LGTM. (Haven't checked the network setup.) :-)

Adrian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stijn Tintel [mailto:st...@linux-ipv6.be]
> Sent: Dienstag, 3. Dezember 2019 13:33
> To: Petr Štetiar <yn...@true.cz>; Adrian Schmutzler
> <m...@adrianschmutzler.de>
> Cc: openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org; pozega.tomis...@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] ath79: add support for Ubiquiti LiteBeam
> AC Gen2
> 
> On 3/12/2019 14:31, Petr Štetiar wrote:
> > Adrian Schmutzler <m...@adrianschmutzler.de> [2019-12-03 13:17:04]:
> >
> >> Other ubnt-wa do this, too, they just do not define it in parent node:
> > Ok, I've checked only the parent node.
> >
> >> So, the question is whether it would make sense to remove the line for all 
> >> the
> other ubnt-wa devices, too, then.
> > I would remove it, it doesn't make sense and is misleading.
> >
> > -- ynezz
> 
> Updated my staging tree again:
> https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/staging/stintel.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads
> /lbe-5ac-gen2
> 
> Thanks,
> Stijn

Attachment: openpgp-digital-signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Reply via email to