Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
Mackenzie Morgan ha scritto: On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 10:50 +, Alex Cockell wrote: As well as a field-test team, may I suggest that updates are subject to a release-candidate-with-positive-signoff-and-test-battery process? All updates go to the -proposed repo. If any regressions are reported against these -proposed updates, they are not released to the main archive. This is certainly not true during alpha and beta testing, which is a shame. Please contradict me and tell me that I am wrong :) because it seems to me that I reported regressions to -proposed many times, and the response time has been so long that the package made it into main and then to stable. That was where my thread started. I would be so happy if it is was sufficient to say hey! there's a regression to stop a wrong update during testing until the bug report has been triaged, that I would install jaunty next week and start happy testing again (yes I plan to skip intrepid in any case :) ). Is there any specific tag that one can use to stop the -proposed update go to main during alpha and beta testing? BTW I finally bought the alternate network card, it works out of the box in hardy, but NOT in hardy.1 where it is broken in various poorly understandable ways. So this brought out some more tears out of my eyes. Then I dried those. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
Hi folks, It's good to see this being discussed; I am your putative new user to Ubuntu and Linux in general - although I work 2nd line tech support (corporate IT) - Lotus Notes and Wintel, so I know the problem resolution/reporting flow from that end. I also bought my machine preinstalled with 8.04, and accepted updates to 8.04.1. However, after that time, kernel 2.6.24-21 came out and broke a lot of users' machines, causing a lot of bad feeling on the forums, and on Brainstorm. Being a preinstall user, I do not know what tweaks Linux Emporium made before they shipped my machine. As well as a field-test team, may I suggest that updates are subject to a release-candidate-with-positive-signoff-and-test-battery process? There are a lot more trusting users out here (Windows refugees) who want a system that just works.. especially when it comes to recommended and critical updates. And if something does make it to production... shouldn't it be backed out asap f there is a massive hue and cry over machines failing on reboot etc? Just the thoughts of a newish user. Alex Cockell -- Alex Cockell Reading, Berks, UK [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 10:50 +, Alex Cockell wrote: As well as a field-test team, may I suggest that updates are subject to a release-candidate-with-positive-signoff-and-test-battery process? All updates go to the -proposed repo. If any regressions are reported against these -proposed updates, they are not released to the main archive. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Andrew Sayers ha scritto: What I'd like to raise - how does one write such a database, when there is no clear-cut answer on whether this card, with this driver, works? Since we're talking about regressions here, one solution would be to make downgrading as easy as upgrading, and to request an optional hardware profile immediately before a user up/downgrades. That you can't do for your life: in feisty, my hardware works (well, don't know about the webcam, actually). But at office, I have hardy, and I use lyx from there. The version of lyx in feisty will not read the files I produce at office. Indeed, there are plenty of bugfixes which are not regressions, and I couldn't stick with feisty forever. What I can do, is to install feisty and use it when I really need it. But for a network card it isn't that simple as you can imagine. The point raised by Sarah, how do you organise such a database and how can you be boolean in saying that something does not work, is an extremely good question. I need to think about it and see if I can suggest a solution or not. A quantitative yet simple answer is that by looking at launchpad I can immediately tell that iwl3945 drivers suck :) But this does not solve the problem of creating a good hardware support database, which seems to be quantitative rather than boolean in many cases. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
Olá Mackenzie e a todos. On Thursday 13 November 2008 19:55:18 Mackenzie Morgan wrote: And yes, you're of course right about the issues with not having access to the hardware to fix it. I've overheard someone mutter well if you'd send me some hardware, sure I could make it work... I recall that the day I met Daniel Chen, he was showing up to an installfest so he could fix any sound bugs with actual, physical access to the hardware. Its not always just hardware... Just a few weeks ago after several hours of debug over IRC, I ended up creating a VPN account on our servers, for asac so he could more rapidly debug nm-pptp. The next morning i got an email, telling me it was fixed. -- BUGabundo :o) (``-_-´´) http://LinuxNoDEI.BUGabundo.net Linux user #443786GPG key 1024D/A1784EBB My new micro-blog @ http://BUGabundo.net ps. My emails tend to sound authority and aggressive. I'm sorry in advance. I'll try to be more assertive as time goes by... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
2008/11/15 (``-_-´´) -- Fernando [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Olá Stephan e a todos. On Thursday 13 November 2008 12:20:17 Stephan Hermann wrote: This task is not easy. There needs to be input from the users with the non-working hardware. Most likely, that this information can be gathered with some magic commands on CLI, which is also provided by a nice developer. I've seen this mention a few times, and if anyone looks at brainstorm, I bet its already there: Would it be of any interest having a tool (only on devel branches or the all time) that would gather the entire HW listing with FULL detail and upload it to some database? Some improved version of hwtest-gtk, mixed with hwinfo and sysinfo (sysinfo as a great user UI and could also teach/report to the user about supported HW). Maybe hook up hwtest-gtk to system 1st runs and kernel upgrades, and notify the user to run the tests, and send the report. To addition to this - what we need is user's field test team, something like virtual voluntary hardware test lab. Say, user registers available computers with their hardware profiles (No need to have Ubuntu on it, Live CD for testing and getting hardware details should be fine). It comes into some db on Launchpad/Cannonical, and say, there is Jaunty with new kernel, which has significant changes on such and such hardware. Checking db - for example, we have 2 users with such hardware. Create task list for testing (because it is clearly not enough to test WiFi with just WPA or WEP), users do tests, and report back. In fact, this *already* happens in bug reports, but let's make it more organized. Also this db could contain list of *known* hardware issues with bug reports and people who you can contact with to test issue (if they are available and agree to help, of course). It would also give huge oversight to Cannonical and community in which fronts there are issues. Say, wifi still have lot of issues, or sound cards what causes most of trouble. It would also give Cannonical availability to print nice Hardware issues page so users would know what to expect. When I upgrade to a new release, I always think (or is it knowing): Ok, for the next 4 hours I'll sit in front of this computer, and I expect something to break...because it's software made by people. If nothing breaks, then I'm really surprised and happy. But when something breaks, I already expected that. And when I find the cause for the breakage, I'll try to fix it, AND/OR file a bug report about that issue. Therefore, I don't upgrade my production machine without any real testing. But this won't help for everybody, I know. That's why I start testing in early development versions: so that stuff can be detected and users on a stable release dont find all those many bugs. I've already upgraded my laptop to Jaunty. With this I can keep up the development, and help fix stuff before release There are some issues with that too - for example, my Intel wifi card was broken by updates only two weeks before final release. I would even say that those last minute updates are most dangerous, because they get introduced so close to finish line that it is really hard task to get update for it in release. Ubuntu really needs wider release testing window, when any functional and hardware updates are strictly forbidden unless it is really needed. Peter. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Scott Kitterman ha scritto: On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:14:31 -0500 Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP. I have 4965 and it worked fine for me with KNetworkManager and WEP in Hardy. I have't had a need for WEP since I upgraded to Intrepid. As an aside, if people are truly concerned about privacy/security, they should be on WPA. WEP is trivial to break. Scott K Scott, if you move often you get what they give you, in my case it is a stupid unprotected network... but the laptop has to work. