/ to fix those on upgrade (i.e. when > it detects ar71xx-style traces in the system)? As well as the wmac path? > > Because a _lot_ of people will need to do ar71xx->ath79. > > Of course, it could be config-based, so that those who don't need it, > don't waste any FLASH/RAM. > >> For anyone interested, there is a downstream issue at the Gluon project >> regarding this topic. [1] >> >> [1] https://github.com/freifunk-gluon/gluon/issues/1570 > > Thanks > > -- > Henrique de Moraes Holschuh > Analista de Projetos > Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas em Tecnologias de Redes e Operações > (Ceptro.br) > +55 11 5509-3537 R.:4023 > INOC 22548*625 > www.nic.br > > ___ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel > Hi AFAIR, OpenWrt always recommends reseting configuration on major upgrades. Otherwise you easily run into config bugs especially on complex setups. ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > Em 05/12/2018 21:20, Thomas Endt escreveu: > >> Auftrag von Henrique de Moraes Holschuh > >> Do we have a wiki table somewhere that has the device name, ar71xx info > >> and ath79 info, which could be expanded with ar71xx->ath79 status (no, > >> yes but unverified, yes verified to be complete)? > >> > >> That would be really useful to direct efforts on adding ath79 support > >> to something that is still ar71xx-only, as well as adding ar71xx->ath79 > >> support to targets of interest (i.e. those one happens to know what > >> changes are required for the migration, really). > >> > >> I suppose one would also add any remarks about ath79 support being > >> incomplete or any regressions for each target one knows about, too. > >> That would help steering the ar71xx deprecation. > > > > There is a table that documents the ath79 status in the OpenWrt forum: > > https://forum.openwrt.org/t/ath79-target-status/18614/9 > > > > The place to put this into the wiki would be: > > https://openwrt.org/docs/techref/targets/ath79 > > > > > > We can define a new target "ar71xx-ath79" for the dataentries, which would > > then give us these 3 options: > > > > 1) "ar71xx" # device is ar71xx only > > 2) "ath79" # device is ath79 only > > 3) "ar71xx-ath79"# device is migrated (and working, if nothing in > > "Unsupported Functions") > > > > ---> devices will automatically show up on the ath79 and/or ar71xx wikipage > > (slight modifications necessary). > > > > For "ath79 WIP" devices, we can set the "Unsupported Functions" datafield > > (that's where WIP usually is found) to "ath79 WIP, see forum". > > Any detailed discussion or description of incomplete support should happen > > elsewhere, i.e. either in the forum or on the respective devicepages. > > > > Please let me know if this meets your requirements. > > Yes, this would do it nicely, provided that we take care to > describe in the web pages what ar71xx-ath79 means. > > Note that my answer assumes "migrated" (i.e. ar71xx-ath79) > means the glue to migrate and convert low-level config (LEDs, > etc) when updating from ar71xx -> ath79 is in place on the > ath79 port. > > If it just does ar71xx _and_ ath79, BUT one has to manually > adjust configuration when migrating from ar71xx to ath79, it > would have to be flagged as WIP or something like that, even if > all of its functions are fully implemented and working in > ath79. One thing we want to avoid meanwhile is keeping the old stuff "just because" The whole point of moving to ath79 is to be closer to upstream. If we just go and repatch everythign to make it compatible with the past, we might as well not have bothered. We want to make sure that any migrations are migrations to new stuff _only_ not adapting things to stay in the same place. Cheers, Karl P signature.html Description: OpenPGP Digital Signature ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
Em 06/12/2018 18:18, Thomas Endt escreveu: I tried to include your comments while creating these two pages: https://openwrt.org/docs/techref/targets/ar71xx-ath79 https://openwrt.org/unsupported/ath79_wip Please crosscheck. It is perfect, thank you! There is a table that documents the ath79 status in the OpenWrt forum: https://forum.openwrt.org/t/ath79-target-status/18614/9 Can I set all devices listed as "working" to "ar71xx-ath79 + no ath79 WIP"? Probably yes, but I am not the best person to answer that question since I have no idea of what level of ath79 support "working" implies. That said, as the native ath79 support and migration from ar71xx get tested (or completed) for a device, they can lose the WIP tag, so I see no problem with your suggestion... I would not tag something that fails to boot with ethernet access still working and configured after an ar71xx->ath79 migration as "ar71xx-ath79 WIP" unless one can add a "!beware!" sort of reminder to the listing, though ;-) -- Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Analista de Projetos Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas em Tecnologias de Redes e Operações (Ceptro.br) +55 11 5509-3537 R.:4023 INOC 22548*625 www.nic.br ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh > Em 05/12/2018 21:20, Thomas Endt escreveu: > >> Auftrag von Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Do we have a wiki table > >> somewhere that has the device name, ar71xx info and ath79 info, which > >> could be expanded with ar71xx->ath79 status (no, yes but unverified, > >> yes verified to be complete)? > >> > >> That would be really useful to direct efforts on adding ath79 support > >> to something that is still ar71xx-only, as well as adding > >> ar71xx->ath79 support to targets of interest (i.e. those one happens > >> to know what changes are required for the migration, really). > >> > >> I suppose one would also add any remarks about ath79 support being > >> incomplete or any regressions for each target one knows about, too. > >> That would help steering the ar71xx deprecation. > > > > There is a table that documents the ath79 status in the OpenWrt forum: > > https://forum.openwrt.org/t/ath79-target-status/18614/9 > > > > The place to put this into the wiki would be: > > https://openwrt.org/docs/techref/targets/ath79 > > > > > > We can define a new target "ar71xx-ath79" for the dataentries, which > would then give us these 3 options: > > > > 1) "ar71xx" # device is ar71xx only > > 2) "ath79" # device is ath79 only > > 3) "ar71xx-ath79"# device is migrated (and working, if nothing in > "Unsupported Functions") > > > > ---> devices will automatically show up on the ath79 and/or ar71xx wikipage > (slight modifications necessary). > > > > For "ath79 WIP" devices, we can set the "Unsupported Functions" datafield > (that's where WIP usually is found) to "ath79 WIP, see forum". > > Any detailed discussion or description of incomplete support should > happen elsewhere, i.e. either in the forum or on the respective devicepages. > > > > Please let me know if this meets your requirements. > > Yes, this would do it nicely, provided that we take care to describe in the > web > pages what ar71xx-ath79 means. > > Note that my answer assumes "migrated" (i.e. ar71xx-ath79) means the glue > to migrate and convert low-level config (LEDs, etc) when updating from > ar71xx -> ath79 is in place on the ath79 port. > > If it just does ar71xx _and_ ath79, BUT one has to manually adjust > configuration when migrating from ar71xx to ath79, it would have to be > flagged as WIP or something like that, even if all of its functions are fully > implemented and working in ath79. I tried to include your comments while creating these two pages: https://openwrt.org/docs/techref/targets/ar71xx-ath79 https://openwrt.org/unsupported/ath79_wip Please crosscheck. > > There is a table that documents the ath79 status in the OpenWrt forum: > > https://forum.openwrt.org/t/ath79-target-status/18614/9 Can I set all devices listed as "working" to "ar71xx-ath79 + no ath79 WIP"? ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
Em 05/12/2018 21:20, Thomas Endt escreveu: Auftrag von Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Do we have a wiki table somewhere that has the device name, ar71xx info and ath79 info, which could be expanded with ar71xx->ath79 status (no, yes but unverified, yes verified to be complete)? That would be really useful to direct efforts on adding ath79 support to something that is still ar71xx-only, as well as adding ar71xx->ath79 support to targets of interest (i.e. those one happens to know what changes are required for the migration, really). I suppose one would also add any remarks about ath79 support being incomplete or any regressions for each target one knows about, too. That would help steering the ar71xx deprecation. There is a table that documents the ath79 status in the OpenWrt forum: https://forum.openwrt.org/t/ath79-target-status/18614/9 The place to put this into the wiki would be: https://openwrt.org/docs/techref/targets/ath79 We can define a new target "ar71xx-ath79" for the dataentries, which would then give us these 3 options: 1) "ar71xx" # device is ar71xx only 2) "ath79" # device is ath79 only 3) "ar71xx-ath79"# device is migrated (and working, if nothing in "Unsupported Functions") ---> devices will automatically show up on the ath79 and/or ar71xx wikipage (slight modifications necessary). For "ath79 WIP" devices, we can set the "Unsupported Functions" datafield (that's where WIP usually is found) to "ath79 WIP, see forum". Any detailed discussion or description of incomplete support should happen elsewhere, i.e. either in the forum or on the respective devicepages. Please let me know if this meets your requirements. Yes, this would do it nicely, provided that we take care to describe in the web pages what ar71xx-ath79 means. Note that my answer assumes "migrated" (i.e. ar71xx-ath79) means the glue to migrate and convert low-level config (LEDs, etc) when updating from ar71xx -> ath79 is in place on the ath79 port. If it just does ar71xx _and_ ath79, BUT one has to manually adjust configuration when migrating from ar71xx to ath79, it would have to be flagged as WIP or something like that, even if all of its functions are fully implemented and working in ath79. Thanks! -- Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Analista de Projetos Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas em Tecnologias de Redes e Operações (Ceptro.br) +55 11 5509-3537 R.:4023 INOC 22548*625 www.nic.br ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: openwrt-devel [mailto:openwrt-devel-boun...