On Thursday 18 September 2008 19:01:26 Santiago Garcia Mantinan wrote: > Package: madwifi-source > Version: 1:0.9.4+r3772.20080716-1 > Followup-For: Bug #492251 > > I've been having crashes also on my laptop with the new version of > madwifi-source, I needed to use new versions because the laptop seems to > have a Atheros AR2425 (AR5007EG) which was not supported by stable madwifi > or ath5k. This is the data of the card: > > 01:00.0 0200: 168c:001c (rev 01) > Subsystem: 103c:137b > Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- > Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx- > Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- > <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx- > Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 128 bytes > Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 16 > Region 0: Memory at 91300000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=64K] > Capabilities: <access denied> > Kernel driver in use: ath_pci > Kernel modules: ath5k, ath_pci > > MadWifi: ath_attach: Switching rfkill capability off. > wifi0: Atheros AR2425 chip found (MAC 14.2, PHY SChip 7.0, Radio 10.2) > ath_pci: wifi0: Atheros 5424/2424: mem=0x91300000, irq=16 > > The driver was hanging the computer from time to time, I even tried to > upgrade other machines which had stable madwifi driven cards to the new > version of the driver with similar results, they also crashed and they had > been stable before. This is not only on the 2.6.25 kernel but also on > current 2.6.26, it is a thing with the driver, nothing to do with the kernel > it is happening to me with current packages and current kernel on all my > atheros hardware. > > I'm currently testing the new "released" hal code by the OpenWrt.org, DD-WRT > and MakSat guys and seems much more stable, this is only my third day with > but no problems have appeared so far. > > I know it is difficult to choose a version of the soft when it comes to a > release, having the stable 0.9.4 wouldn't give support to the guys with new > hardware like me, but on the other hand, providing a unstable driver is not > good either, at least if there is a stable one for most hardware. We are > really advanced on the release cycle but... I'm wondering if having a stable > package plus a development one wouldn't have been a good idea here. > > Regards...
If you want to take over maintenance of it you are welcome. I have little motivation. Maybe jump in on the current thread on debian-release to find other people who want this new binary HAL crack. Thanks, Kel. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
