tested is the keyword.

EDIT:
What is the testprocedure?
What is the expected result to get an "tested OK"?

(Last edited by tmo26 on 22 Sep 2015, 18:43)

I didn't read all of this, so I don't know if the idea was there alredy, but I should post this here:

I would like to add another field: "Bruttodatenrate" to select 150, 300 or 450 Mbit/s

> KanjiMonster: rubo77: xTxR would make more sense, as there
are some asymetrical models (e.g. 2T3R). also there are devices that
can do four streams in theory; and number of streams also works for 11ac
compared to 150/300/450/600

I would like to be able to search for all devices that have USB, min. 8MB Flash and
min. 300mbit

also the legend on top shuold explain, how to search for a min value (otherwise I wouldn't find devices with 16MB)

@tmo26... regarding the Architecture/SubArchitecture proposal, it looks good to me. But I am also not "a pro".
The values that are there now (mostly MIPS and ARM) were gathered
1) cat /proc/cpuinfo
2) subarchitecture stated on device page
3) finding information on the internet

Do you have any idea on how to do the batch update?

PPC PowerPC is this the same as RISC?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC
would RISC be more appropiate?

No... RISC is the opposite of CISC and a big family of processors (PowerPC, Sparc, Alpha, MIPS, ARM)... basically everything except x86 and Itanium... except, for all practical purposes x86 behaves like RISC today and the term has not been very relevant since the Pentium Pro days.

My plan: Ask zo0ok, since his magic was excellent in the past, and surely still is now ;-)

Haha! That is flattering! I have been busy (and still am) lately, with other things.

Anyway... I guess I can fix that some day. I see two main scenarios/strategies:

1) Extract the data entries to files, update the files, batch import the files (much like we did in the past)
2) Fake a web browser, build a program/script that logs in and modifies pages

I see, wikipedia is a bit outdated then....   The more information is out there the harder it is to find data that is up to date. Is this also a flaw of google? After all Google is the one who gave me that page as first choice.

Wikipedia:
"PowerPC (an acronym for Performance Optimization With Enhanced RISC – Performance Computing, sometimes abbreviated as PPC) is a RISC instruction set architecture created by the 1991 Apple–IBM–Motorola alliance, known as AIM. PowerPC, as an evolving instruction set, has since 2006 been named Power ISA, while the old name naturally lives on, as a legacy trademark for some implementations of Power Architecture based processors, and in software package identifiers."

I'm confused now...

This is just like saying "Bananas are fruits". So are peaches, pears and oranges.

Saying that a processor is RISC today means virtually nothing. It was a set of design rules for different processors in the 90s. Most of those rules have somehow survived. Some have not. And the processors that were CISC (explicitly not RISC) also have incorporated those rules/features in their design.

Ok, I now start to get it. thanks.

I'd opt for #1, but maybe it's easier to just provide you a tgz, instead of extracting the dataentries from html to files?

Regarding #2: There is already something like this: https://www.dokuwiki.org/plugin:batchedit, however, I didn't dare yet to discover it's full power due to the somewhat complex regexes...

Take time. I think there will be one or two other things more to be corrected (Version(s)s -> Versionss; Update some comments;...).

Current:
Instructionset:
AVR32
ARM
MIPS
MIPS64
PPC
x86
x86_64
other

My understanding is that x86_64 is a work in development but not supported by the current OpenWRT in make file, etc.  x86 is tracking with the rest of the project by x86_64 is off to the side at this point.  http://pdf.github.io/openwrt-14.07-x86_64/ has the message "Discontinued 13 May 2015 This project has been discontinued. OpenWRT was not providing consistent upstream code quality, and I do not have the bandwidth to maintain this port. The 15.xx release of OpenWRT should have official x86_64 support."

But now I see here https://downloads.openwrt.org/chaos_calmer/15.05/x86 that there seems to be a 64 bit version there.  Can someone confirm that 64 bit has been added and plans are to support it ongoing now?

The x86/64 has been available in all the CC releases.  There are no product specific variants like other branches have. 

Hierarchically I think the x86/64 belongs at the same level as X86 and ARM64.   