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Moins, On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 02:27 +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: On 11/11/2008 Scott Kitterman wrote: I would encourage you (and others, you certainly aren't the only one) to hold your temper and if you can't say something helpful, just take your hands off the keyboard. Being angry, contemptuous, and disrespectful won't get your bugs fixed faster. What it will get you is yet another list with no developers on it and you upset you can't get in touch with them. You are perfectly right, this went out of my control, and I appreciated a lot the responses I got on various other issues in the past. I stop now on the topic. The only seriously valid point for you developers in my e-mails - I think - and the one I wanted to expose in the first e-mail I wrote - is that we users really need a seriously maintained hardware database, and a serious attention to all hardware related regressions, because you can't change your hardware like you can change your software. This is what from times to times leads me to a complete demotivation on keeping supporting ubuntu - and I bet you as a developer care, not of me in particular, but of the numbers. Ubuntu is so popular because developers care about usability and understand what it is, but also because users are openly advertising and supporting it as if it was The Salvation from the Evil Microsoft. Don't loose this important advantage. Advocating Ubuntu doesn't mean you need to support it. Advocating in a company and propose a switch from MS Windows XP/Vista to Canonical+Ubuntu means, that you should have a point doing so. Software in general is not bug free, so mostly you need commercial support for your OS or other Software you are using. Canonical does provide Support for Ubuntu for You, when you want to pay it. If not, fix it yourself, or help us fixing it e.g. join the irc and point people to it. If people can't help you directly, because of not having the broken hardware, you can try to provide this hardware to the people (that's an example, and hey, this you can't do when you use MS Windows). If you start an officially endorsed hardware database with a forum for comments and user-to-user support in launchpad etc, and keep an eye open on regressions in hardware support, that should promptly be acknowledged and put aside the relevant entries in the hardware database itself, and that ideally should never be propagated to stable releases, but _usually_ do, I am sure your user community will make a great job in populating it. If you don't do that because of lack of manpower... I understand and accept the reality. You know, there is more and more hardware on the market, old and new. And I never saw any hardware working out of the box which is quite new, not even on Windows. Most drivers for new hardware on Windows are broken...and believe me, asking the hardware vendor or creator, doesn't help to fix those drivers in time, not if you don't want to pay them. BTW, I do advocate Ubuntu in every company I'm working. And mostly I'm the cursed guy who is doing the support, too. You know what? If I can't fix it in time, I'll file a bug and I'm waiting. In the meantime, there are workarounds (e.g. using an external wifi card, using another graphics card driver etc.pp.) and most people are happy when they can use their computers, it doesn't matter how. Actually most people don't care about their special hardware they have in their laptops or desktop...they just want to work. TBH, if I really want to deploy Ubuntu as Desktop replacement, I'll call Canonical or one of their partners and order some special support contracts with developer support...it costs money, yes, but this should be in your budget for such a project. But in general, you shouldn't advocate things you can't handle. If you are not able to help people out of a bad situation, don't switch them..most likely people will not only hate the new OS, but they will hate you. If you really want to know which hardware is supported, you should read the vanilla kernel mailing list, because this is the most valuable source of finding out which hardware does work out of the box. If a distributor adds more goodies to the kernel, then be happy, but that doesn't mean, that it really works...even when the distributor puts the hardware on the list of supported hardware. Regards, \sh -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
If a distributor adds more goodies to the kernel, then be happy, but that doesn't mean, that it really works...even when the distributor puts the hardware on the list of supported hardware. I hope this is not really the idea of the ubuntu developers on this topic, because if so, then I can really, really forget all my bugs, and go home happy. If the idea is that a trial-and-error process should be the normal way of using ubuntu (it is the way I use it every time I install it to other people), then just tell me. I think it's unbelievable how far things went in this direction. If this is considered normal and unharmful, there's clearly something that I didn't understand here. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Hi, On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 09:00 +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: If a distributor adds more goodies to the kernel, then be happy, but that doesn't mean, that it really works...even when the distributor puts the hardware on the list of supported hardware. I hope this is not really the idea of the ubuntu developers on this topic, because if so, then I can really, really forget all my bugs, and go home happy. If the idea is that a trial-and-error process should be the normal way of using ubuntu (it is the way I use it every time I install it to other people), then just tell me. I think it's unbelievable how far things went in this direction. If this is considered normal and unharmful, there's clearly something that I didn't understand here. This is reality :) Really. Example: I bought an USB DTV Stick for terrestrial signals. The product I bought is supported regarding all sources I read (linuxdvb, kernel...) So, I bought my hardware, regarding all infos I had access to. What was the result? In Hardy, this stick didn't work, just because the hardware vendor changed one single chip revision. And what now? Regarding the Ubuntu Kernel + all other infos, I bought a product, which just had to work out of the box. But reality told me different. Good, that upstream (those guys from linuxdvb) heard about this issue, and some guy also had this stick at home and they produced a new driver release, but this wasn't in time for Hardy. So, even if you buy hardware which should be supported by any linux distro out there, because someone put it on a list, you can't be sure, that it's actually working. Noone can and will add all different revisions of hardware chip infos on a list. What you mostly get is: ATI Graphics Card - supported NVidia Graphics Card - Supported USB DTV Stick Made FooBar - Supported And then you will realize, that your very old card is not really supported anymore, even if it's an ATI or Nvidia...You will even realize that the new NVidia GeForce 10 with 8TB of RAM won't be supported, because the drivers were not finished in time... And this is nothing which only happens on Ubuntu...this happens all the time with any other distro, too. Most likely, if you use server hardware, which doesn't change so many times over three years than desktop hardware, you will be more happy. That's why most distros are not supporting a desktop version of their enterprise release. Because Desktops are really a pain for users and devs regarding hardware support. Regards, \sh -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Sarah - this should make sense on its own, but it builds on an idea I suggested in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2008-November/006250.html which you might provide a little background to this post. 3) There are plenty of other hardware regressions by which I am affected and I feel like these should be a bit more acknowledged by developers. Because I can't be the only one. What I'd like to raise - how does one write such a database, when there is no clear-cut answer on whether this card, with this driver, works? Since we're talking about regressions here, one solution would be to make downgrading as easy as upgrading, and to request an optional hardware profile immediately before a user up/downgrades. Spotting problematic hardware then becomes a relatively simple statistical problem: when a user gives their hardware profile ready for an upgrade, they can be informed you have device X, users with device X were n% more likely than average to downgrade. Are you sure you want to continue?. - Andrew -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Canonical does provide Support for Ubuntu for You, when you want to pay it. If not, fix it yourself, or help us fixing it e.g. join the irc and point people to it. If people can't help you directly, because of not having the broken hardware, you can try to provide this hardware to the people (that's an example, and hey, this you can't do when you use MS Windows). Nailed it. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Am 13.11.2008 um 10:32 schrieb Stephan Hermann: But reality told me different. Stephan, your points about the unfortunate truth are valid. Nevertheless, software quality is one of the keys to success. I've just filed the second bug where one of the Gnome applets segfaults in a standard situation. Many developers obviously code really sloppy, a la it worked once in my situation, so it works always in all situations. Some developers even consider a segfault as a normal way to end the execution of an application. This is a more general observation of mine, this is ridiculous. While we can't fix developers, we can put more automatic helpers into place: - Keep Apport enabled even on stable releases. Hiding bugs doesn't help. While this doesn't fix bugs by it's self, it greatly helps to fix them after the fact (and timely educate developers about their practices). Additionally, this opens the door to get some automatic measure about the quality of drivers or other software. Count open bugs and you know what you roughly can expect. If you count too many of them, drop the hardware in the compatibility list. To keep more users happy: - Allow downgrades. This should help narrowing potential causes of the trouble. Ideally, there would be a big regression testing facility, like Wine has one. Each time a Wine developer fixes a bug, he's pushed to create a test for his case. These test cases are run automatically for each commited patch and pretty well avoid introducing a bug a second time. to add my $o.o2, MarKus - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter http://www.jump-ing.de/ -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Hardware regressions was (Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions))
