Stale "Current Image" Links for Devices

Not the first time that this has happened, but often there are hard-coded links to the "right" version of firmware to install on the device pages. This can lead to users installing an "ancient" version and running into all kinds of problems, or not being aware that they are running outdated firmware at all.

As per hw compatibility table, I installed Barrier Breaker 14.07 on a Netgear DG834GT.

Any thoughts on how this information could be kept up to date, short of hand-editing every device's page?

You are refering to

.

Your position seems to be: 14.07 is ancient, use 18.06!, right?

See this answer:

The devicepage indeed has different information regarding supported release and firmware image links than the dataentry https://openwrt.org/toh/hwdata/netgear/netgear_dg834gt

-> There is a reason why neither the devicepage nor the dataentry recommend 18.06.

That's what dataentries and datatables are for, see e.g. https://openwrt.org/toh/netgear/dgn2200

Normally I would have already added datatables to the devicepage, showing the same data as in the ToH, but during my last big devicepage edit-session (June/July?), knowing that 16MB RAM devices are somewhat doomed, I set priorities to devices with more than 16MB RAM.

Yes, that is the "latest" thread where I felt that a user had unwittingly been directed to an outdated version by a "hard" link.

I did check http://downloads.openwrt.org/releases/18.06.0/targets/brcm63xx/generic/ prior to responding and found http://downloads.openwrt.org/releases/18.06.0/targets/brcm63xx/generic/openwrt-18.06.0-brcm63xx-generic-DG834GT_PN-squashfs-cfe.bin suggesting that it was still a valid build. As I could not confirm from the device page that it was the "right" firmware for the OP's device, I did not link it directly.

I did not realize that it was a 16 MB RAM device.

In this specific case, I agree with assessment that current versions would likely be non-operable on that device.

I agree that keeping up with the more likely functional devices over the ones that are marginal is a good prioritization.

To address this kind of challenge, would it make sense to have an even stronger set of warnings around devices that don't even meet the 4/32 level?

I think that the ToH may be doing a disservice to potential non-expert users in even remotely recommending devices that are likely to have problems running current, supported releases

I chose [the DG834GT] based on the hardware compatibility table and the wiki page for the dg834gt ( that says officially 10.03 backfire is the last officially supporte by dg834gt, but 14.07 should work too, as it actually does as per my experience).

We have already the 432 warning in place. Assuming to get reasonable results with only half of that is adventurous.

You could help by adding the 432 warning to devicepages (right at the top) where it is missing.

See the Table of Hardware: Ideal for OpenWrt for recommended devices with 16MB RAM.