Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] boot-wrapper-aarch64.git repository missing/inaccessible; cannot build arm64 targets
On 09/22/2016 08:26 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote: On 09/22/2016 02:38 PM, Alexander Duff wrote: Hello, The quick version: a repository (boot-wrapper-aarch64.git) required for the default build of arm64 OpenWrt targets (default configuration) on the latest version of trunk seems to have disappeared from the Internet, and I'm unsure who to notify or how to proceed. Furthermore, I can't seem to find anyone else reporting this issue or even talking about it and I can't understand why this isn't being reported anywhere, making me paranoid that I somehow messed up (which has been known to happen) or missed some announcement. How about we use this copy: https://github.com/artagnon/boot-wrapper-aarch64 or this one: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mark/boot-wrapper-aarch64.git/ or even better, create a profile for the Foundation v8 simulator, for which this boot wrapper is necessary, if you are using qemu, there is no need for that. Yes, incidentally, my intention was to run this under qemu, anyway. Yesterday, a friend of mine found the second one while sanity checking that the original really was unavailable. Notably, it was created three days ago, probably due to the original being unavailable. I was reticent to just replace the original one for various reasons, but after asking this, I changed line 15 in ~/openwrt/target/linux/arm64/image/boot-wrapper/Makefile from: PKG_SOURCE_URL:=git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cmarinas/boot-wrapper-aarch64.git to: PKG_SOURCE_URL:=git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mark/boot-wrapper-aarch64.git I did a build and it succeeded. I don't know if the original is gone for good or if this is the official new home for this repository, but would it be worth patching that Makefile to use the (currently) working repository? My problem's solved locally, but I don't know how big of an issue this is for others. Thanks for the reply, -Alex ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] boot-wrapper-aarch64.git repository missing/inaccessible; cannot build arm64 targets
On 09/22/2016 02:38 PM, Alexander Duff wrote: > Hello, > > The quick version: a repository (boot-wrapper-aarch64.git) required for > the default build of arm64 OpenWrt targets (default configuration) on > the latest version of trunk seems to have disappeared from the Internet, > and I'm unsure who to notify or how to proceed. Furthermore, I can't > seem to find anyone else reporting this issue or even talking about it > and I can't understand why this isn't being reported anywhere, making me > paranoid that I somehow messed up (which has been known to happen) or > missed some announcement. How about we use this copy: https://github.com/artagnon/boot-wrapper-aarch64 or this one: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mark/boot-wrapper-aarch64.git/ or even better, create a profile for the Foundation v8 simulator, for which this boot wrapper is necessary, if you are using qemu, there is no need for that. -- Florian ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
[OpenWrt-Devel] boot-wrapper-aarch64.git repository missing/inaccessible; cannot build arm64 targets
Hello, The quick version: a repository (boot-wrapper-aarch64.git) required for the default build of arm64 OpenWrt targets (default configuration) on the latest version of trunk seems to have disappeared from the Internet, and I'm unsure who to notify or how to proceed. Furthermore, I can't seem to find anyone else reporting this issue or even talking about it and I can't understand why this isn't being reported anywhere, making me paranoid that I somehow messed up (which has been known to happen) or missed some announcement. More detailed: As of yesterday (Thursday, September 21 2016), I am unable to build OpenWrt images for arm64 targets. My last successful build (that I can verify) of arm64 images was September 8 (and I have a root filesystem that I constructed for it on September 12, but I don't remember if the configuration I used would have caused it to encounter this issue). The build process fails when it attempts to compile the boot-wrapper. According to the output, the reason is: fatal: remote error: access denied or repository not exported: /pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cmarinas/boot-wrapper-aarch64.git I searched Google for the repository and all of the links to the one owned by cmarinas 404'd. Google's