[LEDE-DEV] ACL kernel config options and 3.18

iVBORw0KGgoNSUhEUgAAADAwAQMAAABtzGvEBlBMVEX///8AAABVwtN+eklEQVQY04XQzQ2EIBAF4IdMDIc5UAIlUIKlWMr0ZiMm28jOj+6iMXEOfBBmXgJAVLGlBkU3wcZ9I3Q7EdrAveowx6hZ0q6QJDsRnHlJwr+W4CHF7vLqTEenXABeUnSssbP8SdwdjTHEwcFDtQGKFuWjH8Lna8vAmfEF3NMPdAOsBscASUVORK5CYII= Content-Type: text/plain;

[LEDE-DEV] Anyone seen this issue with netifd?

iVBORw0KGgoNSUhEUgAAADAwAQMAAABtzGvEBlBMVEX///8AAABVwtN+eklEQVQY04XQzQ2EIBAF4IdMDIc5UAIlUIKlWMr0ZiMm28jOj+6iMXEOfBBmXgJAVLGlBkU3wcZ9I3Q7EdrAveowx6hZ0q6QJDsRnHlJwr+W4CHF7vLqTEenXABeUnSssbP8SdwdjTHEwcFDtQGKFuWjH8Lna8vAmfEF3NMPdAOsBscASUVORK5CYII= Content-Type: text/plain;

Re: [LEDE-DEV] lede integration issues remaining from the detrius of cerowrt

Hi Dave, I don't speak for the LEDE team, but it looks to me a lot of your problem is that you are using LEDE/openwrt for far bigger iron than the primary target (standard routers, including pre-AC non-NAND ones, which are really quite small and low powered). 2 TB+ storage for example, or using

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [PATCH 1/2] Add some common packages for x86-64 target.

Hi, On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 16:57 -0700, gree...@candelatech.com wrote: > From: Ben Greear > > This should make x86-64 targets more useable out of the box. > The assumption is that most x86-64 users have adequate storage, > and those that do not can still config away

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] TR-069 for OpenWrt

On Fri, 2016-05-27 at 03:43 -0700, David Lang wrote: > On Thu, 26 May 2016, Delbar Jos wrote: > > > We are conscious of the fact that together with the proposals made by > > Felix, > > Luka and Wojtek we are now looking at many "competing" proposals. As a next > > step, we recommend to

Re: [LEDE-DEV] TR-069 and OpenWrt discussion on these lists?

On Wed, 2016-06-15 at 16:55 -0700, Dave Taht wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:22 PM, L. D. Pinney wrote: > > It's a Development List ... no place for corporate agendas. > > I think you are making a good point here, being that there is only one > lede list, presently, and

Re: [LEDE-DEV] lede integration issues remaining from the detrius of cerowrt

On Sun, 2016-06-19 at 12:35 -0700, David Lang wrote: > On Sun, 19 Jun 2016, Daniel Curran-Dickinson wrote: > > > On Thu, 2016-06-16 at 10:34 -0400, Aaron Z wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 4:03 AM, David Lang <da...@lang.hm> wrote: > >>> With Imagebui

Re: [LEDE-DEV] new bugs mailing list

Hi Ted, On Wed, 2016-06-22 at 19:06 -0400, Ted Hess wrote: > Daniel - > > Subject to a few more folk's OKs and an up-coming adm meeting, I think we are > going to go forward with Flyspray. There is no other > proposed systems on deck for testing, so this is it unless someone proposes > an

Re: [LEDE-DEV] lede integration issues remaining from the detrius of cerowrt

On Tue, 2016-06-14 at 11:05 -0700, David Lang wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jun 2016, Daniel Curran-Dickinson wrote: > > > On Mon, 2016-06-13 at 11:17 +0200, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> no need to overreact :) I think parts of the topics are

Re: [LEDE-DEV] A request not making IRC necessary to be part of the action

On 16-05-18 12:52 AM, John Crispin wrote: > > >> I was told in the past by one of founding LEDE team members (who shall >> rename nameless unless he chooses to comment himself), that if I really >> wanted to participate in OpenWrt community that I needed to be on IRC >> (in a private mail to

Re: [LEDE-DEV] Why does multiple instance dnsmasq work with jails but not without?

