Hi,
Pavel Roskin wrote:
The patch in question was never submitted to the orinoco mailing list.
I believe any such changes should be discussed by people using the
driver and participating in its development. It's not some minor change
or API update.
I'm sorry for not submitting/CCing this to
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 08:15:10AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Regarding the disabling of IDs, I could prepare a patch for orinoco_cs
that would disable Prism2 support via a configuration option. Would that
be helpful/acceptable?
I'm going to 'officially' drop this patch, while you and
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 07:30:56 +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Unfortunately, that workaround doesn't work so well when you want to
have the ability to plug real orinoco (hermes) cards to your computer...
In other words and unless I'm missing something, there isn't currently a
way to have a
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 09:24:49PM +0300, Jar wrote:
It always loads itself with or without blacklist. That's why I have to
do 'rm -f orinoco*.* depmod -a' when the new kernel arrives. Seems
that users are directed to use unsecure orinoco (wep) driver rather than
secure hostap
Hello, John!
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 11:24 -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:49:54AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Having two drivers supporting the same set of hardware seems pretty
pointless to me. Plus, it confuses hotplugging/automatic detection.
This subject
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 17:10 -0700, Jesse Brandeburg wrote:
my problem is that for my prism 2 adapter both drivers are loaded at
which point neither of them works. I'm running FC5, and i have to
keep removing the orinoco*.ko files to keep them from loading, so I'm
all for this patch.
I
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
use blacklist in module config to block one.
Just put in /etc/modprobe.conf
blacklist orinoco
Unfortunately this is not work at least it is not work with FC4. I can
blacklist eepro100 and 8139cp.
blacklist eepro100
blacklist 8139cp
but I can't blacklist orinoco_pci
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 06:40:54PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
Ah-ha, I had tested the wrong card.
I also have a Sitecom card, which matches this ident you remove in your
patch..
PCMCIA_DEVICE_MANF_CARD(0xd601, 0x0002), /* Safeway 802.11b, ZCOMAX
AirRunner/XI-300 */
snip
So with your
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:49:54AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Having two drivers supporting the same set of hardware seems pretty
pointless to me. Plus, it confuses hotplugging/automatic detection.
This subject comes-up from time to time. In fact, I'm pretty sure
it came-up very recently
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 11:24:39AM -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:49:54AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Having two drivers supporting the same set of hardware seems pretty
pointless to me. Plus, it confuses hotplugging/automatic detection.
This subject
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 06:39:58PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
FWIW, I think we've experienced a similar situation like this in the
past in the networking land and the consensus was to completely remove
the other driver. I'm referring to e100/eepro100, of course.
The difference with
On 6/12/06, John W. Linville [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:49:54AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Having two drivers supporting the same set of hardware seems pretty
pointless to me. Plus, it confuses hotplugging/automatic detection.
This subject comes-up from time to
On 12/06/06 17:10 -0700, Jesse Brandeburg wrote:
On 6/12/06, John W. Linville [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:49:54AM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Having two drivers supporting the same set of hardware seems pretty
pointless to me. Plus, it confuses
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
my problem is that for my prism 2 adapter both drivers are loaded at
which point neither of them works. I'm running FC5, and i have to
keep removing the orinoco*.ko files to keep them from loading, so I'm
all for this patch.
use blacklist in module config to block
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 02:08:50PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 08:50:10PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Remove Prism II IDs from the orinoco driver since now we have a separate
driver for them (HostAP). Additionally, kill orinoco_{pci,plx,nortel}
completely,
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 06:27:19PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 02:08:50PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 08:50:10PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Remove Prism II IDs from the orinoco driver since now we have a
separate
driver for them
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 06:40:54PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
Under hostap, it's a brick, it won't even report any scanning results.
Did you switch it into managed mode? The hostap driver, iirc, defaults
to running in master (AP) mode.
Cheers,
Kyle
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 06:31:40PM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 06:40:54PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
Under hostap, it's a brick, it won't even report any scanning results.
Did you switch it into managed mode? The hostap driver, iirc, defaults
to running in
Remove Prism II IDs from the orinoco driver since now we have a separate
driver for them (HostAP). Additionally, kill orinoco_{pci,plx,nortel}
completely, since they only exist to support Prism cards.
No attempt was made to clean up the rest of the driver of the actual
Prism II code, only the PCI
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 08:50:10PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Remove Prism II IDs from the orinoco driver since now we have a separate
driver for them (HostAP). Additionally, kill orinoco_{pci,plx,nortel}
completely, since they only exist to support Prism cards.
No attempt was made to
20 matches
Mail list logo
