On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 04:56:30PM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECT
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PR
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Don't forget, I already copied the ath9k subdrirectory from
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Don't forget, I already copied the ath9k subdrirectory from the latest
>> tree and applied the patch and compiled it. Is there anything
>> i
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Don't forget, I already copied the ath9k subdrirectory from the latest
> tree and applied the patch and compiled it. Is there anything
> intrinsic about the 2.6.27 kernel that will help the connection?
You get a new shiny
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 01:31:48PM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 6:07 AM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 01:31:48PM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 6:07 AM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> --snip---
> >>>
> >>> Currently the network has been up for 24 minutes.
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 6:07 AM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> --snip---
>>>
>>> Currently the network has been up for 24 minutes. I will let you know
>>> how long it will last.
>>>
>>> Thanks again.
>>>
>
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 6:07 AM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --snip---
>>
>> Currently the network has been up for 24 minutes. I will let you know
>> how long it will last.
>>
>> Thanks again.
>>
>> Partha
>>
>
> The connection died after 54 minutes. But I was able to restore with
>
--snip---
>
> Currently the network has been up for 24 minutes. I will let you know
> how long it will last.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Partha
>
The connection died after 54 minutes. But I was able to restore with
NetworkManager.
BTW, why all the ForceXPAon: 0 messages?
Thanks,
Partha
___
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 03:30:24PM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 03:30:24PM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Update:
> >>
> >> The new code
> >
> > Please elaborate on what new code
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Update:
>>
>> The new code
>
> Please elaborate on what new code is. Did you take
> compat-wireless-old, upgrade to compat-wireless's ath9k an
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Update:
>
> The new code
Please elaborate on what new code is. Did you take
compat-wireless-old, upgrade to compat-wireless's ath9k and apply the
new group key patch posted?
> actually more unstable on my machine which yo
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Mats Johannesson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 06:45:29 -0400 Partha Bagchi wrote:
>> [...]
>>> Well, the patch didn't apply again. I get failed hunks at the same
>>> spo
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Mats Johannesson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 06:45:29 -0400 Partha Bagchi wrote:
> [...]
>> Well, the patch didn't apply again. I get failed hunks at the same
>> spots. I am using the patch you uploaded yesterday. Maybe I can pull
>> in compat-w
On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 06:45:29 -0400 Partha Bagchi wrote:
[...]
> Well, the patch didn't apply again. I get failed hunks at the same
> spots. I am using the patch you uploaded yesterday. Maybe I can pull
> in compat-wireless after the patch has been applied as you asked
> earlier. Right now, my conne
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 6:09 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:04 AM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 7:20 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 04:08:47PM -0700, Partha Bagchi w
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:04 AM, Partha Bagchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 7:20 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 04:08:47PM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
>>> Thanks for the patch. The patch did not apply, I got all rejected
>>> hu
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 7:20 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 04:08:47PM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
>> Thanks for the patch. The patch did not apply, I got all rejected
>> hunks when I applied it to the source
>> compat-wireless-2.6-old/drivers/net/wirele
On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 04:46:18 +0200 Mats Johannesson wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:10:03 -0700 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 03:05:59AM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
> [...]
> > > 03:42:27 EDT 2008 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
> >
> > Please try appling the patch titled:
> >
> >
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:46 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:36 AM, Mats Johannesson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Anyhow, writing now to share the good news that the patch you refer to:
>> [PATCH] ath9k: connectivity is lost after Group rekeying is done
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:36 AM, Mats Johannesson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 04:46:18 +0200 Mats Johannesson wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:10:03 -0700 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 03:05:59AM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
>> [...]
>> > > 03:42:27 EDT 2
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:10:03 -0700 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 03:05:59AM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
[...]
> > 03:42:27 EDT 2008 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
>
> Please try appling the patch titled:
>
> "[PATCH] ath9k: connectivity is lost after Group rekeying is done"
>
> wh
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 04:08:47PM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
> Thanks for the patch. The patch did not apply, I got all rejected
> hunks when I applied it to the source
> compat-wireless-2.6-old/drivers/net/wireless/ath9k
>
> Here are the error messages:
> Bordeaux > patch -p1 < connectivity.p
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 03:05:59AM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I download compat-wireless-2.6-old and compiled and installed it on a
>> Fedora 9 box. Here are the details:
>>
>> lspci > 06:00.0 Network
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 03:05:59AM -0700, Partha Bagchi wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I download compat-wireless-2.6-old and compiled and installed it on a
> Fedora 9 box. Here are the details:
>
> lspci > 06:00.0 Network controller: Atheros Communications Inc.
> Unknown device 002a (rev 01)
> uname -a >
Hi All,
I download compat-wireless-2.6-old and compiled and installed it on a
Fedora 9 box. Here are the details:
lspci > 06:00.0 Network controller: Atheros Communications Inc.
Unknown device 002a (rev 01)
uname -a > Linux Bordeaux 2.6.26.3-29.fc9.i686 #1 SMP Wed Sep 3
03:42:27 EDT 2008 i686 i68
28 matches
Mail list logo