Aren't all the other router projects using the broadcom-wl binary's generally sourced from GPL tarballs? although not necessarily the exact matching ones? DD-WRT and tomato all use broadcom-wl, but I think they use versions that are at least somewhat devices specific unlike OpenWRT which seems to be using a single older version but and it doesn't provide different binary's for different routers, isn't that why they actually have proper wifi support on these routers? From what I gather OpenWRT used this method for better kernel compatibility, but I would say proper working WiFi is much more important than that. I'm fairly sure the other projects have managed to work around the kernel issue for the most part without being forced to give up on using devices specific drivers.
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:47 AM, Felix Fietkau <n...@openwrt.org> wrote: > On 2013-09-17 11:45 PM, James Hilliard wrote: > > Following up on this I'm trying to figure out how broadcom-wl is set up > > in openwrt and what devices specific variables there are how those would > > be changed/determined. I'm trying to fix compatibility problems with > > this driver for a lot of broadcom devices. > broadcom-wl in OpenWrt was built in a way that makes it completely > independent of the kernel version and configuration. > This only works if the Linux specific files are provided in source > format, and the binary only contains the generic parts (the source code > file licenses allow this). > > There is no reasonable way to use binaries from GPL tarballs to achieve > the same, this can only be done by building the driver from source and > packaging it appropriately. > > I hope that I can release an updated version soon. > > - Felix > >
_______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