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:00:36 + Vincenzo Ciancia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If a distributor adds more goodies to the kernel, then be happy, but that doesn't mean, that it really works...even when the distributor puts the hardware on the list of supported hardware. I hope this is not really the idea of the ubuntu developers on this topic, because if so, then I can really, really forget all my bugs, and go home happy. If the idea is that a trial-and-error process should be the normal way of using ubuntu (it is the way I use it every time I install it to other people), then just tell me. I think it's unbelievable how far things went in this direction. If this is considered normal and unharmful, there's clearly something that I didn't understand here. Part of what goes on is that the details of a product change over time, where a specific part was made, or any number of things. So when one person says (to pick one example, this is true for all vendors) IW 3945 is broken and another says it's not, they probably don't have identical cards. We also have more than one kernel. Maybe it works with i386, but is broken with amd64. Use cases differ too. I have a laptop with IW 4965 and it works great for me. A lot of people reported problems on Intrepid with this card. As it happens, I am mostly (maybe always) on 802.11G networks. People with the problems have 802.11N (mostly anyway - see the other factors). Part of the trouble with a hardware database is what to put in it to make it reliable, yet searchable. So this is not an easy problem. Back in Edgy I remember spending a lot of time digging through wiki pages trying to figure out wifi. Clearly we need to do better with this, but I'm not sure exactly how. I think this may be a topic to take up with the QA team. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
Stephan Hermann wrote: On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 11:56 +0100, Markus Hitter wrote: - Allow downgrades. This should help narrowing potential causes of the trouble. This is something I don't understand. When I upgrade to a new release, I always think (or is it knowing): Ok, for the next 4 hours I'll sit in front of this computer, and I expect something to break...because it's software made by people. If nothing breaks, then I'm really surprised and happy. But when something breaks, I already expected that. And when I find the cause for the breakage, I'll try to fix it, AND/OR file a bug report about that issue. That's commendable practice, but the problem in Vincenzo's case was a hardware regression that would require upstream developer time in order to write a fix. An easy downgrade path would give users in that situation the opportunity to use a system that works while they're waiting. It also gives a communication channel to users that aren't technical enough to describe hardware problems - if we log hardware profiles when users up/downgrade, we can see which profiles correlate most strongly with downgrades, and use that to help guess which bug reports are one guy with a dodgy graphics card, and which are something more general. - Andrew -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
2008/11/13 Andrew Sayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] Stephan Hermann wrote: On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 11:56 +0100, Markus Hitter wrote: - Allow downgrades. This should help narrowing potential causes of the trouble. This is something I don't understand. When I upgrade to a new release, I always think (or is it knowing): Ok, for the next 4 hours I'll sit in front of this computer, and I expect something to break...because it's software made by people. If nothing breaks, then I'm really surprised and happy. But when something breaks, I already expected that. And when I find the cause for the breakage, I'll try to fix it, AND/OR file a bug report about that issue. That's commendable practice, but the problem in Vincenzo's case was a hardware regression that would require upstream developer time in order to write a fix. An easy downgrade path would give users in that situation the opportunity to use a system that works while they're waiting. It also gives a communication channel to users that aren't technical enough to describe hardware problems - if we log hardware profiles when users up/downgrade, we can see which profiles correlate most strongly with downgrades, and use that to help guess which bug reports are one guy with a dodgy graphics card, and which are something more general. - Andrew -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss Surely trying to make a safe downgrade path risks introducing even more regressions on top of the original ones, and could be a significant amount of effort - effort that is better spent on fixing the original regressions. Creating a downgrade path seems like a lot of work for very little gain IMO. Regards Chris -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thursday 13 November 2008 05:13, Andrew Sayers wrote: Sarah - this should make sense on its own, but it builds on an idea I suggested in https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2008-November/006250 .html which you might provide a little background to this post. 3) There are plenty of other hardware regressions by which I am affected and I feel like these should be a bit more acknowledged by developers. Because I can't be the only one. What I'd like to raise - how does one write such a database, when there is no clear-cut answer on whether this card, with this driver, works? Since we're talking about regressions here, one solution would be to make downgrading as easy as upgrading, and to request an optional hardware profile immediately before a user up/downgrades. Spotting problematic hardware then becomes a relatively simple statistical problem: when a user gives their hardware profile ready for an upgrade, they can be informed you have device X, users with device X were n% more likely than average to downgrade. Are you sure you want to continue?. Downgrading an entire system is never going to be reliable. It might be possible to take a snapshot of the system onto a suitable storage medium that one could restore to if needed. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
RE: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote: Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work for him, under various modes. Various users on the forums have also mentioned that their systems don't work with these cards. However, other users on the forums, mailing lists, and a whole lot of the developers, including myself, have this card, and see that it works for them. I personally haven't seen this break since I upgraded to gutsy back at the UDS in Sevilla, 2007 (ie, pre-alpha 1), and I use WPA, which seems to be one of the areas of complaint, otherwise without problems. In my experience, it does work fine with WPA. It's WEP that's the issue. It only works with WEP (properly) using iwconfig. If you use NetworkManager, the key will *never* be accepted. And if you use network-admin (gone in Intrepid), the key will be accepted, but it won't get an IP address. And yes, you're of course right about the issues with not having access to the hardware to fix it. I've overheard someone mutter well if you'd send me some hardware, sure I could make it work... I recall that the day I met Daniel Chen, he was showing up to an installfest so he could fix any sound bugs with actual, physical access to the hardware. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote: Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work for him, under various modes. Various users on the forums have also mentioned that their systems don't work with these cards. However, other users on the forums, mailing lists, and a whole lot of the developers, including myself, have this card, and see that it works for them. I personally haven't seen this break since I upgraded to gutsy back at the UDS in Sevilla, 2007 (ie, pre-alpha 1), and I use WPA, which seems to be one of the areas of complaint, otherwise without problems. In my experience, it does work fine with WPA. It's WEP that's the issue. It only works with WEP (properly) using iwconfig. If you use NetworkManager, the key will *never* be accepted. And if you use network-admin (gone in Intrepid), the key will be accepted, but it won't get an IP address. And yet, my intel 3945 works fine with me with WEP NetworkManager both in Hardy and Intrepid. Don't forget there are multiple sub-models of a given model. Please report your detailled hardware information (lspci -vvnn) on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/253697 (Intel 3945 Wireless in Hardy cannot negotiate WEP or WPA Keys) or/and https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/223174 (Intel WLAN, 3945 (a/b/g) - low performance). -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 21:58 +0100, Nicolas Deschildre wrote: On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote: Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work for him, under various modes. Various users on the forums have also mentioned that their systems don't work with these cards. However, other users on the forums, mailing lists, and a whole lot of the developers, including myself, have this card, and see that it works for them. I personally haven't seen this break since I upgraded to gutsy back at the UDS in Sevilla, 2007 (ie, pre-alpha 1), and I use WPA, which seems to be one of the areas of complaint, otherwise without problems. In my experience, it does work fine with WPA. It's WEP that's the issue. It only works with WEP (properly) using iwconfig. If you use NetworkManager, the key will *never* be accepted. And if you use network-admin (gone in Intrepid), the key will be accepted, but it won't get an IP address. And yet, my intel 3945 works fine with me with WEP NetworkManager both in Hardy and Intrepid. Don't forget there are multiple sub-models of a given model. Please report your detailled hardware information (lspci -vvnn) on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/253697 (Intel 3945 Wireless in Hardy cannot negotiate WEP or WPA Keys) or/and https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/223174 (Intel WLAN, 3945 (a/b/g) - low performance). I think I'm already on the first bug, but I'll check again. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 21:58 +0100, Nicolas Deschildre wrote: On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:36 +1100, Sarah Hobbs wrote: Take the intel 3945 card, for example. Vincenzo says it doesn't work for him, under various modes. Various users on the forums have also mentioned that their systems don't work with these cards. However, other users on the forums, mailing lists, and a whole lot of the developers, including myself, have this card, and see that it works for them. I personally haven't seen this break since I upgraded to gutsy back at the UDS in Sevilla, 2007 (ie, pre-alpha 1), and I use WPA, which seems to be one of the areas of complaint, otherwise without problems. In my experience, it does work fine with WPA. It's WEP that's the issue. It only works with WEP (properly) using iwconfig. If you use NetworkManager, the key will *never* be accepted. And if you use network-admin (gone in Intrepid), the key will be accepted, but it won't get an IP address. And yet, my intel 3945 works fine with me with WEP NetworkManager both in Hardy and Intrepid. Don't forget there are multiple sub-models of a given model. Please report your detailled hardware information (lspci -vvnn) on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/253697 (Intel 3945 Wireless in Hardy cannot negotiate WEP or WPA Keys) or/and https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/223174 (Intel WLAN, 3945 (a/b/g) - low performance). Ah, looking again, I'm subscribed to the first, but it's not what I'm describing. That one is that both WEP and WPA fail. In my case, it just fails with NetworkManager with WEP. WPA is fine. There's a bug sitting around for that too, though. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.22/+bug/139080 It's filed in Feisty and Gutsy, but it still exists with Hardy and iwl3945. With that laptop, WEP went like this: Dapper + ipw3945 + network-admin = works Feisty, Gutsy + ipw3945 + NM = fail...WEP key not accepted Hardy + iwl3945 + NM = fail...WEP key not accepted Hardy + iwl3945 + network-admin = fail...WEP key accepted, no ip address Hardy + iwl3945 + iwconfig + dhclient = works I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:14:31 -0500 Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP. I have 4965 and it worked fine for me with KNetworkManager and WEP in Hardy. I have't had a need for WEP since I upgraded to Intrepid. As an aside, if people are truly concerned about privacy/security, they should be on WPA. WEP is trivial to break. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 21:12 -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:14:31 -0500 Mackenzie Morgan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP. I have 4965 and it worked fine for me with KNetworkManager and WEP in Hardy. I have't had a need for WEP since I upgraded to Intrepid. As an aside, if people are truly concerned about privacy/security, they should be on WPA. WEP is trivial to break. I know that, but until about two months ago, the network in the computer science department at school (yeah, go figure) was WEP, so it was a sort of not-by-choice thing for me. And visiting other people's houses, WEP is often something you need to deal with. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On 11/11/2008 Scott Kitterman wrote: I would encourage you (and others, you certainly aren't the only one) to hold your temper and if you can't say something helpful, just take your hands off the keyboard. Being angry, contemptuous, and disrespectful won't get your bugs fixed faster. What it will get you is yet another list with no developers on it and you upset you can't get in touch with them. You are perfectly right, this went out of my control, and I appreciated a lot the responses I got on various other issues in the past. I stop now on the topic. The only seriously valid point for you developers in my e-mails - I think - and the one I wanted to expose in the first e-mail I wrote - is that we users really need a seriously maintained hardware database, and a serious attention to all hardware related regressions, because you can't change your hardware like you can change your software. This is what from times to times leads me to a complete demotivation on keeping supporting ubuntu - and I bet you as a developer care, not of me in particular, but of the numbers. Ubuntu is so popular because developers care about usability and understand what it is, but also because users are openly advertising and supporting it as if it was The Salvation from the Evil Microsoft. Don't loose this important advantage. If you start an officially endorsed hardware database with a forum for comments and user-to-user support in launchpad etc, and keep an eye open on regressions in hardware support, that should promptly be acknowledged and put aside the relevant entries in the hardware database itself, and that ideally should never be propagated to stable releases, but _usually_ do, I am sure your user community will make a great job in populating it. If you don't do that because of lack of manpower... I understand and accept the reality. Bye Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On 11/11/2008 Andrew Sayers wrote: I'd like to hear Vincenzo's take on this, but it sounds to me like the bugs here are: If you ask for it, I reply but try to be concise. It is much simpler than that: 1) One bug is there since more than one year (VGA out) and it is affecting many people that I know, that would have become ubuntu users but will not, and this makes me sad. It's not my bug and I wanted ubuntu developers to know that there are users who have opted not to switch to ubuntu for that reason. And it does not happen every day, that one decides to try and switch to another operating system, so we should care of not missing the train when it passes by. 2) Another bug affected me at random (WIFI), and there was nothing I could do about that, and it happened to me other times with other intel cards. I've not been clear perhaps, but the problem is that I was used to have my network card functioning, and one day it just left me without connection - after I moved abroad for one month, not after I upgraded. This is because intel's drivers mostly suck, there is no simpler explanation. They have tons of bugs and corner cases (I can support this by pointing at the number and gravity of LP bugs for them). I want to be able to rely and let others rely on ubuntu so we need to know what works and what not. 3) There are plenty of other hardware regressions by which I am affected and I feel like these should be a bit more acknowledged by developers. Because I can't be the only one. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
I feel your pain, a colleague of mine who was an administrator in my erst-while company. We had 100 desktops and we had close to 100 odd developer desktops switched to ubuntu. We had also made an apt-mirror to get updates but most of the time the updates were not used. Reason :- The admin had to spend too much time to see as and when things broke so he was static. Applications used :- 4-5 applications were used mostly a. Eclipse b. Openoffice.org c. Web-browsers (mostly Firefox) d. PHP e. Skype Hardware used :- Mostly Intel-based machine (C2D or whatever cheap we could find) , 1 GiB RAM on some machines, smattering of AMD based mobos, IDE HDD's and run of the mill monitors) Even on the few machines we did some updates, many a times it would break something or the other. The good point is that most of the times the worksaround was there on the forums but that takes time. Eventually we came to having a very static environment. Also the admin was never interested to file bugs in ubuntu simply because too much work (and language issues) I dunno if anything given in the post is helpful to the developers or not, or would be just 'noise' but felt like sharing hence did it. -- Regards, Shirish Agarwal This email is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com 065C 6D79 A68C E7EA 52B3 8D70 950D 53FB 729A 8B17 -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On 11/11/2008 Felipe Figueiredo wrote: The kind of rant that started this thread is not only uncalled for, but in fact counterproductive. Not to mention these particular ones are unfair, incorrect and (as noted by several others) exaggerated. He was not asking if he was the one of many, he basically assumed it affected everyone. Also, he wrongly assumed the distribution is responsible for all the QA released, likely ignoring that are distribution bugs and upstream bugs. There, I did it, I