Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

mikrotik rb-912uag-5hpnd firmware file not valid #619

Closed
kc2cbd opened this issue Jan 5, 2023 · 7 comments
Closed

mikrotik rb-912uag-5hpnd firmware file not valid #619

kc2cbd opened this issue Jan 5, 2023 · 7 comments
Assignees

Comments

@kc2cbd
Copy link

kc2cbd commented Jan 5, 2023

Trying to upgrade a node to 2096 and also tried 2024.
Node says
Firmware CANNOT be updated
firmware file is not valid

W4WTN-Basebox5-Fail

@aanon4 aanon4 self-assigned this Jan 5, 2023
@aanon4
Copy link
Contributor

aanon4 commented Jan 5, 2023

Could you log into the node and send me the output when you run the following:

for i in /tmp/sysinfo/* ; do echo $i ; cat $i; done

Thanks

@aanon4
Copy link
Contributor

aanon4 commented Jan 5, 2023

Also, please confirm the specific firmware filename you were loading.

@kc2cbd
Copy link
Author

kc2cbd commented Jan 5, 2023

Firmware that I was using was aredn-2096-fce9629-ath79-mikrotik-mikrotik_routerboard-912uag-5hpnd-squashfs-sysupgrade.bin
W4WTN-putty

@aanon4
Copy link
Contributor

aanon4 commented Jan 6, 2023

So it looks like a simple upgrade for these devices may not be possible. When running the upgrade process the new image is validated in several ways using code from the old image, but various internal checks are failing. It seems a new image structure is being used and it will never pass validation by the old.

This device is not supported by OpenWRT now - we added it ourselves - so it's unlikely this will be fixed anytime soon.

Sorry.

@kc2cbd
Copy link
Author

kc2cbd commented Jan 8, 2023

If we were able to get the newer firmware on this device, would it upgrade fine after that?

@aanon4
Copy link
Contributor

aanon4 commented Jan 8, 2023

Yes - it's just the transition which is the limitation.

@aanon4
Copy link
Contributor

aanon4 commented Feb 20, 2023

Closing as an upgrade path from 3.22.12.0 to the next release will not be possible. A re-install must be done and then upgrades can continue.

@aanon4 aanon4 closed this as completed Feb 20, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants