Was unable to communicate TEW-810DR port order was inverted similar to
the D-Link DIR-810L. Tested - Patch corrects port order.
Signed-off-by: J. Scott Heppler
---
target/linux/ramips/mt7620/base-files/etc/board.d/02_network | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/t
I am having some trouble with installing an OpenWrt image I built onto
a Mikrotik RB493AH. I have been using a RB493G for a long time, but I
just bought a 493AH to serve as a backup.
The following, when run on the router, produces the error as indicated:
$ ubiformat /dev/mtd6 -f /tmp/openwrt-ar71
On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 18:15:04 +0200 Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
> On 6/6/20 1:42 AM, Ian Cooper wrote:
> > Removes the standalone implementation of stack smashing protection
> > in gcc's libssp in favour of the native implementation in musl,
> > glibc and uClibc and introduces a uniform configuration in
On 6/6/20 1:42 AM, Ian Cooper wrote:
> Removes the standalone implementation of stack smashing protection
> in gcc's libssp in favour of the native implementation in musl,
> glibc and uClibc and introduces a uniform configuration interface.
>
> This also makes kernel-level stack smashing protectio
Hi,
since nobody really uses the `restricted` field (apart from LuCI itself I
believe) and since I'd like to avoid changing the ABI, I would be fine with
changing the condition to NO_IR || DFS or even just DFS.
Initially the restricted flag was supposed to give a hint to the ui which
channels are
Hi,
DFS channels are not marked as DFS, even though iw will detect that just
fine.
Getting frequencies list through ubus/iwinfo will result in this output
# iwinfo wlan0 freqlist
2.412 GHz (Channel 1)
2.417 GHz (Channel 2)
2.422 GHz (Channel 3)
2.427 GHz (Channel 4)
2.432 GHz (Channel
Merged into my staging tree.
Thank you!
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
On 6/3/20 10:16 PM, Tim Harvey wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 3:21 PM Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
>>
>> On 6/2/20 7:05 PM, Tim Harvey wrote:
>>> The CPT module requires firmware which we add here as well.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tim Harvey
>>> ---
>>> v2: added license file for firmware
>>> ---
>>> ta
Hello,
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 6:56 PM wrote:
> Sorry, but this is not us being mean, it's just the fact that this kind of
> spam protection and mailing list are inherently incompatible.
>
I don't think OP was asking for spam protection to be disabled... I think
the main issue is the DMARC warn
Hi,
> ... does it though? I know it does traditionally, but... is that really
> the only way? IFF you keep this, then yeah, sure, all the other
> justifications are fine, but it's clearly not working well.
in the past we did rewrite the sender to the list mail address and (iirc)
added the origi
wrote:
>
> However, the basic concept of a mailing list requires it to
> change the From header.
... does it though? I know it does traditionally, but... is that really the
only way? IFF you keep this, then yeah, sure, all the other justifications are
fine, but it's clearly not working well
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: R. Diez [mailto:rdiezmail-open...@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Donnerstag, 11. Juni 2020 12:09
> To: openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
> Subject: Problems with e-mail DMARC policy, and other usability issues
>
> Hi all:
>
> I am trying to contribute a few trivial cha
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 ---
Hi all:
I am trying to contribut
The uci config section network.globals set up in /bin/config_generate
will only be created if /proc/sys/net/ipv6 exists.
Correspondingly, lacking IPv6 support, the command
uci set network.globals.packet_steering=1
will fail with "uci: Invalid argument" as the network.globals config
has not been se
14 matches
Mail list logo
