On Friday 14 December 2007 02:12:25 Ray Lee wrote:
Digging a little farther into it, it looks like b43 is barfing partway
through init as the firmware file it's looking for has changed names.
Perhaps that's the issue. I'll take a longer look at this all
tomorrow.
On Friday 14 December 2007 01:55:50 Harvey Harrison wrote:
On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 01:43 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
Oh come on. b43 is more than a year old now. How long should we wait?
Two or three? Forever?
Any pointers to the advantages of b43?
* Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 14 December 2007 02:12:25 Ray Lee wrote:
Digging a little farther into it, it looks like b43 is barfing partway
through init as the firmware file it's looking for has changed names.
Perhaps that's the issue. I'll take a longer look at
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 11:56:24AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh come on. b43 is more than a year old now. How long should we wait?
Two or three? Forever?
possibly forever, if you dont get obvious regressions like my wlan does
not work
On Friday 14 December 2007 13:53:27 Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This user did get the following messages in dmesg:
b43err(dev-wl, Firmware file \%s\ not found
or load failed.\n, path);
b43err(wl, You must go to
On Friday 14 December 2007 13:59:54 Simon Holm Thøgersen wrote:
This user did get the following messages in dmesg:
b43err(dev-wl, Firmware file \%s\ not found
or load failed.\n, path);
So the question seems to be why b43 needs version 4, when b43legacy and
bcm43x uses version
* Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The testers who did nothing but reported that the new driver did not
work on their hardware.
Which testers?
right in this thread Ray Lee is reporting:
| | Digging a little farther into it, it looks like b43 is barfing
| | partway through init
On Friday 14 December 2007 12:15:34 Ingo Molnar wrote:
So you volunteer to maintain bcm43xx? Fine. Thanks a lot.
it's sad that you are trying to force testers to upgrade to your new
driver by threatening to unsupport the old driver.
I dropped maintainance for bcm43xx over a year ago.
So I
John W. Linville [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 11:56:24AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh come on. b43 is more than a year old now. How long should we wait?
Two or three? Forever?
possibly forever, if you dont get obvious
On Friday 14 December 2007 13:16:17 Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The testers who did nothing but reported that the new driver did not
work on their hardware.
Which testers?
right in this thread Ray Lee is reporting:
| | Digging a little
* Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This user did get the following messages in dmesg:
b43err(dev-wl, Firmware file \%s\ not found
or load failed.\n, path);
b43err(wl, You must go to
http://linuxwireless.org/en/users/Drivers/b43#devicefirmware
and download
Hi all. Perhaps I can inject some facts into this?
On Dec 14, 2007 5:08 AM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This user did get the following messages in dmesg:
b43err(dev-wl, Firmware file \%s\ not found
or load failed.\n, path);
b43err(wl, You must go to
fre, 14 12 2007 kl. 13:31 +0100, skrev Michael Buesch:
On Friday 14 December 2007 13:16:17 Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The testers who did nothing but reported that the new driver did not
work on their hardware.
Which testers?
right
On Dec 14, 2007 6:40 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. As a b43legacy maintainer, I'd be happy to know if Ingo
suggests other ways to smooth out the transition. I haven't read
proposals yet.
This isn't rocket science guys. Put a file in somewhere in your tree
called ReleaseAnnouncement or
On Dec 14, 2007 8:27 AM, Ray Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 14, 2007 6:40 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. As a b43legacy maintainer, I'd be happy to know if Ingo
suggests other ways to smooth out the transition. I haven't read
proposals yet.
This isn't rocket science guys. Put
On Friday 14 December 2007 17:06:39 Ray Lee wrote:
Hi all. Perhaps I can inject some facts into this?
On Dec 14, 2007 5:08 AM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This user did get the following messages in dmesg:
b43err(dev-wl, Firmware file \%s\ not found
or load
On Friday 14 December 2007 17:45:52 Ray Lee wrote:
On Dec 14, 2007 8:27 AM, Ray Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 14, 2007 6:40 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. As a b43legacy maintainer, I'd be happy to know if Ingo
suggests other ways to smooth out the transition. I haven't read
On Dec 14, 2007 8:59 AM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What if you want to compile your own kernel? Well, then you are on
your own anyway. You have to track kernel changes anyway.
I'm trying to help you test your code before it goes out to the
unsuspecting masses. Do you think I do
On Friday 14 December 2007 19:01:51 Ray Lee wrote:
No, I don't have module autoloading disabled. modprobe-ing b43
automatically loads ssb. Neither, however, will load rfkill or
rfkill-input. And if they aren't loaded, then b43/ssb are *completely*
silent during load. Nothing to dmesg at all.
On Friday 14 December 2007 18:59:10 Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In my opinion this all is the work of the distributions and not the
work of the kernel developers. Distributions have to make sure that
everything works after a kernel update. [...]
On Dec 14, 2007 10:11 AM, Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Ray Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now I'm going to go off, sit in the sun, sip some coffee, and think
happy thoughts of kittens playing with yarn for a while.
ok, and given the time-shift and apparent season-shift i'll sit in
On Friday 14 December 2007 19:45:02 Ray Lee wrote:
One problem related to b43 source code, patch exists, has yet to be
merged upstream.