last cached version of the page was September 9, but beyond that, I can't tell when exactly the repository disappeared, or why for that matter. Furthermore, I haven't seen anyone else report this problem. To make sure it wasn't somehow something I had done, I asked a few other people to see if they could reach the repo and I tried from multiple networks with the same results, and then I cloned a fresh copy of the OpenWrt buildroot (bleeding edge) repository, updated the feeds, made sure I had the latest version, then started a build for a default arm64 target. The result was the same failure at the same point. I tried to open a ticket on the issue tracker, but it kept kicking it back as spam (incidentally, there's a thread on the OpenWrt "Developers Only" forum where other users are reporting the same thing). I made a post on the forum about this issue as well, but had to remove all URLs because that too was being reported as spam. There are forks and mirrors of the repository out there. One of them was just pushed on Monday, September 19, suggesting to me that perhaps the repository migrated or changed ownership, but I'm basing that entirely on speculation due to the circumstances; I can't find a log or notes saying that's the case, but the last commit to that repository was in 2013 which was when the last commit to the missing one was made. I probably have a local copy of the repo on my system somewhere, and there are forks of it still available. I could probably fix this issue by just manually changing the line in the boot-wrapper Makefile to point to one of those instead, but I'm not entirely sure that they're identical to the original. Plus, it doesn't fix the problem for other users and it will probably interfere with keeping my local copy in sync with the latest version. Has anyone else encountered this? Am I totally missing something obvious? I'm still relatively new to this, and I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case, but I'd feel very silly. I know it's an external repository used by more than just OpenWrt (it comes up in regular buildroot and several guides on kernel building direct people to the missing repository specifically), so I was shy about reaching out like this, but I also think it might be a relevant OpenWrt issue because we'd have to patch the Makefile that contains that repository to whatever the current working equivalent is. Below is the output of the build of a default version from the point where it attempts to make the target that fails (don't mind my bizarre naming conventions, they're largely arbitrary and only seen by me): mkdir -p /home/alex/openwrt/experimental_builds/arm64/openwrt/build_dir/target-aarch64_armv8-a_musl-1.1.15/linux-arm64/tmp rm -rf /home/alex/openwrt/experimental_builds/arm64/openwrt/build_dir/target-aarch64_armv8-a_musl-1.1.15/linux-arm64/linux-system.axf cp /home/alex/openwrt/experimental_builds/arm64/openwrt/build_dir/target-aarch64_armv8-a_musl-1.1.15/linux-arm64/linux-4.4.14/arch/arm64/boot/Image /home/alex/openwrt/experimental_builds/arm64/openwrt/build_dir/target-aarch64_armv8-a_musl-1.1.15/linux-arm64/Image export MAKEFLAGS= ;make -w -C boot-wrapper clean make[6]: Entering directory '/home/alex/openwrt/experimental_builds/arm64/openwrt/target/linux/arm64/image/boot-wrapper' make[6]: Leaving directory '/home/alex/openwrt/experimental_builds/arm64/openwrt/target/linux/arm64/image/boot-wrapper' export MAKEFLAGS= ;make -w -C boot-wrapper compile make[6]: Entering directory '/home/alex/openwrt/experimental_builds/arm64/openwrt/target/linux/arm64/image/boot-wrapper' mkdir -p /home/alex/openwrt/experim
[OpenWrt-Devel] odhcpd: [PATCH 3/3] Respect interface "ignore" settings as documented.
From: Karl Palsson
The "ignore" option is correctly loaded. Actually observe it as
documented.
Signed-off-by: Karl Palsson
---
src/config.c | 8
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/config.c b/src/config.c
index ef51112..a1b6ab7 100644
--- a/src/config.c
+++ b/src/config.c
@@ -695,10 +695,10 @@ void odhcpd_reload(void)
i->ndp = (master && master->ndp ==
RELAYD_RELAY) ?
RELAYD_RELAY : RELAYD_DISABLED;
- setup_router_interface(i, true);
- setup_dhcpv6_interface(i, true);
- setup_ndp_interface(i, true);
- setup_dhcpv4_interface(i, true);
+ setup_router_interface(i, !i->ignore);
+ setup_dhcpv6_interface(i, !i->ignore);
+ setup_ndp_interface(i, !i->ignore);
+ setup_dhcpv4_interface(i, !i->ignore);
} else {
close_interface(i);
}
--
2.4.11
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
[OpenWrt-Devel] odhcpd: [PATCH 2/3] remove superfluous log output.
