VoCore: No LuCI 2

Looks like goahead is not a good choice to replace LuCI.
It uses too much space(850KB), maybe memory cost is low, but flash cost is not acceptable.
Screen Shot 2014-11-09 at 9.48.35 pm (2)

Also it request librt.so and libpthread.so, that is about 100KB addition flash cost.
Screen Shot 2014-11-09 at 10.01.32 pm

I think maybe write a real light weight one is the only choice. We do not need that complex cgi function, we just need a way to transfer data between browser and the server.
Currently vocore.io/store, the trace page is based on a light weight C language web application(I am not good at php, so have to write one in C), it will not be very hard if we just have a simple cgi and do not use https.

5 thoughts on “VoCore: No LuCI 2

  1. >>It uses too much space(850KB)
    It is a proper space compared 8M FLASH. My experience: 90% simple implement will be replace later because different requirements are required later. Finally, the beginning solution will be a good solution.

    I think vonger.io could run goAhead without any problem. If it could run, it is proper to make goAhead as a standard solution for vonger.io until clear requirement defined.

  2. It might be a noobish question of mine but

    How about using the SD card to store the os or a partition on the SD and have the flash act like a boot loader.

    Or is it not possible to make it work like that?

  3. What about mini-httpd? According to http://wiki.openwrt.org/doc/howto/http.overview it looks like 21k for the binary w/o SSL and the libc and libgcc might already be included. Looks like another 70k-630k if you want to add SSL.

    I went looking to compare lighttpd with your numbers above and it seems like if you want real web server performance, the extra ~110k (if you can compile it w/o SSL) is probably worth it.

    Looking forward to my package arriving so I can play too!
    :)

    1. Oops, that would be 200k for lighttpd versus 21k for mini-httpd (each w/o SSL).
      Depending on the use-case, might be worth the additional storage.

Comments are closed.