<rmilecki>
Tapper: that commit adds "btn" class to the <button> elements
<rmilecki>
Tapper: that should be redundant, i would expect every screen reader to treat <button> as button obviously
<rmilecki>
Tapper: even if <button> does not have "btn" class
ivanich has joined #openwrt-devel
<Tapper>
I am not shure on the exact code used. I know that buttons work as they should when the are dun proper. My issue is that in luci > firewall the buttons labled Save and Reset work as they should. the Save & Apply one does not and some times the screen reader does not let me click on the buttons as it should.
Darkmatter66 has joined #openwrt-devel
<Tapper>
Even the Save Reset ones some times do not let me press them I have to tab back and then tab foreword again.
<Tapper>
Some times the button labeled Save & Apply just says out of list ▾
<Tapper>
blank
<rmilecki>
Tapper: thanks for examples, i'll check them
<Tapper>
NP thanks
<Borromini>
blogic: ping
Tost has joined #openwrt-devel
<jow>
the save & apply button is actually a dropdown
<jow>
for that one, an aria-role=button actually makes sense
<Tapper>
jow It does not work. Not with a screen reader any way.
<Tapper>
I didn't even know it was a drop down.
<Tapper>
There is a lot more to buttons than I thought.
<Borromini>
or there's a few MT7621 devices that need this for their switch to be reset
<Borromini>
s/or //
<blogic>
ok
<blogic>
will do when I am back on my pc
<Borromini>
thanks a lot =)
<svanheule>
Borromini, blogic: thanks!
hbug___ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
hbug___ has joined #openwrt-devel
Darkmatter66 has joined #openwrt-devel
victhor has joined #openwrt-devel
Darkmatter66_ has joined #openwrt-devel
Darkmatter66 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Darkmatter66_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Darkmatter66 has joined #openwrt-devel
mwalle has joined #openwrt-devel
<mwalle>
hi, I was just looking at support for openwrt for our layerscape based board (aarch64). It has upstream support since 5.9. It appears that the layerscape/arm64 boards are using 5.4. Are there any plans to bump that version in the near future (next LTS kernel?)
<Borromini>
mwalle: after 21.02 gets branched
<Borromini>
there's 5.10 patches for a few targets already
<Borromini>
but not layerscape afaik.
<mwalle>
Borromini: ah nice, i have a quick look at the layerscape patches for the 5.4 kernel. it looks like most are backports
<Borromini>
plan seems to be to branch 21.02 next week, but i have no idea how quickly 5.10 patches will move into master after that
<Borromini>
this is just general treewide, targets often need further work to be fully functional
<mwalle>
Borromini: sorry, I haven't done any development in openwrt for now, so this might be a stupid question: how do the bumps to a new kernel version look like?
<mwalle>
eg. https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/staging/nbd.git;a=tree;f=target/linux/layerscape/armv8_64b;h=abc1e4fb6a9b83eec71f76351603240e49b65693;hb=HEAD, there is still the 5.4
<Borromini>
mwalle: like this https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/staging/nbd.git;a=commitdiff;h=3b27b5ad1a42426420dfa46ebb932dd1fc704fbf
<mwalle>
ha, here is another one. uboot-layerscape, I take that "layerscape" is a generic name, i.e. my board should be "layerscape" but it has both upstream linux and upstream uboot support. thus uboot-layerscape is really just an "uboot-layerscape-nxp-only-evalboars". Hum
<mwalle>
and there seems to be no vanilla uboot package. are there no boards which use an unmodfied uboot? ;)
csrf has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
csrf has joined #openwrt-devel
jlsalvador has joined #openwrt-devel
<ynezz>
mwalle: imx6
<ynezz>
or you mean from layerscape?
