FreeBSD 10.0 image and build script for EdgeRouter Lite

[Joe Holden]

On 09/02/2014 01:34, Juli Mallett wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Outback Dingo <outbackdingo at gmail.com
> <mailto:outbackdingo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Juli Mallett <jmallett at freebsd.org
>     <mailto:jmallett at freebsd.org>> wrote:
>
>         On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Joe Holden <lists at rewt.org.uk
>         <mailto:lists at rewt.org.uk>> wrote:
>
>          > On 08/02/2014 00:23, Juli Mallett wrote:
>          >>
>          >> The most likely scenario is that very minor changes will be
>         required to
>          >> support the additional model, possibly as little as just
>         recognizing its
>          >> model identifier.
>          >>
>          >> Juli....
>          >>
>          >
>          > IIRC the bigger variants are Octeon II with hardware switches
>         (likely
>          > marvell/broadcom) - what are the chances of getting support
>         for either
>          > given the NDA requirements?
>
>
>
>     okay so wait, should i buy the light and not risk getting the pro
>     and npot having it worlk? Id really like the pro version
>
>
> The Pro definitely won't work out-of-the-box because its model
> identifier would at minimum need added to FreeBSD.  The question is how
> hard it would be to support.  It seems to be based on the CN6120, so I'd
> be concerned that any number of things could present a problem,
> primarily USB support and Ethernet.  I know that some on this list were
> very disappointed with a similar device (albeit with some different
> hardware) that it was difficult to find someone to work on.  I've got
> hardware for that even though I don't have the EdgeRouter Pro, but
> ENOTIME.  I would be happy to help someone else try to walk through the
> process, or encourage you to contact Cavium asking if they have any
> interest in helping further to support FreeBSD on Octeon II.  I know
> that for some vendors FreeBSD availability on Octeon is a selling point,
> and I'd like to think that at some point that will mean someone will
> have the interest in doing the work, or funding the work.
>
> Thanks,
> Juli.
As an aside, binary blob would be absolutely fine if it worked properly 
(for both Cavium stuff and switch addons), I dislike the idea of having 
a switch connected to a single CPU port anyway, since hairpins are evil.