Implemented in https://openwrt.org/docs/start
When you have time, perhaps a toggle for the header search for
- "Docs only" -- default
It is my guess that the header search, which I think is also used by Google if you enter "openwrt.org " into Chrome, is the "primary" search people use.
Don't get pulled in my friend to talks on pilots and planes and such, they are trolling and attempting to distract. I have been using mod-ed small-linux-system firmware on routers since it was first formed out of vapors as a slight twist to the face of the stock OS of the old WRT54G years ago, yet I'm not sure I've learned that much. And after much consideration I am not sure if there is an answer of how I should be provided this documentation that I've always needed. Why?
At best it's difficult to document something in a medium that changes this rapidly. Secondly and more important, this work is a consortium of people who get paid strictly from the pleasure they derive from having created something this cleaver and unfortunately documentation does not even come close to making the A-list of most coders. Also from the good people who have attempted the task, they seem to speak from a level of if not an expert, a greatly experienced person working in the field of networking. Add to that the shunning by most peers of a Linux or networking professional when one of them tries to explain things at an elementary level, all of these obstacles make it almost taboo for anyone to take someone and guide their hand. It seems if some can't toss a few acronyms while either directly or indirectly implying that you should know that, they feel complied to waste more of their time than they are willing to part with.
So what you are left with is either plowing through comments like you see here or going back to the DD-WRT where you have to deal with worse, even more demeaning and belittling comments (RTFM you twerp, et. al.) and even if you are able to endure that, you are left with a bunch of flaky software, peacock thread and all. (IMHO)
So I can best advise a path to understand all of this and that would be several years of professional training in both Linux and Networking. Of course once you understand that you won't give this forum a thought and will be too busy making money to waste time documenting or answering questions here LOL.
What you can do is what I did and I assume you are like me and came here out of desperation because you may have used "the other team's firmware" and you got tired of all the issues you were having and heard OpenWRT is more stable. Now while there are some really "stressful" releases, things seem to have worked themselves out for the most part and while not 100%, it's probably a lot more stable than even what the MFG is pushing. So being here is a good place to be. (Still with the Lede/Openwrit argument a while back, it shows you how volatile even this "stable" offering is when it comes to politics.)
But before I digress too far, I suggest you ask questions and try to keep a good attitude and the ability to ignore some people here and see how far you get. The comments I've read here are long and tedious but I did read where one person asked why you needed to reboot the router and they assume, I assume, they believe you think the firmware has some problem and needs rebooting, when it may simply be that you want the router down during the time the ISP recycles, and some of them do every Saturday at midnight.
My approach is to try to answer someone's request and then casually ask why they might want to do that, rather than going on the defensive - but that's just the way I operate.
A note to you on rebooting. Use this for reference and take the advice of the person who uses the sleep 70 in the syntax, as this works for me. If it's any consulation for you , it took me quite a while to find how to do it as well.
**** Some more tips for you. I may wrongly assume you a Windows user for whatever that means but as one myself I highly suggest using the WinSCP package (on the Windows machine) and it should be all intuitive past using the SCP option and figuring out short cuts you will find like embedding the ID root and password (use the save pull-down to force save your password). Now you will see the file structure and you can play around in /ect/ and /etc/config in particular and be sure to get your slants going the right way.
Then someday someone will convince you why you need UCI syntax but until they do, you can attempt just to apply a simple notepad style editing to many of the files you'll need to control to customize the various functions of the router. I personally believe the reason many may like UCI is that with VI your only alternative, using UCI from line-comand Linux looks like child's play. But for a windows user raised on simply notepad, WinSCP unquestionably roxx.
Using WinSCP, basically you can figure out a shot-gun approach to change all the config files, save your changes and then do a reboot. I have only gotten caught once in the game of altering the config files on the fly where I accidentally slipped and made some changes with Luci before a reboot, and where the UCI may have protected me but otherwise I haven't seen anything to make me start using it yet. Each time I suggest people direct edit, I am warned of something that might happen but at the moment the reason escapes me. Still it's been my experience at if you change all the config files like you like e.g. changing /etc/config/dhcp, firewall, network, openvpn(if you are using) and wireless, saving all of them and then rebooting without using luci (the GUI interface) then you come up with a configured router that you can then pick up management via luci.
Also it's easier to do a config to config comparison when looking at the normal text style output rather than a long string of whacky UCI commands IMHO.
Hopefully this should get you started. Otherwise, just sign in, set the password, click Network, Interfaces, LAN and set your host and special IP for the router if you like, then go to Network, Wireless, then click Edit button under the SCAN button, page down to Interface Configuration, set the SSID as the wireless name transmitted and click the "WiFi Security" tab to set the password type to WPA2 xxxx and then set a password, Save and Apply and back on the previous screen, click the Enable button next to the Edit button you used before and you should be basically good to go.
What seems stranger to me, is that the documentation, is owned by the whole community. So if the documentation is not well written, it is only we that can change it.
