Hacker News Reader

Comment by lucb1e | Hacker News Reader

I always regarded DDWRT as the de-facto open replacement for router firmware but the EFF doesn't even mention it. Why not fork from them, are there (legal) issues?

View on HN

Not sure I agree with you that DD-WRT is the de-facto open replacement for router firmware. DD-WRT is just a fork of an old version of OpenWRT (White Russian). OpenWRT is where all the innovation really happens. The OpenWRT developers also contribute back to the Linux wireless stack.

I believe DD-WRT also had a few GPL violations in the past. Not sure if they still do. Anyway, do agree with the consensus that none of this is really needed because we already have OpenWRT and OpenWRT runs on anything that you could possibly want :-)

openwrt still does not run on the very popular Asus RT N-66U.

So, no, not everything you could possibly want.

True,

But I think the reason for that is the legality about using the proprietary b43 driver. Again, seems that DD-WRT does (patched kernel) support this but their access to the Broadcom source code seems questionable.

Please see https://dev.openwrt.org/ticket/10852 and https://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2013-July/...

There has been some controversy around DD-WRT and GPL, maybe that's why.

http://web.archive.org/web/20070726045835/http://www.bitsum....

http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/columns/article.php/3816236

It is just an openwrt fork anyway. I use openwrt on everything, ever. I'd wish the EFF would just contribute to that project, or at least present us with evidence they tried.

CeroWRT is an improved version of OpenWRT.

I just run an EPIA 500 fanless x86 with OpenBSD on it, boot it from a CF card. A MSI Ralink RT2560F - MSI PC54G2 PCI Wi-Fi 802.11g card in it for the AP.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com