Yeah. A problem preventing a LED from blinking.
That's a real regression Come on. Stop that bullshit.
I'm going to say this one last time. If
* Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In my opinion this all is the work of the distributions and not the
work of the kernel developers. Distributions have to make sure that
everything works after a kernel update. [...]
actually, not. The the task of kernel developers is to KEEP OLD
On Dec 14, 2007 8:49 AM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 14 December 2007 17:06:39 Ray Lee wrote:
Hi all. Perhaps I can inject some facts into this?
On Dec 14, 2007 5:08 AM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This user did get the following messages in dmesg:
* Ray Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now I'm going to go off, sit in the sun, sip some coffee, and think
happy thoughts of kittens playing with yarn for a while.
ok, and given the time-shift and apparent season-shift i'll sit in the
evening, watch the snowfall and think happy thoughts of
I've run out of time to donate to the kernel today, so I'll keep this short.
On Dec 14, 2007 10:22 AM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you have a PCI device probing works as follows:
The PCI table is in ssb. So as soon as your kernel detects the PCI device
it will load ssb.
On Dec 14, 2007 11:05 AM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 14 December 2007 19:45:02 Ray Lee wrote:
One problem related to b43 source code, patch exists, has yet to be
merged upstream.
Yeah. A problem preventing a LED from blinking.
That's a real regression
On Friday 14 December 2007 20:25:39 Ray Lee wrote:
I'm sorry. The patch that _you_ quoted fixes a blinking LED
and nothing else.
Well, you're wrong. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. See below.
It does _not_ fix loading of rfkill or b43 in any way.
It does, however, fix loading of
On Dec 14, 2007 11:38 AM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 14 December 2007 20:25:39 Ray Lee wrote:
I'm sorry. The patch that _you_ quoted fixes a blinking LED
and nothing else.
Well, you're wrong. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. See below.
It does _not_ fix
On Friday 14 December 2007 20:55:43 Ray Lee wrote:
Oh. My. God.
Michael. I have a degree in Physics. I placed sixth in the world
finals of the ACM Collegiate programming contest in 1999, Cal Poly
Team Gold. ( http://icpc.baylor.edu/past/icpc99/Finals/Tour/Win/Win.html
, I'm the guy all the
On Dec 14, 2007 12:13 PM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ray, I _do_ want to understand what is going on in your machine.
I _have_ to understand it. But I currently do not understand how the
quoted patch could fix modprobe of b43 or rfkill. I'd simply call that
impossible.
Then
On Friday, 14 of December 2007, Michael Buesch wrote:
On Friday 14 December 2007 13:59:54 Simon Holm Thøgersen wrote:
This user did get the following messages in dmesg:
b43err(dev-wl, Firmware file \%s\ not found
or load failed.\n, path);
So the question seems to be why
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Actually, can you explain why, from the technical point of view, the version 4
firware is better than version 3, please?
I will be very interested in Michael's answer to this question; however, my experience is that it
doesn't make much difference if your device is
On Friday, 14 of December 2007, Michael Buesch wrote:
On Friday 14 December 2007 18:59:10 Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In my opinion this all is the work of the distributions and not the
work of the kernel developers. Distributions have to make sure
On Dec 14, 2007 7:58 PM, Larry Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Actually, can you explain why, from the technical point of view, the
version 4
firware is better than version 3, please?
I will be very interested in Michael's answer to this question; however, my
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could this be the reason my BCM94311MCG rev 1 receives such terrible
performance with b43 but works well with bcm43xx? The device is
802.11b/g but my router is 802.11b. I filed a report on this issue
here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=413291
No. On my
On Dec 14, 2007 9:27 PM, Larry Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect that mac80211 is doing something that your router does not like. Do
you have any chance to
capture the traffic between your computer and the router by using a second
wireless computer running
kismet or wireshark? A
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 14, 2007 11:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll attach these logs since I can't read much into them.
I should do what I say...
It will take a while to finish looking over those logs, but are you using ipv6? If not, please
blacklist the ipv6 module to
Michael Buesch wrote:
On Friday 14 December 2007 01:05:00 Ray Lee wrote:
Okay, I had to modprobe rfkill-input and rfkill by hand, didn't
realize that. Hopefully that'll be automatic soon. Regardless, upon
doing so, and loading ssb and b43, it sees my card, but is still not
fully functional.
On Dec 13, 2007 4:43 PM, Michael Buesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 14 December 2007 01:05:00 Ray Lee wrote:
> > Okay, I had to modprobe rfkill-input and rfkill by hand, didn't
> > realize that. Hopefully that'll be automatic soon. Regardless, upon
> > doing so, and loading ssb and b43,
On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 01:43 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> Oh come on. b43 is more than a year old now. How long should we wait?
> Two or three? Forever?
>
Any pointers to the advantages of b43?