bit the bait. Now can we please move on? No we can't. We could if you had not pointed your finger directly to me, now you have called me in cause and I have to reply, sorry if this will augment noise (like your comment above, indeed). I pointed my finger in the past, too, and learned that it is almost always a bad idea. I would like to point out to you that I have made many people switch to ubuntu in a professional environment (an academic department, by the way), and other had to come, that I report every bug I find, and encourage others to do so, trying to be as precise as my 22 years of experience with computers can help me to be, and occasionally I wasted working days (yes I am paid to do a real job like all the others here) to learn to package fixes to stuff that maybe you even use or used (left as an exercise what stuff), just because somebody should do the dirty job sometimes. I have spent much time, and I have sometimes had to quarrel with other persons in my academic department, in various attempts to introduce and defend the principles of free software and open formats in our official regulations. But I can't continue publicizing ubuntu if I can't rely on it - because people will come back to me and I will pass for a liar and completely ruin my public image. So if, as you say, you CARE for ubuntu, you should be sorry that experienced people that actually does some door to door assistance for ubuntu, and helps the community (and I know we are many, I am not claiming any particular personal merit) gets so p**sed off with the current situation that they might want to stop doing this unpaid job. If you really care for ubuntu, you probably will appreciate that its huge success is also due to this network of users that really believe in an independent distribution that is striving to change the world. Of which you probably are a part. In the current situation - keep in mind I can be considered a very experienced user (for me, being asked to compile a driver on X is a matter of wasting a quarter of hour, for example) - I had the unpleasant experience to realise that I can rely on ubuntu _much less_ than on windows on various machines that I had _carefully_ chosen because their hardware is ADVERTIZED as SUPPORTING UBUNTU. Sometimes, all my experties is not sufficient: it just can not do the job it is supposed to do. And this happens also on the machines of other people in my department who I was helping to SWITCH TO ubuntu (from windows, from fedora, and even from OSX). This is very frustrating and surely not what ubuntu is aiming to. This is why, in my first e-mail, I asked for _good documentation_ on what hardware REALLY works. Which implies that, as soon as you have a regression, you have to check if it is true (that is, to urgently triage the bug) and eventually ADVERTIZE the regression on the SAME PAGE where you ADVERTIZE THE HARDWARE. This is always done, the point is that you have to do in weeks, not years. I am not in the position to impose anything, though, if ubuntu has other priorities I can't change the reality. The rest of the thread was an unuseful hurricane of repeated rants, likely due to my frustration in being constrained to use windows, that has been dealt with with __great kindness__ by other people, and frankly a posteriori the fact that nobody flamed me (I don't consider yours a flame yet) is surprising, given the tone of my subsequent e-mails. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Tuesday 11 November 2008 10:47, Luke L wrote: On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Martin Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This list was created to give users a way to discuss Ubuntu development with developers. Comments like I was just joking about you having to know anything make the decision to unsubscribe easy. I'm seriously considering it myself. It should remain, developers should remain. Developers are never going to get away from users who want to bitch, greater layers between the developers and users just breeds users who resent and don't understand developers and developers who don't understand (none programmer)user needs. Very Bad. So on one side I think that list moderators or peers should be very prompt in telling the wrong sorts of emails where to go, perhaps with a standard template which explains the rules and a little checkbox by the offence. On the other hand, list members should try not to bait the trolls. I've caught myself being suckered in too, so I know it's not easy. But why reward the wrong sort of emails with any response other than a boiler plait 'Your being rude' email? On a practical note, it isn't as if this ML is getting flooded with hundreds of messages of traffic a day. For those who could benefit from the technical discussions and user input, I don't see why someone would disconnect themselves from that for the reason of saving themselves 15 minutes a day. As long as there are signals, the noise should be dealt with and ultimately set aside. Whether you see the reason for it or not, I guarantee you that fewer and fewer developers are subscribed to this list. The general reason is not 'too many messages' it's to much rudeness. Users on this list have a choice. Concerns can be raised in a way that is constructive, helpful, and brings us together or they can be raised in a divisive way. Offlist someone mentioned the example of kdvi brought up on this list a few months ago. Based on that user's request, I looked into the validity of their concern and found it had merit. As a result, I invested probably a dozen hours of my free time to repackage kdvi in a way that would work on Intrepid. Developers who are here do try to listen. It's up to you to chose how you decided to engage them in discussion. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 09:47 -0600, Luke L wrote: On a practical note, it isn't as if this ML is getting flooded with hundreds of messages of traffic a day. For those who could benefit from the technical discussions and user input, I don't see why someone would disconnect themselves from that for the reason of saving themselves 15 minutes a day. As long as there are signals, the noise should be dealt with and ultimately set aside. OTOH, someone has to do this filtering. Will you moderate this list? I, as a user, don't want ubuntu developers wasting time dealing with uneducated users' requests that should otherwise be discussed in forums and brainstorm, dealing with users that consistently use bug reports as forums, and devel irc channels as support channels, etc. And it looks like no matter how polite you are with one, there will always be a hundred more tomorrow. Maybe I'm being a little BOFH-inspired, here, but I think this kind uneducated user sucks the life out of a project. There should be mechanisms to isolate these users to only communicate with other users, or to devels who want/need to deal with them, but it looks like the only way is to opt out. The fact that Ubuntu development is open to the public doesn't necessarily mean that anyone can join in *every* step of the process. The stages where people are welcome are well documented, and the ones that are more or less closed to a smaller proven group is left as an exercise to common sense. I fully understand why a devel would unsubscribe from this list, and I read it for only a few months. The kind of rant that started this thread is not only uncalled for, but in fact counterproductive. Not to mention these particular ones are unfair, incorrect and (as noted by several others) exaggerated. He was not asking if he was the one of many, he basically assumed it affected everyone. Also, he wrongly assumed the distribution is responsible for all the QA released, likely ignoring that are distribution bugs and upstream bugs. There, I did it, I bit the bait. Now can we please move on? regards FF -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Martin Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This list was created to give users a way to discuss Ubuntu development with developers. Comments like I was just joking about you having to know anything make the decision to unsubscribe easy. I'm seriously considering it myself. It should remain, developers should remain. Developers are never going to get away from users who want to bitch, greater layers between the developers and users just breeds users who resent and don't understand developers and developers who don't understand (none programmer)user needs. Very Bad. So on one side I think that list moderators or peers should be very prompt in telling the wrong sorts of emails where to go, perhaps with a standard template which explains the rules and a little checkbox by the offence. On the other hand, list members should try not to bait the trolls. I've caught myself being suckered in too, so I know it's not easy. But why reward the wrong sort of emails with any response other than a boiler plait 'Your being rude' email? Regards, Martin -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss On a practical note, it isn't as if this ML is getting flooded with hundreds of messages of traffic a day. For those who could benefit from the technical discussions and user input, I don't see why someone would disconnect themselves from that for the reason of saving themselves 15 minutes a day. As long as there are signals, the noise should be dealt with and ultimately set aside. -- Luke L. