I bought a Slate Plus and a Beryl AX for use in my travels. In my ignorance I thought they would both be able to run the latest firmware. Both seemed to be current supported models but the Slate Plus firmware turns out to be behind the Beryl AX and even overtaken by the humble Opal. That means they are not as interchangeable as I expected unless I use old firmware on the Beryl. If I buy new GLiNet routers how can I choose models that will be most actively developed?
If I'm honest:
The better flag ship tend to get better updates.
But now with these new naming variations it means these get more attention or even less.
The problem is, they easily can, but if nobody asks they won't, when that is a issue since it should be automatically without approval, personally I think they really have to fix these management problems and space issues on their repos, everytime in their decisions this comes up which isn't for the better, thats why there is still no firmware history and or the sudden withdrawel of firmwares, with no explaination what is fixed or why it was withdrawn
Continious integration should just be continious.
1 Like
Hi
We are still actively working on the 4.8.x firmware for the Slate Plus. However, due to development resources and release scheduling, firmware updates cannot be rolled out to all models at the same time. As a result, some devices may receive updates later than others.
2 Likes
Thanks for taking the time to reply, Will. I am overjoyed that 4.8 for the Slate Plus is being actively worked on and in the meantime I will persist with Openwrt 24. My SOP will be to require Openwrt and a track record of GLiNet updates before I buy new hardware.
If you prefer devices with native OpenWrt support, you can refer to the OpenWrt device list and filter supported models here:
The newly released devices may not appear immediately, as official OpenWrt support takes time to be added by Qualcomm/MediaTek vendors and the OpenWrt community.
Will, the point is that Openwrt releases are regular and timely but GLiNet releases for the Slate Plus are not.
1 Like
Honest question: is there somethin that needs an upgrade at the Slate Plus?
In my case I am using the Slate plus on regular basis since release. It never failed. I don't miss any feature. It just works.
Every time I upgrade my Spitz AX for my RV, I pack the Slate Plus as backup, if anything will fail. I am happy with the little helper, it got as much love as possible from me, for being such a good travel buddy.
2 Likes
GL.iNet firmware follows a different release process from OpenWrt. In addition to upstream OpenWrt/QSDK/MTK SDK changes, we integrate our own features and UI, validate compatibility across specific hardware platforms, and perform extended testing. This means update timing can vary significantly between models, especially older or lower-volume devices like the Slate Plus.
If having regular, predictable release cycles is a priority, native OpenWrt is the more suitable choice. GL.iNet firmware is designed for users who prefer a stable, pre-integrated experience, even if that results in less frequent updates on certain models.
And as I seen before. If there is a reason, updates comes fast.
A reason could be a security issue (CVE or less) or a stability bug after analysis.
Just to have e nev version number is obvious not a reason.
Honest question but do you think that OpenWrt releases are for no reason or need other than having a bigger version number? It sounds that you are just excusing the complacency of accepting the status quo. How is one supposed to know what security flaws lie beneath these ancient versions running on our routers, apart perhaps from taking your word for it?
It is not a secret. Just read Testing to determine if you are a bot! …
In fact as I am running some routers on plain OpenWrt, without GL.iNet extensions, I am reading the changelogs on regular base… and most of the new stuff is for some routers, it does not necessarily apply to the Slate Plus.
The only recent fix I which on the Slate Plus is the iPhone CDC tethering one … but as my iPhone is a company phone I only use occasional, there is no need to push it.
Why should I care if the OpenWrt now compile with GCC15? What is the advantage in here for my Slate Plus? Or do we went to talk about the neb VDSL driver, that does not apply?
I am not saying there are no smaller improvements, which will boost the slate as well. But I say it will get love when it is needed. Meanwhile the focus is on other devices, the team is not doing nothing. And I respect the decision, as long as there is nothing I can't do what I should.
But that's only me. I am still happy in my small world. I am neither an expert in security not in OpenWrt. Just a traveler, who wants reliable network.
And here lies the problem…. Too many devices with very little focus on maturing the firmware for ones that are not particularly old. I am also a happy traveller with my Gl.iNet gear but I do not feel that this is a reason to be happy with a firmware base from years gone by (End-of-Life versions as per the link you referenced in your post) and when newer iterations have existed for a long time.
2 Likes
Personally I think they should still give updates.
Especially to the gl sdk, I know that these gl sdks are not synchronized versions walking parallel on all routers but their function set definitely is.
I think just for bug solving purely for the gl sdk is why I think there still should be some more frequently updates.
But as I learned they seem to have very strict and limited resources, which is a issue, and will continiue being a issue threatening stability in the firmwares, because packages are still being pre installed from completely different toolchains, and the issue is with too much big gap it will result in some of these packages and a section of core packages to segfault/corrupt, creating unreliable and unexpected behaviours also deeper rooted in OpenWrt.
Basically if they want to share packages accross multiple firmwares, they want to hold mtk sdk to that sdk, qsdk to qsdk and op24 for sanity, why? because well some toolchains are ancient from OpenWrt 18 maybe, and others 22, some can be more than 8 years old... this can include internal compilers and other things.
Aslong this issue exists, it will also be a reason older routers/less populair routers don't get updates that frequently, they run out of space due to limited resources.
1 Like
@will.qiu Whatever happened to the promises made in May 2024 to quickly update this device and many others, as posted in this blog? 18 months and no action?
The statement: “In response to recent studies revealing that individuals can be tracked through Wi-Fi routers, GL.iNet is taking proactive measures to safeguard the privacy and security of our users. We assure our customers that we take your privacy extremely seriously, and our support team is actively addressing this issue.” rings hollow.
Despite repeated assurances, including from @alzhao, this problem continues to affect GL iNet
1 Like
We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience caused.
To mitigate the issue, we have prioritized releasing at least a 4.7.x beta firmware for impacted devices. A small number of models are excluded due to hardware limitations that prevent upgrading to version 4.6 or later, as stated in the announcement.
If you are still affected, please apply the temporary workaround described in the article, which should help reduce the impact.
We have requested the product team to review this matter again.
Finally, we would like to clarify that the underlying cause is related to Apple’s and Google’s default behavior of collecting nearby Wi-Fi network information, associating it with location data, and uploading it to their databases.
18 months and only beta: Sad 
We know that Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Oracle, Bytedance, X and others are all
trying to get our personal data, including location. That is why we buy products from you, to protect our systems and data.
1 Like
Thank you for your continued trust and support of GL.iNet products.
We are working to accelerate official firmware releases for several models, though some additional time is still required to ensure quality and stability.
The next planned official release is for the SFT1200; however, a recently identified issue related to Wi-Fi power settings may result in a delay.
1 Like
I bought GLiNets because of the firmware and support. Otherwise it would have been cheaper and easier to buy some more TPLinks. If GLiNet neglect a product it is no better than the competition.
Why do I want the Slate Plus to have current firmware? Because my family use travel routers for travel and increasingly there are ships and hotels where the old firmware will not work. Everyone wants the Beryl AX with the latest firmware so the Slate Plus with its old firmware gathers dust. GLiNet support has been helpful in some of these cases but you do not see them recommending an orphaned router on 4.5.
2 Likes
For the same reason, I regret buying the GL-BE3600 Slate 7. I bought into the hype around “innovation” and trusted supposedly unbiased networking YouTubers who, in retrospect, look more like marketers than reviewers.
Could you please share more details about the issues you’re encountering with your Slate 7 so we can better assist?
If you’re primarily waiting for a firmware update, the next Slate 7 release is currently undergoing internal testing. Provided the testing process completes successfully, it should be available in the near future.
1 Like