The ftp site
ftp://ftp.dd-wrt.com/
has far more recent versions of DDWRT for my router.
Is this a glitch on the main site, that it lists outdated versions? Should I just grab the latest version from the ftp and never mind that Router-Database again?
Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2015 15:02 Post subject: Re: Why does the router database suggest old versions?
Klaus5000 wrote:
Is this a glitch on the main site, that it lists outdated versions?
No. Just unmaintained.
Klaus5000 wrote:
Should I just grab the latest version from the ftp and never mind that Router-Database again?
Yes. _________________ Want to get ahold of me? Contact me via one of the links here: http://jse.io/ or via discord at https://discord.gg/NmYX6enh
---
Current Router Setup:
OEM Satellite internet -- I'll likely get back to DD-WRT again when I get better internet
Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2015 16:14 Post subject: Re: Why does the router database suggest old versions?
jsebean wrote:
Klaus5000 wrote:
Should I just grab the latest version from the ftp and never mind that Router-Database again?
Yes.
The latest version is not necessarily best or even good. Latest builds are released as test builds. Some recent builds are causing routers to go into a constant reboot loop. Please do not give advice without knowing anything about what router and build you are giving blind advice on. There are room mended builds that are recommended for a reason, For Broadcom, this information is contained in the peacock announcement. _________________ SIG:
I'm trying to teach you to fish, not give you a fish. If you just want a fish, wait for a fisherman who hands them out. I'm more of a fishing instructor.
LOM: "If you show that you have not bothered to read the forum announcements or to follow the advices in them then the level of help available for you will drop substantially, also known as Murrkf's law.."
Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2015 17:19 Post subject: Re: Why does the router database suggest old versions?
Murrkf wrote:
jsebean wrote:
Klaus5000 wrote:
Should I just grab the latest version from the ftp and never mind that Router-Database again?
Yes.
The latest version is not necessarily best or even good. Latest builds are released as test builds. Some recent builds are causing routers to go into a constant reboot loop. Please do not give advice without knowing anything about what router and build you are giving blind advice on. There are room mended builds that are recommended for a reason, For Broadcom, this information is contained in the peacock announcement.
Well maybe if the main site was actually maintained with that information more clearly people wouldn't get so confused over it..... _________________ Want to get ahold of me? Contact me via one of the links here: http://jse.io/ or via discord at https://discord.gg/NmYX6enh
---
Current Router Setup:
OEM Satellite internet -- I'll likely get back to DD-WRT again when I get better internet
Any one who has been here a while,more than 23 days, knows that the router database is not to be used.
Murrkf is right, what if you had suggested a buffalo user or tp-link user to updated to the lates at the ftp site and it bricked their router.
Those units are not as easy to unbrick as others. _________________ I am far from a guru, I'm barely a novice.
Posted: Fri Dec 25, 2015 5:52 Post subject: Re: Why does the router database suggest old versions?
jsebean wrote:
Well maybe if the main site was actually maintained with that information more clearly people wouldn't get so confused over it.....
That statement doesn't excuse poor advice. You have as much ability as I do to alter the router database. _________________ SIG:
I'm trying to teach you to fish, not give you a fish. If you just want a fish, wait for a fisherman who hands them out. I'm more of a fishing instructor.
LOM: "If you show that you have not bothered to read the forum announcements or to follow the advices in them then the level of help available for you will drop substantially, also known as Murrkf's law.."
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 Posts: 7568 Location: YWG, Canada
Posted: Fri Dec 25, 2015 7:38 Post subject: Re: Why does the router database suggest old versions?
Murrkf wrote:
jsebean wrote:
Well maybe if the main site was actually maintained with that information more clearly people wouldn't get so confused over it.....
