openwrt/upstream - upstream openwrt

	Commit message (Collapse)	Author	Age	Files	Lines
*	utils/spidev_test: drop Build/Prepare rule in favor of default one	Alexandru Ardelean	2016-10-15	1	-4/+0
\| \| \| \|	Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <ardeleanalex@gmail.com>
*	spidev_test: copy the source code into the package folder	John Crispin	2016-06-30	2	-10/+320
\| \| \| \|	Signed-off-by: John Crispin <john@phrozen.org>
*	package: spidev_test: update location for >Kernel 4.5	Dirk Neukirchen	2016-05-23	1	-0/+9
\| \| \| \| \| \| \| \|	- document indirect source code fixup affecting spidev_test v2: check against old Kernel versions Signed-off-by: Dirk Neukirchen <dirkneukirchen@web.de>
*	license info - revert r43155	John Crispin	2014-11-03	1	-3/+0
\| \| \| \| \| \| \| \|	turns out that r43155 adds duplicate info. Signed-off-by: John Crispin <blogic@openwrt.org> SVN-Revision: 43167
*	Add more license tags with SPDX identifiers	John Crispin	2014-11-03	1	-0/+3
\| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \| \|	Note, that licensing stuff is a nightmare: many packages does not clearly state their licenses, and often multiple source files are simply copied together - each with different licensing information in the file headers. I tried hard to ensure, that the license information extracted into the OpenWRT's makefiles fit the "spirit" of the packages, e.g. such small packages which come without a dedicated source archive "inherites" the OpenWRT's own license in my opinion. However, I can not garantee that I always picked the correct information and/or did not miss license information. Signed-off-by: Michael Heimpold <mhei@heimpold.de> SVN-Revision: 43155
*	packages: clean up the package folder	John Crispin	2013-06-21	1	-0/+43
	Signed-off-by: John Crispin <blogic@openwrt.org> SVN-Revision: 37007