Slashdot Mirror


Linux Hackers Reclaim the WRT54G

An anonymous reader writes "The world's most ubiquitous wireless access point is free to run Linux again, thanks to a brilliant hack by db90h, aka Jeremy Collake. No soldering is required, as Collake's 'VxWorks Killer' nixes the WRT54G's VxWorks bootloader and installs a normal Broadcom one, allowing Linux to be installed easily. One distribution small enough for the series five WRT54G's 2MB of Flash and 8MB of RAM is the free DD-WRT project's "micro" edition. It lacks some of the fancier Linux router packages, such as nocat and IPv6, but does support PPPoE, and could be more stable than the VxWorks firmware, which seems to have generated mixed reviews." Update: 06/26 22:52 GMT by T : Note that the project's name is DD-WRT, not (as it was mistakenly rendered) WR-DDT. Check out the DD-WRT project's site.

9 of 265 comments (clear)

  1. Cisco, if you're reading this..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    please do not fight these efforts. Linux on the router (with I firewall I already know how to administer) is e the sole reason I bought your product.


    Other manufacturers (nvidia, are you reading this) - this applies for you too. If you support the software I use most (Linux) I will support your hardware.

    1. Re:Cisco, if you're reading this..... by MrRuslan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No reason for them to combat this or deliberetly prevent this in future versions. I mean as long as they sell the damn thing they should be happy. And the whole vxworks move was a VERY bad idea on their part. countless problems with routers based on that firmware.

  2. What's The Point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's the real point. Sure, the VXWorks version of the WRT54G is a little bit cheaper but, it has less memory, which limits its capabilities. The old Linux capable WRT54G is still available in the form of the WRT54GL so, why would anyone choose this route?

    As I think about it, this development may actually hurt the WRT54G Linux crowd. If price is the motivating factor and everyone opts for the slightly cheaper VXWorks version, Cisco will likely discontinue the WRT54GL due to lack of sales leaving the LInux crowd with a less featureful option.

    1. Re:What's The Point? by Zuke8675309 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      As I think about it, this development may actually hurt the WRT54G Linux crowd. If price is the motivating factor and everyone opts for the slightly cheaper VXWorks version, Cisco will likely discontinue the WRT54GL due to lack of sales leaving the LInux crowd with a less featureful option.


      Bite your tongue! Some folks purchased a v5 not realizing the trouble and instability that vxworks brings. This is GREAT news.

      Woohoo!
    2. Re:What's The Point? by hawkstone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly! I'd mod you up if I had points, but I'll just "me too" instead. The Linux ones were rather good, and I felt confident buying a Linksys b/g router after my old 802.11b-only Linksys died after a happy useful life. Only after I'd suffered with the new one for a while did I realize what the problem was. No one will probably buy the vxworks piece of junk for the insignificant cost savings.

      That said, while the utter joke that is the V5 should never have made it out the door, they've finally fixed many of the worst problems with the thing. So my guess is that this is mostly really good news for those that have problems still not yet fixed or for those that wanted some of the OpenWRT features -- I would have jumped on this a year ago, but today I might skip it.

  3. Re:WRT54G well worth it by batkiwi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Others have said it, but the reason is that VXWorks has a smaller footprint. The VXWorks versions have half the ram and half the flash space of the other versions.

    Linksys/cisco embrace the whole "DIY" crowd and have produced a "WRT54GL" with the full amount of ram and flash so that linux hackers can do their thing. They made it difficult to flash the VXWorks one because too many idiots would try and flash a 4mb image on it and brick it, causing support headaches.

  4. Save $20 on a client by jimbogun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Difference between WRT54G and WAP54G = $20 and a little work. I wanted to set up MythTv for my home. My internet access is in the back room but I watch myth in the front room. Naturally I went with wireless since the wife didn't want the ugly cables. I went to my local electronics store and bought a 54G not thinking it couldn't be a client. I set it up and home and found out I bought the wrong product rather quickly. Knowing that hacks like this exist for anything with a chip I did a little research and found the SVEASoft firmware. Downloaded it from another site (it's open source, thank you Linksys). I upgraded my firmware and on reboot got a blinking red light. That's when I found out about the term brick. After my heart started beating again, I did another search and found a quick tutorial on how to un-brick your system and first step is to try the Linksys exe (worked like a charm, again thanks Linksys). I then found DD-WRT, installed and worked like a charm. I was a little confused that I had to set my clients name as the same as the wireless server to enable the bridge, but after getting that straight everything worked like a charm. Overall, the potential heart attack was not worth $20, but the satisfaction of buying something, finding out it doesn't work and turning to the open source community for the answer, Priceless.

  5. Linksys's continuing missed opportunity by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Amazed, am I, at Linksys's continuing to miss the opportunity to sell a fully featured WRT54G themselves. They could have a knockout product out of the box in that price range that would leave the competition scrambling, but persist in sticking to a basic, no frills configuration.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  6. Re:DD-WRT by jelle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe you could check this:

    ~ # cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_conntrack_max
    4096

    --
    --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.