>
> 1) Does the device boot up in CFUN=1 mode already? This could be
> determined via minicom/screen without MM running. If it does (my 8775
> modules do) then we could avoid this issue by having the startup code
> check AT+CFUN? before doing AT+CFUN=1 explicitly.
>
I will try to implement th
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 07:58 +0200, Gerd Bavendiek wrote:
> Am 22.05.2011 00:44, schrieb Aleksander Morgado:
> >
> > Attached a patch which should do AT+CFUN=1 only if product ID is not
> > 0x6832. Can you guys test it?
> >
> >
> Minor fix in the previous patch,
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Gerd Bavendiek
wrote:
> The log from the second package Pantelis provided is in mm-nok.log. CFUN=1
> is being sent in line 159:
> [...]
Just for kicks (although I 'm not very confident) can you please also
test the latest package
in my ppa? (and attach logs like a
> >>> Attached a patch which should do AT+CFUN=1 only if product ID is not
> >>> 0x6832. Can you guys test it?
> >>>
> >> Minor fix in the previous patch, please use the one here instead.
> >>
> > I updated the package in my ppa with your patch.
> >
> > Gerd, can you test the new one
Am 20.05.2011 12:38, schrieb Pantelis Koukousoulas:
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Aleksander Morgado
wrote:
Attached a patch which should do AT+CFUN=1 only if product ID is not
0x6832. Can you guys test it?
Minor fix in the previous patch, please use the one here instead.
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Aleksander Morgado
wrote:
>> Attached a patch which should do AT+CFUN=1 only if product ID is not
>> 0x6832. Can you guys test it?
>
> Minor fix in the previous patch, please use the one here instead.
I updated the package in my ppa with your patch.
Gerd, can yo
> >
> > Unfortunately I don't have any modemmanager experience or time to
> > implement the quirk "the right way", so if someone can start from
> > the previous attached patch and fix the problem correctly, it would be
> > great :)
> >
>
> Attached a patch which should do AT+CFUN=1 only if prod
> >> > From a cursory reading of the bug reports you cited it seems like some
> >> > sierra modems crash when ModemManager sends CFUN=1 to them.
> >> >
> >> > Can you help verify if this is indeed the case with yours as well?
> >> >
> >
> > So it really seems that not only Wavecom modems get a wh
I really would test if someone provides packages.
Am 20.05.2011 09:38, schrieb Pantelis Koukousoulas:
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Aleksander Morgado
wrote:
From a cursory reading of the bug reports you cited it seems like some
sierra modems crash when ModemManager sends CFUN
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Aleksander Morgado
wrote:
>
>> >
>> > From a cursory reading of the bug reports you cited it seems like some
>> > sierra modems crash when ModemManager sends CFUN=1 to them.
>> >
>> > Can you help verify if this is indeed the case with yours as well?
>> >
>
> So
> >
> > From a cursory reading of the bug reports you cited it seems like some
> > sierra modems crash when ModemManager sends CFUN=1 to them.
> >
> > Can you help verify if this is indeed the case with yours as well?
> >
So it really seems that not only Wavecom modems get a whole software
resta
Hi Pantelis,
you really saved me ! It works ! I now can change to Natty.
I ran
echo modemmanager hold | dpkg --set-selections
to pin your package.
Shall I add a comment to my latest bugreport at launchpad (#784573) ?
Big thanks !
Kind regards
Gerd
Am 20.05.2011 08:24, schrieb Pantelis Kou
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Gerd Bavendiek
wrote:
> I have a ID 1199:6832 Sierra Wireless, Inc. MC8780 Device.
> Unfortunately NetworkManager in Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic
> was the last version I could use the device with. I recently checked
> Ubuntu 11.04 Natty (coming with NetworkManager version
Hi,
sorry to bother you with a user problem. I have a ID 1199:6832 Sierra
Wireless, Inc. MC8780 Device. Unfortunately NetworkManager in Ubuntu
9.10 Karmic
was the last version I could use the device with. I recently checked
Ubuntu 11.04 Natty (coming with NetworkManager version
0.8.3.998). This
14 matches
Mail list logo
