Handling of devices both in ar71xx and ath79 in releases [Was: Re: Firmware Selector Setup]

[Adrian Schmutzler]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: openwrt-adm [mailto:openwrt-adm-bounces at lists.openwrt.org] On
> Behalf Of Moritz Warning
> Sent: Sonntag, 13. September 2020 13:26
> To: Daniel Golle <daniel at makrotopia.org>
> Cc: Petr Štetiar <ynezz at true.cz>; OpenWrt Project Administration
> <openwrt-adm at lists.openwrt.org>
> Subject: Re: Handling of devices both in ar71xx and ath79 in releases [Was:
> Re: Firmware Selector Setup]
> 
> On 9/13/20 1:02 PM, Daniel Golle wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 12:53:01PM +0200, Moritz Warning wrote:
> >> On 9/13/20 11:30 AM, Petr Štetiar wrote:
> >>> Moritz Warning <moritzwarning at web.de> [2020-08-01 02:13:05]:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>>> we have reached the point that we can finally set up the firmware
> >>>> selector
> >>>
> >>> while preparing the deployment, I've just noticed, that for the
> >>> 19.07 releases the firmware selector is quite confusing for devices
> >>> which are in ar71xx and ath79, like for example TP-LINK Archer C7 v5.
> >>>
> >>> It shows `TP-LINK Archer C7 v5` in the dropdown menu for ar71xx
> >>> target and it shows `TP-Link Archer C7 v5` in the dropdown menu for
> ath79 target.
> >>>
> >>> Would it make sense to handle this corner case as well? For example
> >>> having `TP-LINK Archer C7 v5 (ar71xx)` and `TP-Link Archer C7 v5
> >>> (ath79)` in the dropdown menu?
> >> Yes. We should handle that corner case. I will fix it.
> "TP-LINK" and "TP-Link" are different vendors to programs.
> So this should be really have been fixed in OpenWrt. ;-)

It is in ath79 in master (AFAIK), but of course not in ar71xx and not in stable branch.

Best

Adrian

> 
> >
> > I guess the same applies for some of the RasbPi boards which can run
> > either as 32-bit armv7 (bcm270x) or 64-bit aarch64 (bcm271x).
> >
> > In that case it's also even a bit more tricky as the best would be to
> > add "(32-bit)" and "(64-bit)" to the device labels as the
> > naming-scheme of bcm chips might not be known by all users...
> >
> I didn't know. Well, let's fix it in OpenWrt.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openwrt-adm mailing list
> openwrt-adm at lists.openwrt.org
> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-adm
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: openpgp-digital-signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 834 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-adm/attachments/20200913/6c7899fd/attachment.sig>