> > What's the base for the v0/v1 distinction? Is that visible to the user > > somehow? > > I fear that meaningful naming will be the biggest problem here... > > v0 and v1 mostly come from the need to distinguish between them. You could > think of the digit as the least significant digit of the SoC. We could make > them -7240 and -7241 instead of -v0 and -v1 to be slightly clearer what the > names mean, but that seemed ugly. And, no, as far as I know, the SoC is not > indicated on the exterior of the device at all. The user will have to figure > out the right version to use somehow.
That's what I feared. I do not like the -v0/-v1 very much because this is somewhat "reserved" by hardware revisions as TP-Link uses them, and will have everyone looking for a printed version on the device. So, I'd actually prefer -ar7240/-ar7241 suffixes (which will also clearly state what's the difference) unless we can find some identifier from Ubiquiti. What happens if you flash the "wrong" image? Do you see any chance to have one of the images as "default" without suffix or would this make things worse? Best Adrian _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