On 16-05-18 02:32 AM, John Crispin wrote: > it probably checks for a pid file or similar to see if it is already > running. inside a jail it essentially only runs once as it is a > container. so i would guess its pid file of proc table related. It is most likely proc table then (I had separate

Re: [LEDE-DEV] running stuff as !root

On 16-05-18 01:05 AM, John Crispin wrote: > Hi, > > we had previously started building the infra for running stuff as !root. > so far we have added > > * the userid/gid stuff > * acl on ubus > > things that i know are missing > > * handling network ports < 1024 > > what am i missing ? can

[LEDE-DEV] Why does multiple instance dnsmasq work with jails but not without?

Hi all, I had a patch that I submitted to the openwrt list sometime back that launched multiple instances of dnsmasq, so long as the instances were either tied to specific, non-overlapping, interfaces, or used different dns port, but at least in the case of different interfaces it only worked (to

Re: [LEDE-DEV] OpenWRT tree vs LEDE tree

> anyway, that's my perspective as an outsider (who has 15 years of > experience in some *big* openly governed communities) ... Since you obviously feel there are other communities doing this right, perhaps you'd like to share the *names* of these examples so that LEDE can look at what they're

Re: [LEDE-DEV] OpenWRT tree vs LEDE tree

On 16-05-20 01:01 AM, David Lang wrote: > On Thu, 19 May 2016, Daniel Curran-Dickinson wrote: > >> Do I think there are potentially problems, like my, and others, >> impressions, that there is a fair amount of back channel (private) email >> that *isn't* part of the public

Re: [LEDE-DEV] OpenWRT tree vs LEDE tree

On 16-05-20 05:44 AM, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 04:13:37AM -0400, Daniel Curran-Dickinson wrote: >> On 16-05-20 04:08 AM, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: >>>> >>> the whole point of my side sentence was to give a hint that maybe my &

Re: [LEDE-DEV] OpenWRT tree vs LEDE tree

On 16-05-20 03:13 AM, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 10:40:21PM -0400, Daniel Curran-Dickinson wrote: >>> anyway, that's my perspective as an outsider (who has 15 years of >>> experience in some *big* openly governed communities) ... >>

Re: [LEDE-DEV] OpenWRT tree vs LEDE tree

On 16-05-20 05:41 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote: > Daniel Curran-Dickinson <dan...@daniel.thecshore.com> writes: > >> I wasn't meaning it to be hostile (the other guy I think was), > > who? me? No, grumpy is just my default mode. I need to work on that. > But I never rant

Re: [LEDE-DEV] OpenWRT tree vs LEDE tree

On 16-05-20 06:36 AM, Daniel Curran-Dickinson wrote: > > Sorry, I got on this tack because if his hostile approach to the LEDE > project. If he had had a constructive approach I wouldn't likely have > gotten off track this way. Still as Bjorn reminded me, we should be > nice to e

Re: [LEDE-DEV] A note on my use of RFC

On Sun, 2016-05-22 at 16:03 -0400, Daniel Curran-Dickinson wrote: > Hi all, > > There seems to be some confusion because of the way I use RFC. I've > (unless otherwise stated in the PR) intended RFC for looking over code > and commenting before I debug and test (e.g. to make su

Re: [LEDE-DEV] OpenWRT tree vs LEDE tree

Must...remember...don't feed the trolls (or their close cousins the vocal unrealistic idealogues). ___ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev

Re: [LEDE-DEV] Problem with serial console

On Sun, 2016-05-22 at 02:24 -0400, Daniel Dickinson wrote: > Hi John, > > Something seems to have broken with serial console, at least on ar71xx, > possibly because the login.sh stuff. > > If you don't have passwords required on the serial console and you exit > the shell, the shell doesn't

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [PATCH 0/2] fstools: block.c: Add support for checking vfat

On Sun, 2016-05-22 at 05:22 -0400, l...@daniel.thecshore.com wrote: > [PATCH 1/2] block.c: Make static string a const char * instead char * > [PATCH 2/2] block.c: Add support for checking vfat filesystems I forgot to mention I have tested both vfat and ext4 on ar71xx (Netgear WNDR3800).

