On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 21:11, Nick Rout wrote: > On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 21:02 +1200, Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > > > [1] DSE do have a habit of providing a fixed version of linux > > > > drivers, > > > > > and do not update their downloadable. IMHO they would be better to > > > provide some simple info like "this card works with the madwifi > > > > driver, > > > > > and if that driver is not provided by your distribution you can > > > > download > > > > > it from madwifi.sf.net" or "this card works with the airo driver > > > > which > > > > > is included in the linux kernel, the module is named airo_cs" or > > > > "this > > > > > card has no linux drivers but you can use it in linux in conjunction > > > with the ndiswrapper driver... etc" > > > > Ack ack, that would *really* help, but I guess someone has to put the > > effort into making sure the info is correct, or there's liability > > trouble. > > They disclaim liability all over the show anyway, at present they > provide a (soon outdated) driver for download, and they obviously test > that. > > I am just thinking a pointer to the driver's web page or other > information about where to get the driver is likely to be a better > service, in that you can get the latest. > > Their current approach is like putting the sources for kernel 2.0.0 on > your site and saying "we mirror linux". You are far better to point to > http://www.kernel.org. > > Given: > > 1. the disclaimers; and > 2. the "swap out" money back guarantees that they offer in any event > > I see no downside for DSE in providing a pointer to the latest and > greatest driver website, instead of stuff that ages quickly. After all, > isn't that one of the reasons why that smart fella invented the www? Indeed! While at the moment while DSE are trying pretty hard to provide Linux compatible gear, I fear that they simply don't 'grok it' properly.
What, imho, DSE need to do is to make sure that the actual chip sets used in the interfaces are correctly identified in the documentation which comes with the pieces of gear. A reference to the web-site of the firm who made the chip would be a great help. For example it took me several hours futzing around to get their single channel USB -> serial converter ( XH8290 ) to work when it should have been the work of a moment falling off the proverbial log. All the doco really needs to say in this case is something like:- "The chip used in this device is made by Future Technology Devices International Ltd. http://www.ftdichip.com/ The driver required for this device is in the 2.6 kernel. Install the ftdi_sio.c driver as a module. You will find the configuration flag in the kernel make menuconfig system at:- Device Drivers -> USB support -> Support for Host-side USB -> USB Serial Converter support -> USB Serial Converter support Install the driver as a module. <M> You can test the converter using either the 'minicom' terminal emulator or the traditional unix utility named 'cu' which is part of the 'uucp' package. Ignore the fact that this driver is marked 'experimental', because it works perfectly. If you need more support to install kernel modules then you will in all probably find quality help available from one of the Linux User Groups". There you go DSE, word perfect for your support page for the XH8290 USB -> serial converter. Please feel free to use it. If DSE did this sort of thing it would make using their peripherals with Linux a sensible possibility instead of the rather hit or miss affair it is at the moment. I suspect that their main problem is that they don't know where to turn to find a person with both competent authoring and Linux skills at a reasonable price. I wonder if DSE are reading the list? Would they care to make a comment? -- CS