The only product that I know is a 64bit device is the PC-Engines APU.  I know mirko_47 has one, and think JOW has one, but not sure.

Great, thanks so much for the info.  I've got a device that was made for us that's 64 bit dual core baytrail that I'm looking forward to getting setup under CC.  We were working under an old BB build but this is great that it's part of CC ongoing.

Honestly not sure both cores are fully supported.  Above my pay grade.  https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?pid=283541#p283541

No specific topic in the wiki.  http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/pcengines/apu?s[]=dual&s[]=core

I know this was an issue in DD-WRT.

I want to propose a couple changes to the ToH.

1) I think we should change the headings of three columns in the default table. I find it easier to write documentation when the column headings have more natural wording ("Most Recent Release" instead of "Supported Current Rel")
   - Supported Current Rel -> Most Recent Release
   - Device Page -> Details Page
   - Device Techdata -> Technical Data

2) I have rearranged the topnote to include all the new info that has come into the main ToH. It now fits in a smaller space so that the top rows of the table are visible, even in fairly short windows. See http://wiki.openwrt.org/playground/reb/toh

Would this work?

http://wiki.openwrt.org/playground/reb/1407 : Looks way too crowded.
http://wiki.openwrt.org/playground/reb/1407 : We have this already covered by http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/views/toh_minimal_all, which can easily be filtered for 14.07 / 15.05 / ....
Why confuse the user with yet another separate table?

(Last edited by tmo26 on 25 Sep 2015, 07:28)

I agree that my proposal is crowded. My challenge is to address the two problems (a & b) below...

I am trying to address a couple things that surprised me and (I think) would surprise a newcomer. This 30-second video shows several "oops" moments: https://youtu.be/HI5YxbzkePo

1) I entered "archer" in the wrong column.

2) I don't know why the second search went bad.

3) Third time triumphs. But that was a lot of work to make a simple search...

What made it difficult:

a) In the first case, I was used to a different column order, and got it wrong.

b)  In all three cases, I entered the search string, then pressed return, and Poof! everything seemed to disappear. The first time it happened, I actually did wonder, "Hey, where did the search results go?"

Simple explanation: Change *one* filter field, then press enter.

I have just gone through the "travel" routers and updated the OEM homepages, battery capacity in comments and set Travel Router - Battery Powered where applicable.
http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/views/toh_extended_all?dataflt[Device+Type*~]=travel
If any one knows of a device with an internal SIM card please let me know.  I started checking for this part way through and added "3g via USB" to devices whose home page stated so.  I assume any device with a USB port can run this way.

I picked up the work with the Availability column...

Abicom... two devices... originally classified as wifi routers, but they seem to be just the boards (not for end users).
So I changed them from WiFi router to Single Board Computer.
I think that makes more sense. Even as a Single Board Computer they can keep their multi-LAN-ports and WiFi characteristics not typically found in FruitPi.

Another take on the top_note of the ToH... http://wiki.openwrt.org/playground/reb/toh3

I envision that this would be placed at the top of every ToH page we maintain. These ToH pages are:
   - Supported by 15.05
   - Full Hardware Details
   - Datacloud view
   - All Views
   - Link back to the ToH Main Page

My goals with this top_note are:

- Ease of maintenance - the heading and first line of text are relatively easy to customize for the five views we support
- It's relatively short, leaving most of the room on the page for the table itself
- Provides a guide to using the ToH
- Points readers to other sources of info
- Encourage readers to help out

Please give me feedback, or better yet, just edit it.

Update: I believe that copying the text from http://wiki.openwrt.org/playground/toh/top_note3 and pasting into meta:infobox:toh_topnote would get us most of the way there...

(Last edited by richbhanover on 1 Oct 2015, 15:33)

Hi,
I've been jumping through hoops trying to add a router which is in the outdated ToH but which I can't find in the new and improved one. Apparently this forum is the last hoop to be jumped through to add a device to the list:

could you please add this device - http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/xiaomi/mini
almost fully working with CC15.05 final (except for DFS)
tnx.

@tmo... I think you need to add the brand Xiaomi.