Column "Status": What's the difference between "rxxxxx" and "Rxxxxx"?

none. just depends who put it in.

I don't think the status page should ever list Rxxxxx. It should just say the latest stable build supported or say trunk if no stable build is available.

@zo0ok: could you update please once more?

TIA!

Done: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/906 … index.html

@zo0ok: Thanks!

@all: Did anybody know http://wiki.openwrt.org/meta/discussion or more specifically
http://wiki.openwrt.org/meta/discussion … ata_plugin ?
Someone had that idea before, hehe.

By the way: Take a look at the index http://wiki.openwrt.org/start?do=index
There are some misfiled articles -> should be cleaned up and sorted into the right namespaces

Yes... I mean, it is a good idea. Was the performance ok or a showstopper? What steps do we need to take to implement it now that you have been cleaning up the data so nicely?

The ones not in bold, are they the problem? I dont really know how to fix it.

Status (as I see it)

Brand        OK
Model        OK
Version      OK
Status       NOK needs cleanup (at minimum: check all rxxxxx if device is supportet by stable version)
Target       OK
Platform     needs small cleanup
MHz          OK
Flash        NOK messy, needs cleanup
RAM          OK
Wifi NIC     OK
Wifi Std.    OK
Wired ports  NOK, messy, needs cleanup
VLAN         needs small cleanup
USB          NOK, messy, needs cleanup

I created http://wiki.openwrt.org/discussion/improvement as a portal page to sub-pages for ideas regarding OpenWrt documentation improvement.

Feel free to add new sections and links to wiki pages (yet to be created)!

I did a bunch of updates in the status column -> worth an update of https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/906 … index.html

Update complete.
Good work tmo26... I have not contributed much apart from my updates lately.

As I read:
BB is based on r42625
AA is based on r36088
Backfire 10.03.1 is based on r29592

Just replacing
<r29592 => Backfire
r29592-r36088 => AA
r26089-r42625 => BB
would not be terribly hard.

It would be more clear in the sense that "AA" is easy to recognise as "good" while rXXXXX is just scary (especially compared to other devices that say "AA").

But:
Does it happen that devices make it trunk, but not into the subsequent release, while remaining in trunk?
(considering the many targets in trunk not in BB indicates it could be so).

Can things have been added and later removed?
(which means the upgrade from rXXXXX to AA would be a lie)

This brings us to the question that it is not trivial to decide what image to use for a particular piece of hardware.

If we, on the other hand started matching
a) images in trunk
b) device rows in ToH
Then the entire Status column would solve itself automagically (or rather turn irrelevant?).
But that matching is not trivial, and we don't have a column for it right now.

Thoughts on this?

...and not terribly correct ;-)

In fact, I'm doing more than that when replacing rxxxxx by an OpenWrt release: I'm taking the above numbers as a hint where to search first. If it's not found there, look at the next higher release. If not found in any release, look in trunk.
If not found in trunk, search on the devicepage, if some $other firmware applies to this device.
If not found on device page: give up.

Tedious detective work, any help appreciated!

(Sidenote @all: I focused on the Top20 Brands, which represent around 560 devices (or more than 50%) IIRC, for cleaning up the status column. Those Top20 Brands should now be somewhat clean. Please crosscheck and eradicate "trunk", "WIP", and "rxxxxx" where possible (while making sure the updated information is reliable).... and take care of the other 50% of devices

Yes, it does happen.
Yesterday I had a device with r29xxx which made me look first in 12.09, but the image was available only with 14.07.
Hence, real crosschecking if an image really exists is the better way to go.

YES!!!
Yesterday, while searching images, I sometimes wondered how the devices made it into the "supported" cathegory, because I could not find an image that was named after the device or the device page was quasi non-existent or did not contain any info regarding firmware-image. arrrrgggggssss! The device pages are in a horrible state sometimes....

Automagic sounds sexy, however, as you already recognized yourself: No easy job.
About missing columns: Can be added.

You contribute the filterable summary and many updates therof. That's quite a bit of contribution!
Don't take the back seat - you're in the front row!

BTW: Update please!
"Wired ports" should have shrunken significantly!
Geeeez, what a Marathon... and still not finished with the unsupported / unknown / ... pages. However: BIG step forward IMHO.
Applause please!

