Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 17:23 Post subject: new version
I see that opendns released two revisions in the last week or so, the latest being 0.12
Lancethepants has several different variants including 5 different ddwrt versions. Does anyone know what is different between the versions? He just mentions ddwrt toolchains.
Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2012 15:37 Post subject: Re: confused!
ryzhov_al wrote:
wasiqcheema wrote:
If I enable jffs2, I only get the following space:
Total : 384.00 KB
Free Size : 152.00 KB
I'm afraid that is not enough:
Code:
$ du -h ./ipkg-entware/dnscrypt-proxy/opt/sbin/dnscrypt-proxy
432K ./ipkg-entware/dnscrypt-proxy/opt/sbin/dnscrypt-proxy
So which firmware can I use to increase my jffs? I'm not many of router's services (e.g. hotspot, vpn, etc). I'm just planning to run OTRW and DNScrypt.
According to my research,
For OTRW, one need a USB enabled router. So, E2000 is out of option.
For DNScrypt, one need a jffs space of around 1MB. E2000 has 8MB flash... and is already DDWRT'd. So,. I can use nv60k builds, but which one? Eko or Brainslayer? I've read somewhere that Brainslayer builds give more jffs2 space than EKO's. Any pro advice?
Generally you micro or mini builds should allow for more jffs space. The binaries I uploaded for DD-WRT right now are a little bigger, I can compile them to be aproximatley 1/2 their current size. For this round of binaries I decided to not add a few addition flags (LDFLAGS) just to make sure they're not messing anything up, but this also resulted in bigger binaries.
See if you can acquire a firmware that will allow around .5 megabytes space. If you would like to test the binaries for me, you can also load them to /tmp (ram) for testing purposes.
Some routers simply may not simply have the space for sufficient jffs, though I would imagine that the e2000/e3000 with their 8MB could.
Joined: 17 Jul 2012 Posts: 48 Location: Smolensk, Russia
Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 9:06 Post subject:
lancethepants wrote:
Generally you micro or mini builds should allow for more jffs space. The binaries I uploaded for DD-WRT right now are a little bigger, I can compile them to be aproximatley 1/2 their current size. For this round of binaries I decided to not add a few addition flags (LDFLAGS) just to make sure they're not messing anything up, but this also resulted in bigger binaries.
Also, by throwing off some linker flags from original configure.ac we'll able to pack it with $ upx --ultra-brute. _________________ Entware team
Joined: 17 Jul 2012 Posts: 48 Location: Smolensk, Russia
Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2012 18:20 Post subject:
lancethepants wrote:
I can compile them to be aproximatley 1/2 their current size. For this round of binaries I decided to not add a few addition flags (LDFLAGS) just to make sure they're not messing anything up, but this also resulted in bigger binaries.
Another way to make the dnscrypt-proxy smaller is excluding code sections from binary which not really used.
Code:
TARGET_LDFLAGS += -Wl,--gc-sections
TARGET_CFLAGS += -fdata-sections -ffunction-sections
...
after compilation
...
$ du -h ./dnscrypt-proxy
256K ./dnscrypt-proxy
Which means ~40% of original binary code is not used. _________________ Entware team
here's the toolchains I used. I downloaded from DD-WRT site and tried any that would work.
toolchain-mipsel_3.3.6_BRCM24 #1
toolchain-mipsel_4.1.1_BRCM24 #2
toolchain-mipsel_gcc4.1.2 #3
toolchain-mipsel_gcc-linaro_uClibc-0.9.32 #4
toolchain-mips_r2_gcc-linaro_uClibc-0.9.32 #5
All work for me, except #5. I used the Tomato build most, but I have switched to #4 since I had some very short periods of the router being unresponsive. I don't think they have gone for good, but it seems to have helped a bit. I don't use hostip, since I want no unencrypted DNS requests. Time is synchronized from an IP number and the router checks the time before starting dnscrypt (i.e. if the year is 1970 it loops back to checking the time). _________________ 2 times APU2 Opnsense 21.1 with Sensei
2 times RT-AC56U running DD-WRT 45493 (one as Gateway, the other as AP, both bridged with LAN cable)
3 times Asus RT-N16 shelved
E4200 V1 running freshtomato 2020.8 (bridged with LAN cable)
3 times Linksys WRT610N V2 converted to E3000 and 1 original E3000 running freshtomato 2020.8 (bridged with LAN cable)
Joined: 04 Oct 2007 Posts: 1258 Location: Ohio USA
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2012 15:12 Post subject:
lancethepants wrote:
Generally you micro or mini builds should allow for more jffs space.
Micro does not have JFFS. Please refer to the File Versions table to see which builds include JFFS. _________________ (05/02/17) std - 31924
Linksys WRT400N
Buffalo WHR-G300N
I can compile them to be aproximatley 1/2 their current size. For this round of binaries I decided to not add a few addition flags (LDFLAGS) just to make sure they're not messing anything up, but this also resulted in bigger binaries.
Another way to make the dnscrypt-proxy smaller is excluding code sections from binary which not really used.
Code:
TARGET_LDFLAGS += -Wl,--gc-sections
TARGET_CFLAGS += -fdata-sections -ffunction-sections
...
after compilation
...
$ du -h ./dnscrypt-proxy
256K ./dnscrypt-proxy
Which means ~40% of original binary code is not used.
Thanks for the insight ryzhov_al. Will give that a shot.
Just have to add it to my DNSMasq settings and such on page 1.