From: Karl Palsson Drop pointless syslog. The single line just doubles the amount of lines logged to syslog without adding any value. Signed-off-by: Karl Palsson --- src/odhcpd.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/odhcpd.c b/src/odhcpd.c index c51cfa1..50f3c9f 100644 --- a/src/odhcpd.c +++ b/src/odhcpd.c @@ -457,7 +457,6 @@ static void odhcpd_receive_packets(struct uloop_fd *u, _unused unsigned int even else if (addr.in.sin_family == AF_INET) inet_ntop(AF_INET, &addr.in.sin_addr, ipbuf, sizeof(ipbuf)); - syslog(LOG_DEBUG, "--"); syslog(LOG_DEBUG, "Received %li Bytes from %s%%%s", (long)len, ipbuf, (iface) ? iface->ifname : "netlink"); -- 2.4.11 ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
[OpenWrt-Devel] odhcpd: [PATCH 1/3] enable loglevel setting via envvar ODHCPD_LOG_LEVEL
From: Karl Palsson
Currently the loglevel is hardcoded to LOG_WARNING, even though there is
debug log messages. Allow an env var to control the log threshold.
Signed-off-by: Karl Palsson
---
src/odhcpd.c | 16 +++-
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/odhcpd.c b/src/odhcpd.c
index 74830ac..c51cfa1 100644
--- a/src/odhcpd.c
+++ b/src/odhcpd.c
@@ -58,7 +58,21 @@ static void sighandler(_unused int signal)
int main()
{
openlog("odhcpd", LOG_PERROR | LOG_PID, LOG_DAEMON);
- setlogmask(LOG_UPTO(LOG_WARNING));
+ char *env_log_level = getenv("ODHCPD_LOG_LEVEL");
+ int log_level = LOG_WARNING;
+ if (env_log_level) {
+ char *end;
+ errno = 0;
+ long temp = strtol(env_log_level, &end, 0);
+ if (end == env_log_level || *end != '\0'
+ || ((temp == LONG_MIN || temp == LONG_MAX) && errno ==
ERANGE)
+ || (log_level > LOG_DEBUG) || log_level < LOG_EMERG) {
+ syslog(LOG_ERR, "ODHCPD_LOG_LEVEL envvar was invalid");
+ } else {
+ log_level = temp;
+ }
+ }
+ setlogmask(LOG_UPTO(log_level));
uloop_init();
if (getuid() != 0) {
--
2.4.11
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] FCC regulatory compliance
I agree that if the FCC pursues this proposal, that OpenWRT for 5 GHz devices is doomed to return to the ‘get a binary with API’ from a validated provider, that was required in the days of Madwifi. This of course only helps large corporations that can put their devices in for certification, and the smaller organizations which would use such devices, will just have to take what they can get. John Clark. On Sep 22, 2016, at 4:39 AM, Alexander Couzens wrote: > Hi Ryan, > > IMHO: the only possible solution is to create political pressure to > remove those rules or to get an exception for wifi routers. > There is no technical solution, because we want to have research > on this, we want to create our own wifi router firmware and wifi chip > firmware. > > Take a look on the FSFE effort on this problem, because it's originate > from the EU. > > Best, > lynxis > -- > Alexander Couzens > > mail: lyn...@fe80.eu > jabber: lyn...@fe80.eu > mobile: +4915123277221 > gpg: 390D CF78 8BF9 AA50 4F8F F1E2 C29E 9DA6 A0DF 8604 > ___ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] FCC regulatory compliance
Hi Ryan, IMHO: the only possible solution is to create political pressure to remove those rules or to get an exception for wifi routers. There is no technical solution, because we want to have research on this, we want to create our own wifi router firmware and wifi chip firmware. Take a look on the FSFE effort on this problem, because it's originate from the EU. Best, lynxis -- Alexander Couzens mail: lyn...@fe80.eu jabber: lyn...@fe80.eu mobile: +4915123277221 gpg: 390D CF78 8BF9 AA50 4F8F F1E2 C29E 9DA6 A0DF 8604 pgpxM2l7maczI.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
