Nicola Mfb writes:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Paul Fertser wrote:
>> Can you confirm it's a regression and if yes, in which version it did work
>> without issues?
>
> I cannot confirm, I always had problem in some ways.
> It may be only due the fact that as I developed nwa I stressed a lot
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Nicola Mfb wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Paul Fertser wrote:
> [...]
[...]
>> Can you confirm it's a regression and if yes, in which version it did work
>> without issues?
I forgot to say an important thing: thanks for your effort!
Keep up the good work
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Paul Fertser wrote:
[...]
> Quite interesting indeed. Can you possibly provide a way to reproduce it
> without nwa using some bash or minimal python script?
Yes, I'll try with standard tools, anyway when nwa quits it remove
eth0 from the list of interfaces managed
Hi,
Thanks for the feedback.
On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 04:13:28PM +0200, Nicola Mfb wrote:
> > Nicola Mfb writes:
> >> I built a3587e4ed77974adfb057af261aaeea4022018e8 and commented the HTC
> >> line suggested in your patch
> > andy-tracking HEAD, that's right revision.
...
> rebooted and tryied
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:14 PM, Paul Fertser wrote:
> Nicola Mfb writes:
>> I built a3587e4ed77974adfb057af261aaeea4022018e8 and commented the HTC
>> line suggested in your patch
>
> Oh no! We reverted Werner's patch and with that nothing should be
> commented, it should work as is. And yes, you'r
my mistake - looks like a meta-package ... :(
BillK
On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 21:29 +0800, William Kenworthy wrote:
> That link looks like its only 762 bytes - somethings wrong?
>
> On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 16:21 +0400, Paul Fertser wrote:
> > Nicola Mfb writes:
> > >> I remember you were testing th
That link looks like its only 762 bytes - somethings wrong?
On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 16:21 +0400, Paul Fertser wrote:
> Nicola Mfb writes:
> >> I remember you were testing the fsoraw method and indeed proved that it
> >> doesn't work properly with the latest kernel. After some discussion we
> >> rev
Nicola Mfb writes:
>> I remember you were testing the fsoraw method and indeed proved that it
>> doesn't work properly with the latest kernel. After some discussion we
>> reverted the offending patch and now the latest SHR kernel should provide
>> the same level of stability as .28.
>>
>> Please t
Nicola Mfb writes:
> I built a3587e4ed77974adfb057af261aaeea4022018e8 and commented the HTC
> line suggested in your patch
Oh no! We reverted Werner's patch and with that nothing should be
commented, it should work as is. And yes, you're building
andy-tracking HEAD, that's right revision.
--
Be
Am Freitag, 4. September 2009 13.08:05 schrieb Paul Fertser:
> Hi,
>
> I remember you were testing the fsoraw method and indeed proved that it
> doesn't work properly with the latest kernel. After some discussion we
> reverted the offending patch and now the latest SHR kernel should provide
> the
> I remember you were testing the fsoraw method and indeed proved that it
> doesn't work properly with the latest kernel. After some discussion we
> reverted the offending patch and now the latest SHR kernel should provide
> the same level of stability as .28.
>
> Please try again and report the re
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Paul Fertser wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I remember you were testing the fsoraw method and indeed proved that it
> doesn't work properly with the latest kernel. After some discussion we
> reverted the offending patch and now the latest SHR kernel should provide
> the same level
Hi,
I remember you were testing the fsoraw method and indeed proved that it
doesn't work properly with the latest kernel. After some discussion we
reverted the offending patch and now the latest SHR kernel should provide
the same level of stability as .28.
Please try again and report the results.
13 matches
Mail list logo