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:03 AM, Martin Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This list was created to give users a way to discuss Ubuntu development with developers. Comments like I was just joking about you having to know anything make the decision to unsubscribe easy. I'm seriously considering it myself. It should remain, developers should remain. I agree. If developers are unsubscribing from one of the two main development mailing lists, we have a serious communication problem in the community that needs to be addressed. When the distinction between -devel and -devel-discuss was set up, it relied on developers to take responsibility for following both lists. In the description of -devel-discuss, you see the phrase Point of contact for Ubuntu users to reach Ubuntu developers. For this list to be successful, developers need to be reading it, or it's not worth having the list in the first place. So on one side I think that list moderators or peers should be very prompt in telling the wrong sorts of emails where to go, perhaps with a standard template which explains the rules and a little checkbox by the offence. That seems a good idea also. Unsubscribing from a mailing list is not the correct response to rudeness, it should be perfectly simple to correct it simply by pointing out some ground rules. That's why we have the code of conduct. If individuals who regularly read the list are interested in taking on the role of doing a little gentle moderating, then I'm pretty sure that it would be successful. From what I read on this list, I don't actually think that much intervention would be required. -- Matthew East http://www.mdke.org gnupg pub 1024D/0E6B06FF -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 7:57 AM, Bryce Harrington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That said, I do like generalizing. :-) I think there is a cyclical thing in FOSS, where you have some legacy thing that works 80%, and upstream decides to get that last 20% it requires a major rewrite. They expect it to get to 90-95%, so distros adopt it, but when the dust settles it works at just 85%... ...and unfortunately the 15% it doesn't cover is different than the 20% the legacy system didn't cover, and that 15% is rightfully pissed that they are seeing a regression when things worked so well before. OTOH hand this means that the drivers together cover more than 85%. Would it perhaps be worth making both drivers easily available on the same kernel? I guess ideally we would scan the CVS automatically compiling each module, and identify the exact revision that caused the regression. -- John C. McCabe-Dansted PhD Student University of Western Australia -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
John McCabe-Dansted ha scritto: OTOH hand this means that the drivers together cover more than 85%. Would it perhaps be worth making both drivers easily available on the same kernel? I guess ideally we would scan the CVS automatically compiling each module, and identify the exact revision that caused the regression. In the case of intel, that would have meant letting us the choice to use i810 for xorg and ipw3945 for wifi also in hardy and intrepid. i810 does not recognise my card anymore if I try to use it manually. Intel has deprecated both drivers but someone should go there and ask them why they maintain their linux driver at a much lower level than their windows ones. If official representatives of ubuntu go there we have some chances. If normal users like me ask better support on linux, they get ignored. In the meantime, yes, I think that ubuntu should have left ipw3945 and i810 working on the hardware they supported - but maybe for ipw3945 it was not feasible. For i810, it still is, don't know why it does not want to recognise my card. For VGA out I really think I've not seen any recent laptop taking it right on ubuntu, we are far beyond the 15% here I think but without a serious analysis we can't know. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 10:13 +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: For VGA out I really think I've not seen any recent laptop taking it right on ubuntu, we are far beyond the 15% here I think but without a serious analysis we can't know. What issue do you have with VGA-out? Does it not work *at all* or does the switch display key just not work? You can test this by booting with the external display plugged in. On my 945 laptop, I can plug in VGA while running and hit the switch display key, and it's fine. On my 965, I have to boot with it plugged in. I'm trying to figure out what to change to make the switch display key work. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:13:25AM +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: John McCabe-Dansted ha scritto: OTOH hand this means that the drivers together cover more than 85%. Would it perhaps be worth making both drivers easily available on the same kernel? I guess ideally we would scan the CVS automatically compiling each module, and identify the exact revision that caused the regression. In the case of intel, that would have meant letting us the choice to use i810 for xorg and ipw3945 for wifi also in hardy and intrepid. i810 does not recognise my card anymore if I try to use it manually. Intel has deprecated both drivers but someone should go there and ask them why they maintain their linux driver at a much lower level than their windows ones. If official representatives of ubuntu go there we have some chances. Are you asking why Intel would devote more support resources to the side with more marketshare that makes much more money for them? ;-) Regarding -i810, indeed there are a few remaining corner cases where there are issues (mostly with old 8xx-era chips that Intel provides only limited support for), and I've discussed a lot of these with Intel. But I can't really speak on your issue without knowing the specifics of your case. LP#? Bryce -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
Regarding -i810, indeed there are a few remaining corner cases where there are issues (mostly with old 8xx-era chips that Intel provides only limited support for), and I've discussed a lot of these with Intel. But I can't really speak on your issue without knowing the specifics of your case. LP#? Bryce You should know them very well :) In fact you were assigned to the case some point in time between winter and spring, or at least these were the words of somebody on the ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list. Various problems (my laptop broke twice for example, and now I don't have a monitor at all as I am abroad for a month) delayed the solution of the bug which is now active and waiting for me to find an external monitor for me (here in UK they are lots picky with their stuff). However I see vga out problems consistently on intel cards. On an older laptop with centrino I can enable vga out but then I can't get back... I have to reboot the system to get the LCD on again). On many new sony vaio laptops at my department in Pisa, they have the problem that the screen output does not come out (I will check this in detail when back in Pisa and add those models to my bug report). The lp bug is here: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xserver-xorg-video-intel/+bug/137234 and the upstream discussion you can follow from the link. Thanks in any case, since you helped a lot here. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 09:50:22PM +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: Regarding -i810, indeed there are a few remaining corner cases where there are issues (mostly with old 8xx-era chips that Intel provides only limited support for), and I've discussed a lot of these with Intel. But I can't really speak on your issue without knowing the specifics of your case. LP#? Bryce You should know them very well :) In fact you were assigned to the case some point in time between winter and spring, or at least these were the words of somebody on the ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list. I wasn't assigned, but I did work on your bug around that time, and found it to be an upstream bug so forwarded it. Various problems (my laptop broke twice for example, and now I don't have a monitor at all as I am abroad for a month) delayed the solution of the bug which is now active and waiting for me to find an external monitor for me (here in UK they are lots picky with their stuff). However I see vga out problems consistently on intel cards. On an older laptop with centrino I can enable vga out but then I can't get back... I have to reboot the system to get the LCD on again). On many new sony vaio laptops at my department in Pisa, they have the problem that the screen output does not come out (I will check this in detail when back in Pisa and add those models to my bug report). The lp bug is here: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xserver-xorg-video-intel/+bug/137234 and the upstream discussion you can follow from the link. Yes, and looks like upstream is wishing for you to gather some additional information for them. Also it seems you're using 945 graphics, so you fall in none of the corner cases I alluded to earlier. Upstream will give you full support on -intel, if you can please supply them with the info they need. Thanks in any case, since you helped a lot here. No prob, Bryce -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On 10/11/2008 Bryce Harrington wrote: You should know them very well :) In fact you were assigned to the case some point in time between winter and spring, or at least these were the words of somebody on the ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list. I wasn't assigned, but I did work on your bug around that time, and found it to be an upstream bug so forwarded it. Yes I didn't ever take those words for serious but there was a thread on this mailing list where an ubuntu developer said that an xorg developer had been assigned to the case. I was just joking about you having to know anything. I have done all my best for that bug - sometimes really struggling to gather debug information in time before e.g. sending the laptop out. As soon as I have a monitor at hand I will keep on. But my laptop is not the only one. Problem is that most people in academia won't even bother to set up ubuntu - fancy to report a bug - if it cannot enable their vga out. Don't want this to look like a bug which will be quickly fixed and it's only waiting for me. This problem existed since gutsy at least and I cannot be the only one experiencing it. If so I am sorry for noise - I feel like intel is being said to be the most free-software friendly hardware vendor while they are not caring about finalising their video driver, and making at least decent their wifi one. I have been recommending intel hardware for first and I regret having done that. However, I am beginning to think that all the cases I know are i945 - execpt for the aforementioned old laptop about which - frankly - I don't care at all :) So perhaps my bug will solve most of the other ones regarding VGA out. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
