Live data from Hacker News

OpenWrt Two Approval

openwrt.org

131–133 of 133 posts

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For another approach to open source networking by Linux Foundation please check DENT OS [1]. > OpenWRT is not yet in a position to influence the hardware design decisions made by companies like Mediatek, Qualcomm, Broadcom for their consumer WiFi product families. Perhaps I'm biased, but I do believe DENT is in much better position and has more chance of influencing the white-box networking vendor than OpenWRT with r…

That doesn't even appear to be attempting to address anything relevant to consumer networking. It's a purely enterprise-focused project, mostly about putting a Debian-based OS onto rackmount ethernet switches.

>That doesn't even appear to be attempting to address anything relevant to consumer networking

Don't be too pessimistic, anything that can contribute to the disaggregation of networking technology will be good for the consumer markets since the companies producing these networking SoC namely Qualcomm, Mediatek, etc should care about their downstream revenues. By adopting the open eco-system champion by SONiC and DENT for networking technology disaggregation, it will definitely spill over to the consumer networking as well since these are the very same companies that design and manufacture the networking pervasive consumer networking SoC.

There are too many and numerous examples of Linux enterprise features that are spilling over to consumer Linux, and the latest is the real-time Linux kernel extensions although it did take like forever (i.e 20 years) to be adopted by the main line Linux kernel.

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#132
post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Those are only mistakes if you ignore the realities of what hardware is available. If you think the focus should be on what hardware is available, then why make a OpenWrt Two instead of buying the existing hardware? > A highly-integrated SoC designed specifically for wireless router usage is a more cost-effective platform than a generic x86 PC. This is exactly why OpenWrt One and probably Two too is just e-waste -…

Am I understanding you correctly: your complaint about OpenWRT software is that they aren't focused exclusively enough on being a router, and your complaint about OpenWRT hardware is that they are focused exclusively on being a router?

Almost...

- There's no hardware for router+NAS functionality, other than repurposing x86 PCs.

- OpenWrt software is not good enough at routing, could be a little better as NAS, but it seems now focused on being usable as a general-purpose desktop OS.

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#133
post #127
post #105

OpenWrt went crazy in the last few years. OpenWrt (the OS) is a mess: - bugs are ignored, - bug fixes ignored, - improvements to core OpenWrt are ignored (although package PRs are still accepted somehow), - almost no new documentation, - no reply for documentation clarifications on the forum, - significant parts of OpenWrt are not accessible for PRs or bug reports: fstools, procd, ubus, etc. - no improvements to crit…

> they're going to make the same mistakes [...] no (e)SATA. > I wish they got back to routing. I feel like you are contradicting yourself.

I'm actually not.

1) OpenWrt software has decent support for NAS-on-router, unfortunately OpenWrt hardware didn't make use of that.

2) OpenWrt hardware has non-replaceable wifi for which OpenWrt simply takes upstream drivers with no investment on their part, not even as much as DD-WRT which have Broadcom drivers working. This makes it e-waste almost immediately.

I think:

- They should abandon hardware entirely.

- If they don't abandon hardware, at least target the router+NAS(+home server) niche, not make a router that's even more hw-crippled than most.

If you look at this webpage [1], where OpenWrt One was proposed and voted for, the intentions are weak and the result doesn't even match those intentions, while the list of what it wasn't intended to be, is exactly what was needed.

[1] https://openwrt.org/voting/2024-01-openwrt-one

Post reply on HN