From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail2.tohojo.dk (mail2.tohojo.dk [IPv6:2a01:4f8:200:3141::101]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A72521F1EB for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 01:44:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at example.com Sender: toke@toke.dk DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=toke.dk; s=201310; t=1389692651; bh=FEJCSH7IJ8PlcINiCjfI/4GMhlUpgAxb0pqBMZ2VnU4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To; b=OpA1rbf0Zi69Hp/jWAjwTljEAT7MmUv/+fzhfP4KgzdOx3A6uq+tcRZ/o35qpWHnz aDKSBRDegnik9puph1ZTovBJGoA5XiI1frrrUvDSBDEjNUh+qoEWcBwsobPqDgsVS5 1hEjwS47ZoSsjCYssqBqW6Yo8K6NpfnPFut8gpY4= Received: by alrua-desktop.borgediget.toke.dk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D02B92016E; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 10:44:09 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= To: Christopher Robin References: Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 10:44:07 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Christopher Robin's message of "Tue, 14 Jan 2014 03:37:59 -0500") Message-ID: <871u0aew48.fsf@toke.dk> Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] notes on going for a stable release X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:44:49 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Christopher Robin writes: > ***Are we here for research and development, or are we here for final > implementation? I've always thought about CeroWRT as an R&D project. As Dave points out I don't think it's realistic to provide a "stable" release in the sense of having it upgraded and maintained. At least not as things stand now. However, designating a release as "stable" in the same way as the previous one (i.e. something that won't crash and where most or all of the advertised features (mostly) work) would probably be a good idea. In particular, crash bugs and things that are completely broken should probably be fixed? As far as my installation goes: # cat /sys/kernel/debug/mips/unaligned_instructions=20 154737 # uptime 10:39:18 up 5 days, 10:56, load average: 0.05, 0.03, 0.04 # dmesg | grep "TX DMA" [348064.371093] ath: phy0: Failed to stop TX DMA, queues=3D0x004! # dmesg | grep "checksum failed" [13551.957031] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0= 001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [16072.535156] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0= 001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [22734.054687] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0= 001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [93252.820312] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0= 001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [96253.570312] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0= 001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [106396.003906] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [156808.253906] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [163650.000000] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [224205.101562] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [269216.191406] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [276718.035156] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [316807.695312] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [329890.929687] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [333792.148437] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [399208.269531] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [410070.828125] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [435757.078125] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [441458.539062] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] [449560.417968] ICMPv6 checksum failed [2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:= 0001 > 2001:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:0000:0000:0000:0002] I've had to re-initialise the wifi a couple of times for no apparent reason, and one or two reboots necessary, but nothing that major... =2DToke --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS1QbnAAoJEENeEGz1+utPJFgH/2JfdkTURd9qfsUSAhFjtLQr ej1bo/VVcsim2islGy/TaRl99T8x3MJr+wE0FX4SFefizfNlWsaljD04DLREWBjC CXka7SGPEAExflDhoEK4lvewGuahCS6cTXwo9+W2+1iCkLbLaD8lms0nmkkPAJxS yHEFRaxSl1CqmoV5PXAai/jhHa1c3H+FCahmeGYptG6/F6PQEcZhIHPvJg4XAb7n 1RSQDO17pNJxS+tB0makYYmOx4RWT+xfkYnNmXFzuK1wjF58U0Nwj4ozVC4HQCZf jevMA5aknvg85Hh44BsaB2tPU1JinwnPzZfQgFMfkQoY6IM7FZtqCNeEFbHiHmc= =ihaB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--