[LEDE-DEV] rb112/rb133 (adm5120) compile fail

[Hartmut Knaack]

Denis Periša schrieb am 27.02.2017 um 16:36:
> Yes, indeed, old kernel.
> I suck at coding so I'm of no use there.

I also have got an adm5120 device around and thought for some time
already to tinker with it, again. So, seems like now would be a good
time to do that.

> I do have one or two 16mb ram devices, but these 'newer' are all 32MB
> .. plus some swap.. good to go. I don't use luci or any daemons so..
> bridge tools and kernel modules for it and ath5k is pretty much all I
> use. It's like supplementary node to main node mostly. Cheap devices,
> good use.
> 
> Is there any quick tips to try newer kernel? maybe patches still apply?
> Device works, compiles as rb1xx and runs fully. But I have some
> problems with ath*k as it requies some old compatibility crypto that
> google cannot find.
> 
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Stefan Lippers-Hollmann <s.l-h at gmx.de> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On 2017-02-27, Denis Periša wrote:
>>> Ah, now I saw if I enable "BROKEN" that it will show as rb1xx, not
>>> generic.. And does compile altho I cannot get ath5k running for some
>>> crypto reason..
>> [...]
>>
>> Be aware that adm5120 has never been ported to kernel 4.4, nor 4.9 and
>> is stuck on kernel 3.18, which is now EOL. This dependency on a no
>> longer supported kernel version and the fact that the platform as a
>> whole hasn't seen sufficient (or probably any-) development to bump
>> the kernel version to 4.4 (or now 4.9) is one of the major reasons why
>> it is marked BROKEN (another is because most of its devices only have
>> 16 MB RAM, which means you need a very specific/ targetted config to keep
>> it running at all). Chances are very high that the whole platform code
>> will be removed from LEDE shortly, unless it gets the development
>> needed to update it to kernel 4.9.x[1]. If you're interested in keeping
>> adm5120 support available, the situation is probably very urgent to
>> get it ported (and stable) to kernel 4.9+.
>>
>> Disclaimer: I can't speak for the LEDE development team and this response
>> is only my personal interpretation of adm5120's current state and most
>> likely fate.
>>
>> Regards
>>         Stefan Lippers-Hollmann
>>
>> [1]     see http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/lede-dev/2017-February/006321.html
>>         for reference about a platform (au1000) in a similar situation.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lede-dev mailing list
> Lede-dev at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0xFAC89148.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 3086 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/lede-dev/attachments/20170227/bd2b8b27/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/lede-dev/attachments/20170227/bd2b8b27/attachment.sig>