@lists.openwrt.org] Im > Auftrag von Henrique de Moraes Holschuh > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2018 11:03 [...] > Do we have a wiki table somewhere that has the device name, ar71xx info > and ath79 info, which could be expanded with ar71xx->ath79 status (no, > yes but unverified, yes verified to be complete)? > > That would be really useful to direct efforts on adding ath79 support > to something that is still ar71xx-only, as well as adding ar71xx->ath79 > support to targets of interest (i.e. those one happens to know what > changes are required for the migration, really). > > I suppose one would also add any remarks about ath79 support being > incomplete or any regressions for each target one knows about, too. > That would help steering the ar71xx deprecation. There is a table that documents the ath79 status in the OpenWrt forum: https://forum.openwrt.org/t/ath79-target-status/18614/9 The place to put this into the wiki would be: https://openwrt.org/docs/techref/targets/ath79 We can define a new target "ar71xx-ath79" for the dataentries, which would then give us these 3 options: 1) "ar71xx" # device is ar71xx only 2) "ath79" # device is ath79 only 3) "ar71xx-ath79"# device is migrated (and working, if nothing in "Unsupported Functions") ---> devices will automatically show up on the ath79 and/or ar71xx wikipage (slight modifications necessary). For "ath79 WIP" devices, we can set the "Unsupported Functions" datafield (that's where WIP usually is found) to "ath79 WIP, see forum". Any detailed discussion or description of incomplete support should happen elsewhere, i.e. either in the forum or on the respective devicepages. Please let me know if this meets your requirements. Thomas ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
Em 04/12/2018 19:57, Piotr Dymacz escreveu: On 04.12.2018 17:08, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: Another aspect was the LED configuration, as LED naming is very inconsistent and often differs from ar71xx. Some LEDs are now not included in UCI configuration. > So you either need to delete (and recreate) them ore just dump your '/etc/config/system' and recreate it using "config_generate". Is it possible to have uci-defaults/ to fix those on upgrade (i.e. when it detects ar71xx-style traces in the system)? As well as the wmac path? Because a _lot_ of people will need to do ar71xx->ath79. ar71xx already includes such "migration" uci-defaults scripts and I believe we could use something similar in ath79 to make the update transparent for users (fix wmac path, LED names etc.). LED example: https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/blob/master/target/linux/ar71xx/base-files/etc/uci-defaults/04_led_migration Yes, that's exactly what I meant... In ath79's case, it makes sense to handle not only changes in the ath79 DTSes (ath79->ath79), but also migrations from ar71xx (ar71xx->ath79), even if we create a specific config option to handle that (to compile it out from small flash devices, for example). Do we have a wiki table somewhere that has the device name, ar71xx info and ath79 info, which could be expanded with ar71xx->ath79 status (no, yes but unverified, yes verified to be complete)? That would be really useful to direct efforts on adding ath79 support to something that is still ar71xx-only, as well as adding ar71xx->ath79 support to targets of interest (i.e. those one happens to know what changes are required for the migration, really). I suppose one would also add any remarks about ath79 support being incomplete or any regressions for each target one knows about, too. That would help steering the ar71xx deprecation. -- Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Analista de Projetos Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas em Tecnologias de Redes e Operações (Ceptro.br) +55 11 5509-3537 R.:4023 INOC 22548*625 www.nic.br ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
Hi Henrique, On 04.12.2018 17:08, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: Another aspect was the LED configuration, as LED naming is very inconsistent and often differs from ar71xx. Some LEDs are now not included in UCI configuration. > So you either need to delete (and recreate) them ore just dump your '/etc/config/system' and recreate it using "config_generate". Is it possible to have uci-defaults/ to fix those on upgrade (i.e. when it detects ar71xx-style traces in the system)? As well as the wmac path? Because a _lot_ of people will need to do ar71xx->ath79. ar71xx already includes such "migration" uci-defaults scripts and I believe we could use something similar in ath79 to make the update transparent for users (fix wmac path, LED names etc.). LED example: https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/blob/master/target/linux/ar71xx/base-files/etc/uci-defaults/04_led_migration -- Cheers, Piotr ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
John Crispin wrote: > > On 03/12/2018 19:04, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > (openwrt-adm dropped from this subthread) > > > > Em 03/12/2018 15:29, Stijn Segers escreveu: > >> Op ma, 3 dec 2018 om 5:51 , schreef John Crispin : > >>> The idea was to fade out ar71xx after the next release and only accept > >>> new boards for ath79. However i'd been fine taking that step as of now. > >>> i have noticed that the ath79 patches far out number the ar71xx > >>> ones. we > >>> have lots of patches that migrate boards and i have seen a few new > >>> boards added only to ath79. lets see how the thread goes, looking > >>> fwd to > >>> hearing opinions... > > > >> Rather than further duplicating efforts, I'd 'encourage'* ath79 only > >> submissions. > > > > Is there a viable way to "sysupgrade" from ar71xx to ath79? > > > > Even if it would require a model-by-model "update map" for the > > lower-level stuff (LEDs, switch ports?, etc), that would be valuable. > > Otherwise, it will be difficult for people with fleets of ar71xx > > devices to remotely switch them to ath79... > > > afaik this works ootb, if not its easy to make work. it was > indeed one of the primary concerns in the early stages of the > task Compat names are in the makefiles for at least some of the targets that are known to upgrade nicely, where they're not directly compatible by name alone. Cheers, Karl P signature.html Description: OpenPGP Digital Signature ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
Hello Henrique, On 03.12.18 19:04, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > Is there a viable way to "sysupgrade" from ar71xx to ath79? > > Even if it would require a model-by-model "update map" for the > lower-level stuff (LEDs, switch ports?, etc), that would be valuable. > Otherwise, it will be difficult for people with fleets of ar71xx devices > to remotely switch them to ath79... We've looked into this issue a few weeks ago. We have a lot of wireless mesh communities in Germany using thousands of ar71xx devices, so this is something we need. First things first - sysupgrade is possible (be it with -F option). The wmac path however changed, it has to be adjusted from "qca95xx_wmac" to "platform/ahb/ahb:apb/1810.wmac". Another aspect was the LED configuration, as LED naming is very inconsistent and often differs from ar71xx. Some LEDs are now not included in UCI configuration. So you either need to delete (and recreate) them ore just dump your '/etc/config/system' and recreate it using "config_generate". I expect ethernet and switch configuration to be consistent between ar71xx and ath79, but exceptions may apply. Tested this migration strategy across some devices and it worked flawlessly. For anyone interested, there is a downstream issue at the Gluon project regarding this topic. [1] [1] https://github.com/freifunk-gluon/gluon/issues/1570 Best wishes David ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
> On 3 Dec 2018, at 18:23, Petr Štetiar wrote: > > On December 3, 2018 6:04:28 PM UTC, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh > wrote: >> (openwrt-adm dropped from this subthread) >> >> Is there a viable way to "sysupgrade" from ar71xx to ath79? > > Have you tried it? It didn't work for you? > >> Even if it would require a model-by-model "update map" for the >> lower-level stuff (LEDs, switch ports?, etc), that would be valuable. >> Otherwise, it will be difficult for people with fleets of ar71xx >> devices >> to remotely switch them to ath79... > > It works out of the box for me if the ar71xx board name matches the one in > ath79 DTS (which isn't the case for example for Nanostation, but I'll send > the patch to fix that), otherwise you just need to use force flag in > sysupgrade (if you know what you're doing) and it should work. I did one of the earlier C7 v2 migrations, with the minor glitch of having to swap the wifi devices everything went very well. Cheers, Kevin D-B 012C ACB2 28C6 C53E 9775 9123 B3A2 389B 9DE2 334A ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
