This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
OpenWrt article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
FreeWRT was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 23 June 2011 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into OpenWrt. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
The contents of the LEDE page were merged into OpenWrt on 24 March 2019. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
"0 December 2002" really? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.83.244 ( talk) 23:04, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
The article originally had a link here indicating that Sveasoft claimed "that OpenWRT was illegally distributing software copyrighted by Sveasoft and Broadcom under the GPL". However, that citation makes no such claim. It only says that these packages (most or all of which were not written by Sveasoft and therefore not copyrighted by them) are released under terms different from the GPL or LGPL. As an example, libpcap is released under the terms of the BSD license if I am not mistaken. I believe the person who added this information initially was in error and I have marked the information with the fact tag to indicate a dispute. If no reliable citation can be found within a week (and if no significant disputes are raised here), I will remove the information about Sveasoft's counterclaim. -- Yamla 17:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Just to let you know. The purpose of selecting an article is both to point readers to the article and to highlight it to potential contributors. It will remain on the portal for a week or so. The previous selected article was PaX. Gronky 15:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Image:Openwrt-logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I believe it's misleading to call OpenWrt GNU/Linux; it uses the µClibc library and busybox environment. On my little box, it seems the only GNU packages installed are libgcc and GNU nano. For reference, there are 212 references to “Linux” in the OpenWrt wiki, but only 16 references to “GNU/Linux”, so calling OpenWrt a “Linux distribution” seems consistent with the nomenclature of the project itself.
Personally, I find the entire GNU/Linux controversy somewhat silly, but I believe the arguments for prepending “GNU” aren't relevant to this particular instance.
DanChr 10:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
it would be useful to differentiate between features included in real WRT firmware and this ddWrt linux distribution, if only to help people choosing to switch or not. I understand that the features may be found out on official pages of these software, but it would be nice to see what improvements has openWRT done in contrast to original firmware. 178.41.54.147 ( talk) 23:03, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Someone please write a better 5-line intro about what the software actually does, or is targeted to do. Electron9 ( talk) 16:57, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
I have been working on a Linux Users Group resource page and need some conformity of all the Wiki Linux versions and distributions. Debian has an excellent template and I have made an RSS reader to pluck version data from the wiki page. Would be nice if I could get all of them to follow this method and my page could keep up to date with all the latest versions. RSS source path http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Template:Latest_stable_software_release/Debian&feed=rss&action=history RSS Template. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Template:Latest_stable_software_release/Debian&action=edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icarusfactor ( talk • contribs) 02:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Should the Feature section be simplified to be more general? Perhaps something like:
Just for reference, here's a copy&paste of my post from User talk:ScotXW, together with my original signature, regarding revision 576841584 and later performed reverts. -- Dsimic ( talk) 11:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Is there any information on approximately how many users of OpenWRT are there? 128.197.128.231 ( talk) 15:04, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
The section heading seems to indicate something more than what it is. The section would be better called Hardware requirements Moxoed ( talk) 19:53, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
OpenWrt has had a fair share of hardware/software discovery in the past without help from the hardware manufactures but there are some manufactures that are more FOSS friendly, especially SOC manufactures are in focus [1] However, there are differences in how cooperative thes manufactures are. As an indication of which manufactures are actively FOSS friendly it could be interesting to have such a section in relation to OpenWrt [2] Moxoed ( talk) 20:01, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
One should consider a revision of the history with respect to this referance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-OlUxeS57E Moxoed ( talk) 17:37, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?id=63415 Ihaveacatonmydesk ( talk) 00:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
One editor from Croatia has been repeated blanking my edits about OpenWrt/LEDE remerger stating it is invalid. However based on public sources, the rememger is still ongoing as of August 2017 blocked on asset transferring.