That statement doesn't excuse poor advice. You have as much ability as I do to alter the router database.
that is not true..on an overall level, the latest build has been the best for the typical user. broadcom's "peacock thread" is not always right even for router models it lists, let alone other routers like qualcomm atheros or mediatek, ive tried speaking to broadcom community before about that, didnt go well so i gave up. its common sense for a user to start with latest, then work from there, if a user is not satisfied with the "risks" then they wont flash, or they shouldnt anyway, but u can never know. broadcom is at fault for having a closed source driver thats questionably "tested", before providing it to ddwrt, theres been so many broadcom drivers that were plain broken.
yes the peacock thread is right in many aspects, but it has to keep up, which it isnt doing very well
1. I cannot see what your statements have to do with what you quoted. You seem to be bashing the peacock announcement, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the whether the advice was bad or whether we can change the router database.
2. The suggestion that the peacock announcement not be relevant to atheros and Qualcomm etc. Is already stated in big bold letters at the start of the peacock.
3. Imo the peacock announcement is up to date,with respect to builds that work well on Broadcom. I update it whenever a good reliable build comes out that general users will find stable. It is always a compromise, but it is not matter of not keeping up. _________________ SIG:
I'm trying to teach you to fish, not give you a fish. If you just want a fish, wait for a fisherman who hands them out. I'm more of a fishing instructor.
LOM: "If you show that you have not bothered to read the forum announcements or to follow the advices in them then the level of help available for you will drop substantially, also known as Murrkf's law.."
Posted: Tue Dec 29, 2015 14:08 Post subject: Really nothing newer than from 2010?
Thanks for these replies. My router uses broadcom so the peacock thread applies. It tells me I should take Brainslayer 14929, which is from 8.12.2010. I don't mind doing so, but is there really nothing newer that is recommended?
Posted: Tue Dec 29, 2015 21:10 Post subject: Re: Really nothing newer than from 2010?
bjorn_e58 wrote:
Thanks for these replies. My router uses broadcom so the peacock thread applies. It tells me I should take Brainslayer 14929, which is from 8.12.2010. I don't mind doing so, but is there really nothing newer that is recommended?
/Bjørn.
Well, without knowing which router you have, it's impossible to say. For older routers, I typically recommend older and known-to-be-stable builds. Putting the newest build on an older router usually won't provide you with much more than an older build would. Why? An old router doesn't have any hardware that isn't already supported by the older builds. This isn't necessarily the case with the newest routers. If you have the latest generation of some brand's router, then you actually have a good reason to try a newer build.
Remember, this is all open source stuff so there's always exceptions. One that comes to mind is the SSH heartbleed bug. If you're running OpenVPN on an older router, you'll probably want to get the oldest stable build that came out after roughly 4/15/14 when the bug was fixed.
All of this being said, do your homework before you flash anything. You should also understand that "bricking" a router is likely to happen if you play with this stuff long enough. For this reason, it pays to get comfortable with things like "serial recovery".
Posted: Tue Dec 29, 2015 21:25 Post subject: Re: Really nothing newer than from 2010?
bjorn_e58 wrote:
Thanks for these replies. My router uses broadcom so the peacock thread applies. It tells me I should take Brainslayer 14929, which is from 8.12.2010. I don't mind doing so, but is there really nothing newer that is recommended?
/Bjørn.
There are newer builds than 14929 recommended in the peacock announcement. _________________ SIG:
I'm trying to teach you to fish, not give you a fish. If you just want a fish, wait for a fisherman who hands them out. I'm more of a fishing instructor.
LOM: "If you show that you have not bothered to read the forum announcements or to follow the advices in them then the level of help available for you will drop substantially, also known as Murrkf's law.."
lets face it. we are all lazy. who would want to spend a large amount of time writing a really long "manual" that no one is really ever going to read?
there was some narrow minded person i was just talking to in the marvell forum who was asking whether or not dd-wrt supported his router (which it does). i tried to clue him in on it and told him to read about the marvell forum WHICH HAD 3 THREADS WITH WORKING BUILDS and he said "i cant find it".
maybe if its made clear enough in a short paragraph on the front site in three sentences in big red bold letters that even four eyed people can see well without their reading glasses, i think newbies would actually put effort into reading our (if it ever happens) "updated" material.
Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:22 Post subject: Went for 14929
Thanks. My router is a WRT54GL and I went for 14929, even though the peacock thread mentions others have sucessfully been using a somewhat newer one. It went relatively smooth, although I had to hard reset it twice after getting 14929.
