OpenWrt: A Linux OS targeting embedded devices

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Industry Adoption & Ecosystem

  • Widely used as an embedded base: portable “Amazon choice” routers, early DJI range extenders, Starlink routers, many ISP/home APs and mesh systems.
  • Several WiFi SoC vendor SDKs (Qualcomm, Mediatek, Maxlinear) are reportedly OpenWrt-based; Broadcom often uses its own Linux.
  • Disagreement over Ubiquiti: some devices (outdoor radios, APs, cameras) said to be OpenWrt-derived, while EdgeRouters/UDM lines are described as Vyatta/Debian-based and clearly not OpenWrt.

Licensing, Blobs & Drivers

  • One notable GPL enforcement case helped open a vendor codebase; some think this discouraged others from GPL use, others say firms already knew the implications.
  • Debate on binary blobs: some accept firmware blobs but reject kernel/userland binaries; others argue even that compromise is too generous.
  • Broadcom is seen as poorly supported; Mediatek praised for upstream drivers and nearly fully open host-side stack.

Hardware, Features & Performance

  • OpenWrt One router receives positive feedback (“just works”, good price/perf vs Pi or vendor gear). OpenWrt Two (via GL.iNet) is coming, with arguments over its ~$250 “enthusiast” pricing.
  • Recent work: WiFi 7 support, yearly kernel bumps (toward 6.12+), better switch support (e.g. Zyxel GS1900), WIP package manager migration to apk, upgrade tools that preserve packages/configs, mobile-friendly UI ideas, notification system.
  • Reports of excellent performance on x86 (up to 10 Gbit) and clear wins vs vendor firmware on some EdgeRouters; others note weaker 802.11ac performance vs OEM firmware and SQM disabling hardware offload on older devices.

UI, Usability & Management

  • LuCI is seen by some as clean and pragmatic; others find it dated, inconsistent, and confusing compared to OPNSense or GL.iNet’s simplified frontends.
  • Tension between “powerful, low-level Linux-like UI” and “simple, family-friendly abstractions” (guest networks, parental controls, IoT isolation).
  • Multi-device / mesh management is a weak spot: OpenWISP targets larger fleets (20+ devices); OpenSOHO aims at small/home networks. Many home users prefer turnkey mesh kits for ease of VLAN/guest setup.

Alternatives, Architectures & Critiques

  • Some run Tomato, DD-WRT, Alpine, Debian, or OpenBSD instead, especially on “big” hardware, preferring standard filesystems, systemd, and familiar tooling.
  • Complaints include odd overlay/partition behavior on x86 images, brittle upgrade/docs in some cases, Busybox security/maintenance concerns, and the learning curve of OpenWrt’s bespoke environment.
  • Nonetheless, many highlight decade-long uptimes, stability, and flexibility as reasons to deliberately choose hardware for OpenWrt compatibility.