<mwalle>
ynezz: no in general, I was just asking myself where I should put the bootloader for my board
<mwalle>
uboot-layerscape isn't suitable, because its the nxp branch
<mwalle>
(or even tree)
<ynezz>
what board is that?
victhor_ has joined #openwrt-devel
victhor has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
<ynezz>
naming is hard, but if IIUC and you've some board which is supported by the upstream uboot, then perhaps the current directory should be renamed to uboot-layerscape-lsdk
<ynezz>
(if that would be possible)
daregap has quit [Quit: daregap]
<mwalle>
ynezz: the board name is kontron_sl28 (dunno if that will help you much ;) but its based on a LS1028A SoC
<mwalle>
ynezz: and yes, that would be a better name, although the upstream name is uboot-qoriq
<mwalle>
which has the same problem, so yeah, the -lsdk suffix would be correct
Borromini has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
ivanich has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
Borromini has joined #openwrt-devel
feriman has joined #openwrt-devel
Ivan__83 has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
jlsalvador has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.0]
feriman has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.0.1]
Ivan__83 has joined #openwrt-devel
feriman has joined #openwrt-devel
Ivan__83 has quit [Client Quit]
Ivan__83 has joined #openwrt-devel
feriman has quit [Quit: WeeChat 3.0.1]
joaohcca has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Tapper has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<mwalle>
doh. even the target/linux/layerscape is really a layerscape-lsdk :( because it imports all the lsdk patches on top of the 5.4 kernel
<mwalle>
so this might be a bit unpopular: what do you think about renaming the whole layerscape cruft to layerscape-lsdk ? and create a new layerscape which uses the vanilla kernel and stuff
valku has joined #openwrt-devel
Ivan__83 has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
Ivan__83 has joined #openwrt-devel
MichaelOF has joined #openwrt-devel
eduardas has joined #openwrt-devel
MichaelOF has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
Tapper has joined #openwrt-devel
phaidros has joined #openwrt-devel
phaidros has left #openwrt-devel [#openwrt-devel]
Darkmatter66 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Darkmatter66 has joined #openwrt-devel
Tost has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<rmilecki>
adrianschmutzler: hey, don't we need to add SOC to the list of variables?
<rmilecki>
adrianschmutzler: i'll test your patch this weekend I hope
<adrianschmutzler>
rmilecki: it's in image.mk I think
<ynezz>
mwalle: I would prefer to get rid of this LSDK crap and just use upstream kernel/uboot
<ynezz>
mwalle: and thus force NXP to upstream
<ynezz>
mwalle: I would keep it in this release 21.02, but switch to upstream sources for next, add current layerscape boards based on LSDK to the list of targets for removal
<ynezz>
I don't like it since beginning, it's impossible to review this LSDK code bombs etc.
<ynezz>
I assume we don't want to have layerscape/layerscape-lsdk targets :p
<pkgadd>
rmilecki: adding the btn class to luci-advanced-reboot was only done to fix the button rendering with the openwrt2020 luci theme, not because of any (unknown, at that time) screenreader heuristics in mind
joaohcca has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
koniu has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
koniu has joined #openwrt-devel
<Borromini>
pkgadd: hi. was about to ask something about the u-boot thing but forgot >_>. will get back to you when i remember
<pkgadd>
it would surprise me if the gs1900-8hp v1/ v2 boards wouldn't need the smaller erase block size as well
ivanich has joined #openwrt-devel
<pkgadd>
you can steal /etc/fw_env.config from the gs1900-10hp for testing, it probably fails to decode ubootenv as-is, and starts working if you overwrite /etc/fw_env.config with the correct gs1900-10hp file
<Borromini>
pkgadd: yeah had some help from bmork there, will check, thank
<Borromini>
* thanks
<Borromini>
brb
Borromini has quit [Quit: leaving]
black_ant has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
Borromini has joined #openwrt-devel
<Borromini>
guys, i'm using kermit to transfer an openwrt image over (tftp is wonky and keeps resetting)
<Borromini>
instructions are for an image to be written, and use loadb $memory_address
<Borromini>
can i do the same with an initramfs image or do i need another command for that? (remember i cannot tftboot since tft is wonky)
ivanich has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
ivanich has joined #openwrt-devel
<Borromini>
ok seems it does not matter, i can still use loadb