The Asus WL520GC I just bought is running Linux. It has 2MB of flash.
Wow, I assumed that out of the box, these devices with a small amount of
flash did not run Linux. That was true in the past at least. Things have
changed since I last checked...
obviously. DD-WRT micro images also run on
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010, Stefan Monnier wrote:
The Asus WL520GC I just bought is running Linux. It has 2MB of flash.
Wow, I assumed that out of the box, these devices with a small amount of
flash did not run Linux. That was true in the past at least. Things have
changed since I last checked...
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 15:27 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
Indeed. The only difference is that there is no predefined config for
such small targets, so you have to manually select the part of busybox
you want to strip, and similarly for the kernel config.
You should be able to get pretty close
Indeed. The only difference is that there is no predefined config for
such small targets, so you have to manually select the part of busybox
you want to strip, and similarly for the kernel config.
You should be able to get pretty close to DD-WRT's config, while still
benefitting from
As such I think it would be very useful to have a minimum build (just
enough to bring up interfaces and install additional packages)
Agreed.
Stefan
___
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
Hi All,
I support a 2mb version for a somewhat different reason. It seems to
me that the base router kernel/boot loader should be VERY small.
It optionally does a 'kexec' to a possibly attached USB/MMC memory
card. In this way router firmware can be totally upgraded. Can be as
large as
On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 18:05 +0100, edgar.sol...@web.de wrote:
obviously. DD-WRT micro images also run on 2MB devices, see for
contained functionality
http://dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/What_is_DD-WRT%3F#File_Versions
, so why should openwrt fail to do so?
I already compiled images smaller
On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 00:07 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
Linux can hardly fit in a 2MB flash device, once you have opened the
Yes, but this text was written in the old times (2004?)
I've been using OpenWRT on my WL-700gE for a while now. That machine
has a 2MB flash, so OpenWRT is quite
So in summary, it is IMO safe to assume that a device like a router with
only 2Mbytes of non-volatile storage (flash) does not run Linux.
please read the thread again - you are wrong.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
openwrt-devel
On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 16:24 +0100, Benjamin Henrion wrote:
The Asus WL520GC I just bought is running Linux. It has 2MB of flash.
Wow, I assumed that out of the box, these devices with a small amount of
flash did not run Linux. That was true in the past at least. Things have
changed since I last
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Bas Mevissen ab...@basmevissen.nl wrote:
On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 16:24 +0100, Benjamin Henrion wrote:
The Asus WL520GC I just bought is running Linux. It has 2MB of flash.
Wow, I assumed that out of the box, these devices with a small amount of
flash did not run
On 19.02.2010 16:47, Bas Mevissen wrote:
On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 16:24 +0100, Benjamin Henrion wrote:
The Asus WL520GC I just bought is running Linux. It has 2MB of flash.
Wow, I assumed that out of the box, these devices with a small amount of
flash did not run Linux. That was true in the past
Linux can hardly fit in a 2MB flash device, once you have opened the
Yes, but this text was written in the old times (2004?)
Linux is more and more modularized, so it is
comfortably possible to run it (customized)
with 4MB RAM and 512k of FLASH.
bye, Bastian
signature.asc
Description:
Linux can hardly fit in a 2MB flash device, once you have opened the
Yes, but this text was written in the old times (2004?)
I've been using OpenWRT on my WL-700gE for a while now. That machine
has a 2MB flash, so OpenWRT is quite usable there. But yes, it also has
a IDE interface, so the 2MB
14 matches
Mail list logo