On Monday 10 November 2008 18:14, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: On 10/11/2008 Bryce Harrington wrote: You should know them very well :) In fact you were assigned to the case some point in time between winter and spring, or at least these were the words of somebody on the ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list. I wasn't assigned, but I did work on your bug around that time, and found it to be an upstream bug so forwarded it. Yes I didn't ever take those words for serious but there was a thread on this mailing list where an ubuntu developer said that an xorg developer had been assigned to the case. I was just joking about you having to know anything. There has been a fair amount of chatter recently on IRC channels frequented by Ubuntu developers (none of which are secret, BTW) about the signal to noise ratio on this list. Many indicated that they are no longer subscribed. This list was created to give users a way to discuss Ubuntu development with developers. Comments like I was just joking about you having to know anything make the decision to unsubscribe easy. I'm seriously considering it myself. I can understand being unhappy about regressions in particular and problems in general. I'm not happy when they hit me (there are items in the release notes for 8.10 that are there because of 'fun' I had after upgrading). I would encourage you (and others, you certainly aren't the only one) to hold your temper and if you can't say something helpful, just take your hands off the keyboard. Being angry, contemptuous, and disrespectful won't get your bugs fixed faster. What it will get you is yet another list with no developers on it and you upset you can't get in touch with them. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 17:05 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote: However, I am beginning to think that all the cases I know are i945 - execpt for the aforementioned old laptop about which - frankly - I don't care at all :) So perhaps my bug will solve most of the other ones regarding VGA out. Possibly. VGA out issues tend to be extremely HW-specific. I could believe there could be a VGA out issue affecting just 945 chips. That said, I haven't seen the issue on the spare 945 laptop I have on hand. The issue doesn't affect all 945 chips. Mine isn't affected. There are multiple different chips in existence labeled 945, however. From drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h: 945G: 2772 945GM: 27A2 945GM: 27AE Maybe only one of these three is affected? I do have to wonder if it is more likely to affect upgrades than clean installs, as well. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 08:13:52PM -0500, Mackenzie Morgan wrote: On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 17:05 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote: However, I am beginning to think that all the cases I know are i945 - execpt for the aforementioned old laptop about which - frankly - I don't care at all :) So perhaps my bug will solve most of the other ones regarding VGA out. Possibly. VGA out issues tend to be extremely HW-specific. I could believe there could be a VGA out issue affecting just 945 chips. That said, I haven't seen the issue on the spare 945 laptop I have on hand. The issue doesn't affect all 945 chips. Mine isn't affected. There are multiple different chips in existence labeled 945, however. From drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h: 945G: 2772 945GM: 27A2 945GM: 27AE Yes, this is quite likely. And indeed, quite often they're unique not only to the chip PCI ID, but also the subsystem vendor PCI ID. In other words, the chip itself may be fine, but the issue came into being when the chip was integrated onto the motherboard and wired to the VGA port. The subsystem vendor PCI ID can be found in the 'lspci -vvnn' output, as the second line after the VGA device PCI line. Maybe only one of these three is affected? I do have to wonder if it is more likely to affect upgrades than clean installs, as well. Certainly it's possible, if the user had stray configuration in their xorg.conf. But usually users doublecheck that stuff before they file a bug report, so most VGA issues I've dealt with have been legitimate video driver issues. Bryce -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:14:34PM +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: I have done all my best for that bug - sometimes really struggling to gather debug information in time before e.g. sending the laptop out. As soon as I have a monitor at hand I will keep on. But my laptop is not the only one. Problem is that most people in academia won't even bother to set up ubuntu - fancy to report a bug - if it cannot enable their vga out. Don't want this to look like a bug which will be quickly fixed and it's only waiting for me. This problem existed since gutsy at least and I cannot be the only one experiencing it. If so I am sorry for noise - I feel like intel is being said to be the most free-software friendly hardware vendor while they are not caring about finalising their video driver, and making at least decent their wifi one. I have been recommending intel hardware for first and I regret having done that. Mmm, there is some truth amongst your points, but it seems clear that the path to attaining a solution here is open to your hands. I see you have some strong passions on this topic, and would suggest they'd be most productively channeled into working with Intel to solve it. I'd also suggest calibrating your expectations on FOSS-friendliness. Compared with how unfriendly other vendors are, Intel does indeed good marks, but it doesn't mean they're perfect, just that they're the rare good guy in a room full of rogues. However, I am beginning to think that all the cases I know are i945 - execpt for the aforementioned old laptop about which - frankly - I don't care at all :) So perhaps my bug will solve most of the other ones regarding VGA out. Possibly. VGA out issues tend to be extremely HW-specific. I could believe there could be a VGA out issue affecting just 945 chips. That said, I haven't seen the issue on the spare 945 laptop I have on hand. Bryce -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Do you really want developers to be on this list was (Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions)
This list was created to give users a way to discuss Ubuntu development with developers. Comments like I was just joking about you having to know anything make the decision to unsubscribe easy. I'm seriously considering it myself. It should remain, developers should remain. Developers are never going to get away from users who want to bitch, greater layers between the developers and users just breeds users who resent and don't understand developers and developers who don't understand (none programmer)user needs. Very Bad. So on one side I think that list moderators or peers should be very prompt in telling the wrong sorts of emails where to go, perhaps with a standard template which explains the rules and a little checkbox by the offence. On the other hand, list members should try not to bait the trolls. I've caught myself being suckered in too, so I know it's not easy. But why reward the wrong sort of emails with any response other than a boiler plait 'Your being rude' email? Regards, Martin -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
