e towards the goal of its software
liberation (if there would be any crowdfunding). Also, being able to
run on 100% opensource will surely attract a lot of FSF-minded buyers
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 1:20 PM Daniel Golle wrote:
>
> Hi Ivan,
>
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:15:58AM +, Ivan I
licon
BootROM is considered by Free Software Foundation as a part of
hardware, + it is not as bad as those bloated binary blobs
running at your OpenWRT space
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 9:51 AM Piotr Dymacz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 11.04.2024 10:52, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> > Ivan Ivanov wr
> SOC: MediaTek MT7981B , Wi-Fi: MediaTek MT7976C
Are these Mediateks capable of working without any binary blobs, at
least in theory? (i.e. some existent reverse-engineering research)
If not, why have they been chosen in particular? IMHO the "OpenWRT
One" project hardware should not be worse
> My 2 cent on the problem of permitting nick is that if we accept that,
> some funny guy might use nickname like "ExtraHardCockSucker"
> and we wouldn't have anything to say about it and have to accept
> it if the contribution is correct.
An immature person who uses such a nickname - is quite
This is an excellent idea by Dave Taht to use multiple ath9k chips.
Actually, I don't understand: how for a "modern, open, stable" WiFi
platform - someone could suggest a blobbed Mediatek or even worse,
Broadcom. an OpenWRT official device should be no worse than
LibreCMC-supported routers in
Dear community,
This is an excellent idea by Dave Taht to use multiple ath9k chips.
Actually, I don't understand: how for a "modern, open, stable" WiFi
platform - someone could suggest a blobbed Mediatek or even worse,
Broadcom. an OpenWRT official device should be no worse than