On 03/12/2018 19:50, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: Apparently I was working on outdated information (likely from the early days of ath79). Likely I got it from the ML archive or an older forum post. Sorry about the noise (and happy it is supposed to just work!). all cool, this is what the discussion is about, we want to know what doubts people have and if they have been resolved and/or how we can resolve them, allowing us to make an educated decision John ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
Em 03/12/2018 16:23, Petr Štetiar escreveu: On December 3, 2018 6:04:28 PM UTC, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: (openwrt-adm dropped from this subthread) Is there a viable way to "sysupgrade" from ar71xx to ath79? Have you tried it? It didn't work for you? Even if it would require a model-by-model "update map" for the lower-level stuff (LEDs, switch ports?, etc), that would be valuable. Otherwise, it will be difficult for people with fleets of ar71xx devices to remotely switch them to ath79... It works out of the box for me if the ar71xx board name matches the one in ath79 DTS (which isn't the case for example for Nanostation, but I'll send the patch to fix that), otherwise you just need to use force flag in sysupgrade (if you know what you're doing) and it should work. Apparently I was working on outdated information (likely from the early days of ath79). Likely I got it from the ML archive or an older forum post. Sorry about the noise (and happy it is supposed to just work!). I will test the ar71xx->ath79 sysupgrade on the (few) models we have in our lab, if any doesn't work on that particular model, I will try to cook a patch. Thanks! -- Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Analista de Projetos Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas em Tecnologias de Redes e Operações (Ceptro.br) +55 11 5509-3537 R.:4023 INOC 22548*625 www.nic.br ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
On December 3, 2018 6:04:28 PM UTC, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: >(openwrt-adm dropped from this subthread) > >Is there a viable way to "sysupgrade" from ar71xx to ath79? Have you tried it? It didn't work for you? >Even if it would require a model-by-model "update map" for the >lower-level stuff (LEDs, switch ports?, etc), that would be valuable. >Otherwise, it will be difficult for people with fleets of ar71xx >devices >to remotely switch them to ath79... It works out of the box for me if the ar71xx board name matches the one in ath79 DTS (which isn't the case for example for Nanostation, but I'll send the patch to fix that), otherwise you just need to use force flag in sysupgrade (if you know what you're doing) and it should work. -- ynezz ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
On 03/12/2018 19:04, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: (openwrt-adm dropped from this subthread) Em 03/12/2018 15:29, Stijn Segers escreveu: Op ma, 3 dec 2018 om 5:51 , schreef John Crispin : The idea was to fade out ar71xx after the next release and only accept new boards for ath79. However i'd been fine taking that step as of now. i have noticed that the ath79 patches far out number the ar71xx ones. we have lots of patches that migrate boards and i have seen a few new boards added only to ath79. lets see how the thread goes, looking fwd to hearing opinions... Rather than further duplicating efforts, I'd 'encourage'* ath79 only submissions. Is there a viable way to "sysupgrade" from ar71xx to ath79? Even if it would require a model-by-model "update map" for the lower-level stuff (LEDs, switch ports?, etc), that would be valuable. Otherwise, it will be difficult for people with fleets of ar71xx devices to remotely switch them to ath79... afaik this works ootb, if not its easy to make work. it was indeed one of the primary concerns in the early stages of the task John ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] ar71xx Vs ath79 -- sysupgrade
(openwrt-adm dropped from this subthread) Em 03/12/2018 15:29, Stijn Segers escreveu: Op ma, 3 dec 2018 om 5:51 , schreef John Crispin : The idea was to fade out ar71xx after the next release and only accept new boards for ath79. However i'd been fine taking that step as of now. i have noticed that the ath79 patches far out number the ar71xx ones. we have lots of patches that migrate boards and i have seen a few new boards added only to ath79. lets see how the thread goes, looking fwd to hearing opinions... Rather than further duplicating efforts, I'd 'encourage'* ath79 only submissions. Is there a viable way to "sysupgrade" from ar71xx to ath79? Even if it would require a model-by-model "update map" for the lower-level stuff (LEDs, switch ports?, etc), that would be valuable. Otherwise, it will be difficult for people with fleets of ar71xx devices to remotely switch them to ath79... -- Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Analista de Projetos Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas em Tecnologias de Redes e Operações (Ceptro.br) +55 11 5509-3537 R.:4023 INOC 22548*625 www.nic.br ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