To the ubuntu developers, in particular those who deal with hardware drivers. DISCLAIMER *** Rather than using the pre-installed windows in my laptop, and giving bad publicity both to ubuntu and myself, I decided to spend some money of my own to purchase a kind of hardware that I already possess and even has an open source driver, which does however NOT work. So, if I am going to spend my money to remain a part of your community, please at least read this e-mail till the end, even if it is so long. This is not a complaint, I suppose I can find my way out of this mess by buying various usb cards and returning them until I get the one that works, but I want to bring your attention to the problem of finding decent linux drivers for network cards, especially due to huge regressions in this area in recent releases of ubuntu, including the LTS. And this is also true for so many other components, so I am just calling for attention, not to me, but to (y)our distribution and (y)our hardware support. *** I am the unlucky owner of an intel 3945 network card, internal to my laptop. I say unlucky because, I have sadly to say this, it already used to be a bit broken when the default driver used to be ipw3495, but since when we have this new (completely open source?) driver, it created to me so many problems that I can no longer use it. At home, it plays badly with my 802.11b router and I get some 10kb/sec which go slowly down until frustrated I plug the cable in. Reported this bug a long while ago, also to upstream, but everybody is just waiting for us to throw away these 802.11b routers, spend another bit of our money into consumer electronics, and pollute the environment a bit more. Now I moved abroad for one month, and it doesn't see an access point (it mistakenly detected a network with a similar name, dunno why). I am constrained to use windows, and the bad thing is that the guy that shares the house with me was interested in linux until he asked me why I was using windows. I hate this. Will complete my bug report soon, but I had so many other little problems with this open source driver which we all are supposed to support by buying their cards, that I decided to get a new USB one. Then I googled for a long time today, even found an UK resellers who only sells open hardware and they strongly endorsed the usage of rt2500 chipsets because the producer has embraced the GPL philosophy... I don't know if this is true, but I went to launchpad and searched for bugs related to this chipset and found that also rt2500 has STOPPED WORKING in many situations in recent ubuntu releases. Now, I really don't know which card to get, and won't trust any ubuntu-related source, since all of them say that iwl3945 works well, while it completely sucks, forgive me. This is a problem of mine, not yours. The question I want to raise is just. *** For your own image, for the image of ubuntu, and for the sake of your users, are you ever going to become committed to quality hardware support, in particular starting to really prioritize all those regressions from feisty and gutsy? Are you going to intel and demand more attention to their ubuntu customers, in particular making them notice that their beloved linux drivers sucks? (As you are there you could also mention the complete lack of attention to problems in VGA out support in their graphics cards, ask toshiba or vaio users for details ;) ) Are you going to check those rt2500 bugs, so that I can trust your wikis and buy it? Are you going to provide users a way (e.g. a tag that you watch) so that they can warn you of regressions, and are you consequently going to publish a page with ALL KNOWN BROKEN HARDWARE instead of just letting people pay for that hardware, and then having to use windows because they TRUSTED YOUR DOCUMENTATION that says it works, or just found a driver in the kernel that IS SUPPOSED TO work? Is it possible that I have to guess from launchpad bugs if rt2500 will work or not??? How is my non-geek friend supposed to guess what hardware to buy for its ubuntu? These are not things that _I_ can do, it's UP TO YOU who ARE the distribution! So are you willing to do that or not? *** People is actively reporting all regressions in times that I suppose beat microsoft beta testers. People is working for free for ubuntu, and ubuntu is working for free for people. That should be a good thing. However, ubuntu is more and more broken, period. Intrepid is going to keep on broken hardware support inherited from hardy (in particular, iwl3945 and it seems also rt2500), and to break webcams and tablet PCs for most of us. For me, it also breaks audio input. When I showed a friend of mine that he could just plug his webcam and chat in his ubuntu in gutsy (he
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 17:19 +, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: I am the unlucky owner of an intel 3945 network card, internal to my laptop. Interesting. I'm hoping my current laptop uses the same interface as my old one so I can put my Intel 3945 into this one. The only difference I see between ipw and ipl is that ipw has *much* better range. Here's the status of the Intel 4965: - Hardy: the manufacturer of my laptop says I am the only buyer to report kernel panics. They also say most people didn't decide to pay extra for the 4965 to get 802.11n. This makes it sound like the 4965 802.11n card is likely the issue. - Intrepid: It *will* kernel panic. It'll panic on 802.11g and 802.11n. If you install l-b-m, it'll kernel panic after a day or two instead of 15 minutes, but it'll still kernel panic. Current workaround being suggested for a patch is to turn panics into warnings. The side-effect? /var/log grows at a rate of 1 GB/hr. We also saw a chunk of Atheros cards lose support this time around. I'm using Hardy because Intrepid seems like a downgrade to me. I'm still hopeful for Jaunty though. Hopefully my webcam's driver and my fingerprint reader's driver will be included in Jaunty, and the Intel wireless will be fixed, so I'll have a laptop where all the parts work. It's kind of disappointing that even following the Intel always releases open drivers, so use Intel rule doesn't really help. -- Mackenzie Morgan http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com apt-get moo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
Anyway, thanks for the good work in areas different from hardware support. Intrepid is lovely, every time I try it I really would like to be able to start using it. I hope to be in time for jaunty :) Have you tried reinstalling Ubuntu 8.10 from scratch? I have the same wifi as you and I have none of those problems. the iwp/iwl thing was a pain in the neck in the past, but that's been made much better. Things I would check: blacklist file, modules file, custom compiled cruft that may be still around, dmesg, lsmod. So far most of the errors I've seen reported for wifi and that I have come across have either been because of faulty upgrades (a major problem) or lack of firmware or (and this was bad) drivers loading before all their dependencies or after a cut-off module has been loaded. Best of luck with your problem, developers in various communities continue to work very hard on wifi and network problems. Martin -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On Sunday 09 November 2008 15:07, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: ... network. Some of them work in a release, some of them in another. In the end, you never see your laptop just working in a single release. Oddly enough, for me, my Dell Latitude D430 laptop (not one of the ones that is pre-sold with Ubuntu) has 'just worked' in Gutsy, Hardy, and Intrepid. I don't doubt you've had problems, but it's not safe to over-generalize. Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
On Sunday 09 November 2008 15:07, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: ... network. Some of them work in a release, some of them in another. In the end, you never see your laptop just working in a single release. Oddly enough, for me, my Dell Latitude D430 laptop (not one of the ones that is pre-sold with Ubuntu) has 'just worked' in Gutsy, Hardy, and Intrepid. I don't doubt you've had problems, but it's not safe to over-generalize. What he propably meant more is that Ubuntu don't deliver fully on it's promises, and it is really hard and frustrating to people who like Ubuntu to do more promotional work because usually something breaks between releases. I see solution as feature and hardware spec, where supported stuff is provided as much as possible. It will be never 100% sure, of course, but at least some starting point. Good report when starting new development cycle on this (like bug list about hardware which doesn't work) would be good start. Just my two euro cents, Peter. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
Where I said rt2500, I actually meant the edimax cards with the rt73 chipset that should be very supported and good under ubuntu, but try to search for edimax on launchpad and you'll see recent breakage. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Very bad status of hardware (especially wifi) support in ubuntu, due to the too many accumulated regressions
So far most of the errors I've seen reported for wifi and that I have come across have either been because of faulty upgrades (a major problem) or lack of firmware or (and this was bad) drivers loading before all their dependencies or after a cut-off module has been loaded. Best of luck with your problem, developers in various communities continue to work very hard on wifi and network problems. Martin The problems with intel wifi cards are various and many keep existing in intrepid - many times in the past also with other laptops, with intel 2100-2200 cards I've not been able to connect to the network. Intrepid is a pain also for webcams and tablet (xournal is affected by a problem in libgnomecanvas which should be trivial to fix, however it's there, plus you have to struggle with the things said today in another thread). Intrepid is a pain also because audio input is broken for me. I think I reported the bug but am now too lazy to check. I reported tons of hardware bugs in the past and the fix cycle is 2 years on the average. This makes ubuntu typically unusable. I've never seen a release that is able to cover the whole of any of the laptops we own at home (4 at the moment). VGA out, SD card reader, tablet, webcam, audio input, network. Some of them work in a release, some of them in another. In the end, you never see your laptop just working in a single release. That's a pity, and that happens to other laptops in my department. In the past, I strongly advocated the usage of free software to many people, and the fact that ubuntu works on most laptops (whereas people said to me hey, I have a laptop, that's why I don't bother with linux. I am tired of this, because in the end I discovered they are becoming more and more right. Said this, the edimax card should be working and is reported to work very well under ubuntu. I contacted the bug reporter personally and think he is going to close the bug - it was just a temporary problem. I just ordered it - hope it won't be wasted money. Vincenzo -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
