31–40 of 82 posts
Now if they could just get rid of Linux underneath and use something with better security. L4, maybe. After all, this is for embedded devices which basically run one program.
It is a real pity that the lack of developers is compensated by splitting developer focus on two different forks. If the reasons stated are true, let's hope it works out and strengthens embedded Linux, maybe even leading to a reunion like egcs/gcc.
This announcement comes as a surprise to all the other developers, myself included. - mbm (openwrt founder)
Now if they could just get rid of Linux underneath and use something with better security. L4, maybe. After all, this is for embedded devices which basically run one program.
I typical consumer wireless router runs quite a few programs - routing, switching, dns, firewall, dhcp, web server for configuration, etc.
Now if they could just get rid of Linux underneath and use something with better security. L4, maybe. After all, this is for embedded devices which basically run one program.
I don't know why parent is being downvoted. Linux probably isn't the best OS for this, a microkernel OS or something based on BSD seems to be far saner, especially since we don't need weird hardware support, all home routers use the same three or four families of MIPS and ARM SoCs.
This is a job for a limited protected-mode OS that Just Works. L4, QNX, something like that.
A series of well-designed pages that would help me find the latest info, with notes of workarounds or "no it won't work" would have saved me a lot of Googling to find posts, then having to look at the date of each post to work out the chronology; and would go a long way to helping with adoption.
I was very pleased with OpenWRT even 5-6 years ago! I am sure that things are better now.
A long time openwrt user here. What puzzles me the most is that, those who are forking openwrt are the the majority group of core developers for openwrt, so I don't know why they are leaving the project they're in control in the first place. It seems a few core developers left behind are also in shock, nobody knows why, and there is no dispute in the community that led to the split either, truly a mystery.
Maybe this is the first step towards launching a commercial offering?
The last couple of OpenWRT releases have moved fast, in the future OpenWRT could move closer to the cutting edge without the pressure of users who want long term stability?
It is a real pity that the lack of developers is compensated by splitting developer focus on two different forks. If the reasons stated are true, let's hope it works out and strengthens embedded Linux, maybe even leading to a reunion like egcs/gcc.
This announcement comes as a surprise to all the other developers, myself included. - mbm (openwrt founder)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know why parent is being downvoted. Linux probably isn't the best OS for this, a microkernel OS or something based on BSD seems to be far saner, especially since we don't need weird hardware support, all home routers use the same three or four families of MIPS and ARM SoCs.
Routers are on the front line of computer security. They need to be very resistant to attack. Patch and release won't work; many routers never get patched, and those that do implicitly have a backdoor in the update system. This is a job for a limited protected-mode OS that Just Works. L4, QNX, something like that.
Now if they could just get rid of Linux underneath and use something with better security. L4, maybe. After all, this is for embedded devices which basically run one program.
They could use BSD underneath, like JunOS and Netscaler run on. But maybe an operating system is too large in scope. You're right that these devices only run one application, why use a tool (operating system) that can run many applications? It's a bit like running a hypervisor for only one operating system. There are benefits, true.