[LEDE-DEV] [OT] Email delay app

Hi all, I know this is off-topic, but does anyone know of linux app that one can use to intercept one's emails and force oneself to decide some hours later if one *really* wants to send the email? Or an email service with such a feature? Regards, Daniel

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [PATCH 2/4] v2: block.c: Add support for checking vfat filesystems

Hi John, It looks like on ar71xx MS_ACL is not defined in linux/fs.h in the default kernel. It must have been added later than 4.1 (I believe that is the version ar71xx is currently on). I guess my desktop system is a newer kernel that has symbols (I didn't have a build tree handy to check at

Re: [LEDE-DEV] A request not making IRC necessary to be part of the action

On 16-05-16 05:18 PM, Daniel Curran-Dickinson wrote: > The objective is so that you don't have isolated pools of TZ's where one > TZ has little insight into what the other TZ is doing and has no *good* > mechanisms for communicating across timezones. > > Reading IRC chat logs

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [PATCH 0/4] [RFC] fstools: block.c: Various enhancements

On 16-05-18 07:31 AM, Conor O'Gorman wrote: > On 18/05/16 12:21, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote: >> On 05/18/2016 12:12 PM,l...@daniel.thecshore.com wrote: >>> >Hi John, >>> > >>> >I haven't tested these changes yet, > Testing would be good before next submission. The whole point of the [RFC] is that

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [PATCH] generic: New LEDE Banner

On 16-05-14 02:20 AM, L. D. Pinney wrote: > + ___ > +/ /\ ██╗ ███╗ ██╗ ███╗ > + / Linux / \ ██║ ██╔╝ ██╔══██╗ ██╔╝ Linux > + / Embedded /\ ██║ █╗ ██║ ██║ █╗ Embedded > + / / \

Re: [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] OpenWrt / LEDE

On Tue, 2016-05-24 at 23:57 +0200, Zoltan HERPAI wrote: [snip] > Hi, > >> I would like to see a reunion of LEDE and OpenWrt, so do any of the non > >> LEDE but OpenWrt core devs have any problems with the LEDE rules and so on? > >> > > This is my personal opinion and this was not somehow

[LEDE-DEV] Bikeshedding vs patch assessment

Hi all, I just thought I would observe that sometimes it's kind of fuzzy between when as a dev one is making appropriate suggestions for improvement and when one is unconsciously engaging in bikeshedding on work someone has done.  I won't claim it's easy, just pointing out that there is a

[LEDE-DEV] Avoiding useless debugging and testing via URFC or RFD

Hi all, but especially Felix and John, I am rather frustrated with the fact that whole point of my URFC concept seems to have failed.  The point of URFC is not free debugging, it is to avoid things like the DEFAULT_/DEVICE_TYPE patch where I spend a ton of time debugging and testing, but a quick

[LEDE-DEV] Clarification on recursive dependencies

Hi Felix, I'd like clarification on https://git.lede-project.org/?p=source.git;a=commitdiff;h=71753a8286dcb 4dedbb6d4792b0fd5dd305c3338 for two reasons: with a patch picking a default SSL provider, the two packages in commit emitted a recursive dependency error. It made sense to me that

[LEDE-DEV] LEDE and locale issues

Hi all, I've noticed that LEDE default locale seems to be ANSI_X3.4-1968, however Ubuntu 16.04 does not let you set that locale (an error is thrown if LC_CTYPE is set to that string). For things where locale matters, how does one alter the locale for LEDE? Regards, Daniel

Re: [LEDE-DEV] lede integration issues remaining from the detrius of cerowrt

On Thu, 2016-06-16 at 10:34 -0400, Aaron Z wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 4:03 AM, David Lang wrote: > > With Imagebuilder and things pre-compiled, what does it take to create an > > image? I'm wondering if this is something that can be converted to a web UI > > where we could

Re: [LEDE-DEV] adding luci to snapshot images

On Wed, 2016-06-29 at 11:43 -0700, David Lang wrote: > I agree. There may be some devices with extremely small flash that > can't fit  > luci, but otherwise I think it should be on the default images that > people are  > pointed at. > > Having a second set of images without luci isn't a bad idea,