SPI = Software in the Public Interest
-- Voidvector ( talk) 08:20, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
I propose that LEDE be merged into OpenWRT. The LEDE project is folding back into OpenWRT and it should eventually only be a historical event in the long history of the project, however significant. A redirect should be kept, of course. TheAnarcat ( talk) 02:51, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
OpenWrt article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
FreeWRT was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 23 June 2011 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into OpenWrt. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
The contents of the LEDE page were merged into OpenWrt on 24 March 2019. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
"0 December 2002" really? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.83.244 ( talk) 23:04, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
The article originally had a link here indicating that Sveasoft claimed "that OpenWRT was illegally distributing software copyrighted by Sveasoft and Broadcom under the GPL". However, that citation makes no such claim. It only says that these packages (most or all of which were not written by Sveasoft and therefore not copyrighted by them) are released under terms different from the GPL or LGPL. As an example, libpcap is released under the terms of the BSD license if I am not mistaken. I believe the person who added this information initially was in error and I have marked the information with the fact tag to indicate a dispute. If no reliable citation can be found within a week (and if no significant disputes are raised here), I will remove the information about Sveasoft's counterclaim. -- Yamla 17:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Just to let you know. The purpose of selecting an article is both to point readers to the article and to highlight it to potential contributors. It will remain on the portal for a week or so. The previous selected article was PaX. Gronky 15:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Image:Openwrt-logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I believe it's misleading to call OpenWrt GNU/Linux; it uses the µClibc library and busybox environment. On my little box, it seems the only GNU packages installed are libgcc and GNU nano. For reference, there are 212 references to “Linux” in the OpenWrt wiki, but only 16 references to “GNU/Linux”, so calling OpenWrt a “Linux distribution” seems consistent with the nomenclature of the project itself.
Personally, I find the entire GNU/Linux controversy somewhat silly, but I believe the arguments for prepending “GNU” aren't relevant to this particular instance.
DanChr 10:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
it would be useful to differentiate between features included in real WRT firmware and this ddWrt linux distribution, if only to help people choosing to switch or not. I understand that the features may be found out on official pages of these software, but it would be nice to see what improvements has openWRT done in contrast to original firmware. 178.41.54.147 ( talk) 23:03, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Someone please write a better 5-line intro about what the software actually does, or is targeted to do. Electron9 ( talk) 16:57, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
I have been working on a Linux Users Group resource page and need some conformity of all the Wiki Linux versions and distributions. Debian has an excellent template and I have made an RSS reader to pluck version data from the wiki page. Would be nice if I could get all of them to follow this method and my page could keep up to date with all the latest versions. RSS source path http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Template:Latest_stable_software_release/Debian&feed=rss&action=history RSS Template. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Template:Latest_stable_software_release/Debian&action=edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icarusfactor ( talk • contribs) 02:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Should the Feature section be simplified to be more general? Perhaps something like:
Just for reference, here's a copy&paste of my post from User talk:ScotXW, together with my original signature, regarding revision 576841584 and later performed reverts. -- Dsimic ( talk) 11:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Is there any information on approximately how many users of OpenWRT are there? 128.197.128.231 ( talk) 15:04, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
The section heading seems to indicate something more than what it is. The section would be better called Hardware requirements Moxoed ( talk) 19:53, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
OpenWrt has had a fair share of hardware/software discovery in the past without help from the hardware manufactures but there are some manufactures that are more FOSS friendly, especially SOC manufactures are in focus [1] However, there are differences in how cooperative thes manufactures are. As an indication of which manufactures are actively FOSS friendly it could be interesting to have such a section in relation to OpenWrt [2] Moxoed ( talk) 20:01, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
One should consider a revision of the history with respect to this referance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-OlUxeS57E Moxoed ( talk) 17:37, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?id=63415 Ihaveacatonmydesk ( talk) 00:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
One editor from Croatia has been repeated blanking my edits about OpenWrt/LEDE remerger stating it is invalid. However based on public sources, the rememger is still ongoing as of August 2017 blocked on asset transferring.
SPI = Software in the Public Interest
-- Voidvector ( talk) 08:20, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
I propose that LEDE be merged into OpenWRT. The LEDE project is folding back into OpenWRT and it should eventually only be a historical event in the long history of the project, however significant. A redirect should be kept, of course. TheAnarcat ( talk) 02:51, 31 October 2017 (UTC)