LEDE Table of Hardware: Review of dataentry fields

I am referring to the drop down in the Data Entry view while in edit mode which contains the instruction set values.

I am suggesting, if possible, this display as a hyper-link in the data entry view mode and point to the same value on this page: https://downloads.lede-project.org/snapshots/packages/ .

So the LEDE Instructions Set value "i386_geode" would land here: https://downloads.lede-project.org/snapshots/packages/i386_geode/

I have gone into more detail here: Packages for instruction sets I have no idea how to map the values in this table, and suspect most users will also not.

OK, now I get it!
I'm afraid, AFAIK this is not possible. That's our old problem, that we want to show a short link in the datatables, e.g. "Installation Image" or "Upgrade Image" instead of the current full url.

Found a workaround:

  • datafield "LEDE instructionset" is now of type "page" -> internal wiki link
  • datafield "Packages download" is now of type "title" -> internal wiki link
  • on the page that both of the above datafields currently link to, I placed an external link to https://downloads.lede-project.org/snapshots/packages/
  • I created a namespace template for /instructionset/, which automatically fills in the instructionset in the pagetitle and the packages URL.

Good enough?

1 Like

Great solution!

I realize that I should mention something that has always bothered me about the "Device Page" entries shown on the OpenWrt ToH.

The names are lower-cased, but I think they would be far better ("more official" appearing) if they were the same case as the "Model" column.

We were talking about modularity. Several devices share the same installation methods.
Introducing the "Installation method" field was an attempt to create shortcuts to the always same installation instructions, that do not need to be repeated over and over again.

Richb wrote in Toward a good "Flashing LEDE Instructions" page

I am not sure of the value of this "Installation method" field.

First off, I don't know how we would populate it. It wouldn't make
sense for us to review all the Device Pages from OpenWrt: despite the
fact that it would be a lot of work, we'd simply propagate any
(mis)information contained there (because we don't have personal
experience with all devices).

Second, what will the reader do differently based on the setting of this field? Would they choose not to use the device?

  1. I'm not afraid of a lot of work.
  2. Why should we review the OpenWrt devicepages, when this is about LEDE devicepages (which have yet to be created)?
  3. You don't want to propagate (mis)information -> you don't want to copy the OpenWrt devicepages, but instead create new LEDE devicepages. If the devicepages are created new anyways, why not add a new way to include installation instructions?
  4. Why should the reader do anything differently?
    What you might think: The "Installation method" shows up in the ToH, and the $user wants to sort and select by this criteria. That's not necessarily so, but thinking about it, it could be a usecase (I want a device that can be flashed via GUI, since I'm too noob to even think about using CLI. Everything different than GUI will not do.) But that's only thinking aloud...
    What I was thinking of: Show this field only on the devicepages and make them more modular by doing so.

Look at the packages download: Packages are now downloadable by instruction set, not by target, because several targets share the same instructionset and therefore also the same packages.

Same same in this case: Several devices / targets share the same installation instructions.
You could show this field on the devicepage in the "Installation" datatable, right next to the firmware download urls https://wiki.openwrt.org/meta/template_device#installation

Since LEDE is targets not only routers anymore, but to a wider category of embedded devices with hardware that may be much different than routers:
Would it be useful to have a field "GPIOs" in the dataentries?

The number of readily accessible GPIOs could be a useful search criteria.

What do you think?

Definitely, I think GPIO info is useful for custom hardware projects

+1 for GPIO field, for devboards/single board computers it is crucial info.

It may make sense to list also screen ports (either embedded like LVDS or external like HDMI) and audio ports.

Gentle reminder :slight_smile:

The conversion table I posted above moved to a new location and is waiting for filling. Once I have the relation OWrt vs. LEDE Instructionset, I will update the dataentries.


he posted them here

If what you need in that wiki page is mostly monkey businness (jow not strictly required), I can do that tomorrow.

Nice! Thanks for pointing me to that posting!

I've been adding things to that page, I noticed we have a few package arcs that are not used by any target.
I removed their entries when jow confirmed that they are indeed useless and will be purged from the download page here

Looking at the full view, at the end are "Firmware LEDE Install URL" and "Firmware LEDE Upgrade URL".

Currently there is only trunk and the url points to the snapshots folder. Eventually (soon?) there will be a stable release. Do we need 2 more fields and add some text "Trunk" and "Stable" (or similar) to the descriptions?

Do you have a plan around the future of the OpenWrt fields and contents? Long term does it make more sense to add a field and link to the device or techdata page at OpenWrt.

In the past the directive was: Show the stable version in the firmware download fields. Only if no stable version exists, use trunk instead.

No plans. For now, they are there and didn't cost anything :slight_smile:
If they stay in the dataentries, they need to be updated... hm... extra workload.
I wouldn't mind throwing them out.

That's already available: https://wiki.lede-project.org/toh/views/toh_available_864

I updated the dataentries:

  • subtargets added as far as possible
  • LEDE firmware download urls corrected as far as possible (some targets do not exist in LEDE, some moved to different subtargets, ...)

Please take a look at https://wiki.lede-project.org/toh/views/toh_fwdownload2
Please check for correctness: Subtarget, LEDE instructionset, Firmware LEDE Install URL, Firmware LEDE Upgrade URL. Should you spot any errors, please let me know.

Dugh, I knew that, sorry.

There are some targets coming from OpenWrt that are not in jow's list

There are some tagets on jows list that appear to not have devices

malta (4 sub-targets and only 1 device)
mediatek\generic (none)
apm821xx (none)
au1000/au1550 (none)
gemini (2 subtargets and only 1 device)

There are about 60 devices with no targets, so there still may be a need for these.

I am struggling with the "Platform" field. It seems like a level at or below target\sub-target. I was looking for a wiki page and found your ToDo list with the note to change it to CPU.

I am concerned this is a free form field in the dataentry form. The current values do not match the OpenWrt platform list (exactly). If it's selection worthy, does it make sense to split off the brand?

Are these values some how tied to the build process?

I updated https://wiki.lede-project.org/templates:template_dataentry to the latest status (=the status of the imported OpenWrt dataentries).

I also updated https://wiki.lede-project.org/meta/create_new_dataentry_page
Feel free to create new dataentries as you like (they will be lost after the tryout period, though).
After creation, edit the dataentry via the LEFT edit button below the dataentry box to see the editor with all datafields.

Please review the dataentries as described in the first posting. Special attention should be paid to some newly introduced datafields, and there especially at the dropdown values:

Dropdown review needed

  • CPU Cores
  • Installation method <---- I added basic ones; new ones welcome! let's play around with this for some time and see if it is useful.
  • LEDE Instructionset <--- Is this the right naming for this field? @jow called it "Package arch".
  • Packages download (=LEDE Instructionset + "|Download")
  • Serial connection parameters <--- what other common parameters like 115200 8N1 are needed?
  • GPIOs

Comment review needed
Take a look at the rightmost column, the "Comment" column. This column provides basic help on what is expected in the datafileds. Datafields which need some input here are marked with "--------> Description goes here". Any help is welcome!

Note to self: "Flash MB" is currently unusable (too small) -> to be improved via CSS