;-)

Update complete.

tmo26, I see you take the status column seriously I could not have done a better job myself. Definitely worth an applause!
It's not like you have been writing down somewhere what image you found for what device? That would have been interesting data to merge into "my" hardware list.

There are more devices every day. A week ago we had 890. Now we are up at 907. Hope nobody is adding duplicates to supported because they don't check wip/possible/unknown.

While looking for duplicates...

ASUS RT-G32 has just one version: B1

However, there are two separate routers
ASUS N13U (version 1)
ASUS N13U B1 (version 1)

The Netgear WNDR3700 v3... is supposed to not be supported. Now it says 14.07 in the status column. Is that a mistake or is it correct?

...I clearly need to fix that the main table can be sorted by Brand/Model Name... as it is now the supported/wip/possible/unknown destroys it all

I have updated the WNDR3700 page myself a while ago and I set the model to 'Not supported' at that time with comments: basic support, probably no wireless YMMV [sic].

However - I have found there are images for the WNDR3700 v3, but it is unclear how complete the support is.

Zajec has been very busy adding basic support for a lot of Broadcom boards but (predictably) wireless support is still lacking, as this ticket for the v3 suggests. So it looks like the router may be functional, but wireless is probably limited to 2,4 GHz.

I leave it to you experts to decide what status you need to assign it in that case (and I will update the device page accordingly). But it certainly is not fully functional.

Edit: rephrased for correctness.

(Last edited by Borromini on 4 May 2015, 22:35)

Added some sorting... there are some bugs, but I think it is a lot better than no sorting.
Bugs:
- not so many sorting options
- "standard" is strange and default (it is the old order, that is the order it appears in ToH)
- CPU/RAM... mostly correct, not entirely
- sorting does not work for ugly/slow display mode (only for raw and no links) I think

Enjoy.

Just a test if somebody is actually interested in what I'm doing and checking if I'm doing it right.

No, just joking. :-D
Mistake by the way I check the status: If an image is available, the device is supported. How good the support is -> Please see device page (you want to go there anyhow for further instructions).
Maybe a "support_restrictions" or "comments" column would help?

I've seen that and deleted it, since it was too long for this column. (Sorry for that).
I thought: Such information should be placed on the device page.
This is a good example for devices that are either supported (but with restrictions like no wifi) or WIP.

Example how to mark such devices: http://www.ideasonboard.org/uvc/ --->  '/!\ Device works with issues.'
Alternatively in simple text: 14.07* -> "Supported, but device has issues. Please see device page for details."

Thoughts?

@zo0ok: Bugs: Filtering doesn't work any more.

ASUS RT-G32 should be split up in two versions:
- B1 4MB/16MB
- C1 4MB/32MB

Edit: Split done.

(Last edited by tmo26 on 5 May 2015, 17:22)

I think the filter bug is fixed now.

If support for WNDR3700 is better than it used to (seem to) be it can be listed as 14.07, I suppose.
I dont have any such hardware and I have no opinion about it.

Now that sorting works, perhaps the ASUS routers could benefit from some consistent naming/versions. Esp N12 and N13 where version numbers seem to have made it into the model name.

There are two "Teltonika" (one supported, one possible) that looks suspicously like a duplicate?
Trendnet TEW-651BR... wonder if 2.0 and 2.2 need separate rows?

D'oh! It's Asus who started this:

http://www.asus.com/de/Networking/RTN12/
http://www.asus.com/de/Networking/RTN12_D1/

http://www.asus.com/Networking/RTN13U/
http://www.asus.com/Networking/RTN13U_B1/

Inconsistency within Asus naming scheme:
http://www.asus.com/ru/Networking/RTG32_vB1/  <--- additional v compared to N12/N13

*sigh*

(Last edited by tmo26 on 5 May 2015, 01:56)

Update on the Community Discussion re: Improving OpenWrt documentation https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php … 85#p275285

@zo0ok: Update please!
- cleaned up some more in Wired ports column
- added some devices to WIP
- some more cleanup in status column

Here and there I started to add links to fw images:
- http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/alfa.network/w502u
- http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/alfa.network/n2

Could be 909 or 910 today.