Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Do I owe one of you a big thank you? (TechNerdery)
#1
I think it was this very forum when I first read about Gargoyle. If so, I owe you a thank you. May have been John Dough. If so, then thank you. If not, then thank whomever mentioned Gargoyle.

I've been trying to get an old Linksys WRT54G-TM to act a wireless client bridge. Reliably. With WPA2 supported. DD-WRT seemed to work fine initially, but the WRT54G-TM would eventually stop bridging. Unplugging the Ethernet cable from client to bridge wouldn't work. Rebooting client wouldn't work. Rebooting my mobile data WiFi hostpot (Internet access point for my network) wouldn't work. Tested multiple clients connected to the bridge. The only solution was to reboot bridge.

Next, I gave Tomato a go. Installation went well as a flash from DD-WRT. Might have worked fine, but I'll never know since Tomato didn't support WPA2 in bridge mode. Oh well. Probably should have done a bit more research before flashing. Finally, I remembered Gargoyle. Reset the Tomato installation, NVRAM reset, and flashed straight into Gargoyle. Changed login password and time zone, and the next page prompted me to configure WAN/LAN/Wireless and a few options later I have what seems like a working bridge.

Without further testing, I won't know for sure if the fix will stick, but if nothing else, Gargoyle is probably the most user friendly of alternate firmwares I've used (DD-WRT, Tomato, OpenWrt*, and Gargoyle). Tomato was pretty straightforward as well, but maybe a step back from Gargoyle. DDWRT is pretty easy, but not as slick, in my opinion as those two. OpenWrt is very powerful, but seems like the most technical of the bunch when it comes to presentation.

*I run a port of OpenWrt by dony71 (scroll down to see his post) on my current router. Yes, the link resolves to a DD-WRT forum link, but that's where I first read about the OpenWrt post. The Vizio XWR100 router has cripplingly buggy firmware that now runs much better after the flash to Openwrt. I paid less than $40 a couple years back and thought I was getting a pretty good deal. Well, two years later and the deal finally ended up being pretty decent.
Reply
#2
I don't know anything about Gargoyle, but I think you owe *all* of us a big thank you for putting up with you and your Apple bashing for so long!

:-)


Just kidding.
Reply
#3
The UnDoug wrote:
I don't know anything about Gargoyle, but I think you owe *all* of us a big thank you for putting up with you and your Apple bashing for so long!

:-)


Just kidding.

Ha!* Yeah, well, sorry about that and thank you for your magnanimity.

Edit: *I do always find amusement with people who think I "bash" Apple unfairly when I've been an Apple product owner for just over twenty years and a user since the late 80s. Pay no mind that I actually wrote for a couple Mac websites in the mid 2000s. "You crazy Apple people!" Wink
Reply
#4
whats the relationship between OpenWRT, DD-WRT, Tomato, and Gargoyle? seems like there is some overlap.
Reply
#5
From what I read, Gargoyle is based off OpenWrt and you can (could?) install the Gargoyle packages directly on top of OpenWrt. I just used my router compatible prerolled image on the Gargoyle site. DD-WRT development seems to gave slowed compared to Open Wrt and I think DD-WRT does (did?) use the OpenWrt kernel. Tomato is also Linux based like those other three distributions, but it is not directly related to OpenWrt.

My process for selecting a third party firmware was to look at what firmware was compatible with my hardware, then see if the specific feature was supported, and wrap up with real world reliability test. Don't get me wrong, user friendliness is greatly appreciated. While I am not a novice to home networking, I am far from an expert. From that standpoint, I find the Gargoyle GUI to be more engaging than the other three. Tomato was pretty nice as well. DD-WRT looks like the old Linksys interface I am used to, but with even more options to wade through. OpenWrt seemed the most technical to me, but I didn't have any problems finding the basic settings, even if it took me longer to configure everything.

OpenWrt seems like a popular base for creating more specialized firmware distros. Reminds me of Debian; actually, where so many later Linux distros can trace their lineage back to Debian (often through Ubuntu granted).

I should reiterate, I don't do development and I haven't looked at source code, I'm just relaying the info I've read from various sources. An actual expert should probably chime in and offer a real explanation. Wink
Reply
#6
The Vizio XWR100 router has cripplingly buggy firmware...

So bad firmware is not just limited to Vizio's crappy TVs??
I've already convinced myself to never buy another Vizio product.
/rant
Reply
#7
MrNoBody wrote:
The Vizio XWR100 router has cripplingly buggy firmware...

So bad firmware is not just limited to Vizio's crappy TVs??
I've already convinced myself to never buy another Vizio product.
/rant

Ha! Guess not. I actually like my little Vizio TV. Small guy, M221NV I think. I wish it was IPS, but for a bedroom Or kitchen TV it isn't bad. The first few firmware revisions were rather buggy. I'll give you that. Things got better after a few updates. Too bad the Vizio router didn't really get any updates. Would have made a decent little box with the stock interface if the more severe bugs were fixed.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)