Me, when I arrived at openwrt, the first thing I discovered is that the firewall I wanted to use (nftables) although it was supported, it wasn't the default, and had no documentation. So the first thing I did was write the documentation:
So at least then there was some documentation. yes the documentation is technical - thats becuase it had to be, for nftables there is no nice interface, you can only use it at the low level. So that is was I documented.
Now if everyone added to the wiki, couldn't we make it better? For if we don't, then the situation won't change. Only the community as a whole can decide what is documented, some of it will be low level, and some at higher level. Such is how it must be ...
This is a great help thanks.
I dunno if it’s feasible with the forum software , but perhaps incentivizing quality contributions to the wiki is linked back to people in some way (badges, acknowledgement, rep, etc).
For the functionalities, bypassing the openwrt-specialities, I agree on you. As you bypassed the uci stuff. But for special functions like procd or ubus and its interactions, the coders are responsible for the docs. As an IT-dinosaur, I have to recite, in pre-historic times one of our rules was: Good software without docs simply does not exist ...
Wow, you think you need no training in networking, yet so say you don't know anything about it. Why would you want to install an advanced system like OpenWRT, if you don't want to make use of the advanced functionality? And if you do, how would you configure it, without any domain specific knowledge about it?
Clearly you have no clue of how to administer a Linux system, nor of how to architect or configure a network.From the discussion alone it becomes clear you lack basic knowledge of computer constructs. If you really think regularly rebooting your router makes it more stable.... If you want to be able to operate a complex system, you're going to have to put in the effort to understand it. No GUI or tutorial is going to get your network configured, without you knowing what you're doing.
Wouldn't you simply be much better off with a more simple system, that works out off the box? I think for example Google and Apple make such systems. Nearly no configuration needed, and no deep knowledge about Linux or networking needed.
That's exactly what I thought. I mean, you don't have to be wise in the Networking and Linux administration. But you don't have to search a project that requieres that knowledge if you are not willing to either help the community or help yourself.
Why would someone want to drive a car when they don't understand how to even turn it on? And worst, why would they try if they are not willing to learn? You can blame the 1996 Toyota for doing such complex cars and say that Tesla is way easier to drive (hint: they almost drive themselves).
Community was actually more helpful than they should, given the OP reclaiming something as he deserves it. What would happen if you have a problem with Windows? Go to Microsoft forums and ask for it. 99% of the time the solution is to reboot and if it doesn't work, reinstall Windows.
Still, I'm thinking that LuCI needs more work to be done. For example, users management for Samba an a simple GUI for cron. I would like to help, but I'm already helping with low level stuff, you know? Kernel configuration, advanced administration; and I'm not precisely good at web development.
P.S. not all of us are native speakers. Most of you native speakers don't understand a word in our language and you'll never will. Please be more respectful with people that do it's best despiste it's limitations; specially if you're not doing it better.
OpenWRT has very good logic and documentation. It is "Linux on Router", so it is user-friendly to extent it should be. It is very predictable in configuration. Consider Padavan, e.g. For me it is much difficult to configure, it has "hand-made" scripts with very badly described behavior. So OpenWRT is absolutely ideal system for router. Btw, I've written manual for OpenVPN with kill-switch, people use it regularly.
Most of the documentation is very outdated, lacking, or non existent. Folks always spew the b.s to use the search feature. Lines and lines of comments with a rare mark of solved or completed for an answer. My favorite question was "How to disable ipv6 completely on openwrt". There were many responses, many ways of doing this, many disagreements. How about we just place two lines in the /etc/sysctl.conf and reboot?
Nope! There was this massive pissing contest and lots of confusion. I dare any egomaniac to tell me this doesn't work for openwrt. I'm your Huckleberry.
This is not considered a supported OpenWrt configuration anymore.
@jow It's standard for Linux and works for openwrt as well. If at some point it doesn't work anymore for openwrt, then where is that documentation?
It is not supported in the sense that nobody actively test that all is working with it disabled.
If it can be disabled the same way as in standard Linux desktop distros why would we need OpenWrt specific documentation for it?
example: netstat openwrt < netstat linux. Missing or non existant commands, therefore NOT the same. is this documented? NO. a short tip explaining? NO. nada except for read the man page.
Do we need more donations to help ease the pain? More volunteers to write socially acceptable wiki pages? I'm on board 110% and I'm sure many others would contribute in some way as well.
It's not OpenWrt's "netstat", but Busybox's "netstat".
As far as I know, the wiki is open for contributions from anybody...
These threads come up regularly several times a year. The problem might be that there are two extremes: consumer routers & OpenWRT and until recently there was almost nothing in between (dd-wrt/Asus-Merlin and the likes do not count as they are very close to one of these extremes). It is very unreasonable to expect user friendly docs/UI from OpenWRT enthusiasts: it is just boring and time consuming with no monetary benefit.
I wonder if manufactures like GL-iNet would be open to some kind referral program if OpenWrt project starts officially referring inexperienced users their way? PFSence/OPNSense/etc do have their commercial offerings. Why not OpenWrt?
So you are advocating the "non-professional" (amateurish) attitude of the "OpenWRT enthusiasts", not to provide accurate, up-to-date docs. It is very convenient, too, to use your argumentation to justify "good enough software quality" ...