Harvey
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a
On Friday 14 December 2007 01:05:00 Ray Lee wrote:
> Okay, I had to modprobe rfkill-input and rfkill by hand, didn't
> realize that. Hopefully that'll be automatic soon. Regardless, upon
> doing so, and loading ssb and b43, it sees my card, but is still not
> fully functional. iwconfig sees:
>
>
On Dec 13, 2007 5:45 AM, Michael Buesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 13 December 2007 02:17:16 Ray Lee wrote:
> > Uhm, hijacking the thread a bit here, but which driver is supposed to
> > be supporting my 4309? Neither b43 nor b43legacy found my wireless,
> > and I'm not seeing its PCI
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 12:11:32PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Thursday 13 December 2007 11:13:27 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > This driver is scheduled for removal, so I'd not touch it anymore to
> > > > avoid the possibility to
On Thursday 13 December 2007 02:17:16 Ray Lee wrote:
> On Dec 12, 2007 4:48 PM, Michael Buesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This driver is scheduled for removal, so I'd not touch it anymore
> > to avoid the possibility to introduce a lastminute regression.
> > The new drivers (b43 and b43legacy)
On Thursday 13 December 2007 11:13:27 Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > This driver is scheduled for removal, so I'd not touch it anymore to
> > > avoid the possibility to introduce a lastminute regression. The new
> > > drivers (b43 and b43legacy) have
* Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This driver is scheduled for removal, so I'd not touch it anymore to
> > avoid the possibility to introduce a lastminute regression. The new
> > drivers (b43 and b43legacy) have this fixed (in a different way by
> > completely removing it).
>
>
* Daniel Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This driver is scheduled for removal, so I'd not touch it anymore to
avoid the possibility to introduce a lastminute regression. The new
drivers (b43 and b43legacy) have this fixed (in a different way by
completely removing it).
When is the
On Thursday 13 December 2007 11:13:27 Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Daniel Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This driver is scheduled for removal, so I'd not touch it anymore to
avoid the possibility to introduce a lastminute regression. The new
drivers (b43 and b43legacy) have this fixed (in
On Thursday 13 December 2007 02:17:16 Ray Lee wrote:
On Dec 12, 2007 4:48 PM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This driver is scheduled for removal, so I'd not touch it anymore
to avoid the possibility to introduce a lastminute regression.
The new drivers (b43 and b43legacy) have
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 12:11:32PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
On Thursday 13 December 2007 11:13:27 Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Daniel Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This driver is scheduled for removal, so I'd not touch it anymore to
avoid the possibility to introduce a lastminute
On Dec 13, 2007 5:45 AM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 13 December 2007 02:17:16 Ray Lee wrote:
Uhm, hijacking the thread a bit here, but which driver is supposed to
be supporting my 4309? Neither b43 nor b43legacy found my wireless,
and I'm not seeing its PCI ID
On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 01:43 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
Oh come on. b43 is more than a year old now. How long should we wait?
Two or three? Forever?
Any pointers to the advantages of b43?
Harvey
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a
On Friday 14 December 2007 01:05:00 Ray Lee wrote:
Okay, I had to modprobe rfkill-input and rfkill by hand, didn't
realize that. Hopefully that'll be automatic soon. Regardless, upon
doing so, and loading ssb and b43, it sees my card, but is still not
fully functional. iwconfig sees:
lo
On Dec 13, 2007 4:43 PM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 14 December 2007 01:05:00 Ray Lee wrote:
Okay, I had to modprobe rfkill-input and rfkill by hand, didn't
realize that. Hopefully that'll be automatic soon. Regardless, upon
doing so, and loading ssb and b43, it sees
Michael Buesch wrote:
On Friday 14 December 2007 01:05:00 Ray Lee wrote:
Okay, I had to modprobe rfkill-input and rfkill by hand, didn't
realize that. Hopefully that'll be automatic soon. Regardless, upon
doing so, and loading ssb and b43, it sees my card, but is still not
fully functional.
On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 01:48 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 December 2007 09:00:03 Daniel Walker wrote:
> >
> > Signed-Off-By: Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > ---
> > drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_debugfs.c | 30
> > -
> > 1 file
On Dec 12, 2007 4:48 PM, Michael Buesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This driver is scheduled for removal, so I'd not touch it anymore
> to avoid the possibility to introduce a lastminute regression.
> The new drivers (b43 and b43legacy) have this fixed (in a different
> way by completely removing
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 09:00:03 Daniel Walker wrote:
>
> Signed-Off-By: Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_debugfs.c | 30
> -
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> Index:
Signed-Off-By: Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_debugfs.c | 30 -
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.23/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_debugfs.c
Signed-Off-By: Daniel Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_debugfs.c | 30 -
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.23/drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_debugfs.c
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 09:00:03 Daniel Walker wrote:
Signed-Off-By: Daniel Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_debugfs.c | 30
-
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
Index:
On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 01:48 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 09:00:03 Daniel Walker wrote:
Signed-Off-By: Daniel Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
drivers/net/wireless/bcm43xx/bcm43xx_debugfs.c | 30
-
1 file changed, 15
On Dec 12, 2007 4:48 PM, Michael Buesch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This driver is scheduled for removal, so I'd not touch it anymore
to avoid the possibility to introduce a lastminute regression.
The new drivers (b43 and b43legacy) have this fixed (in a different
way by completely removing it).
101 - 164 of 164 matches
Mail list logo
