From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gwirth79@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4BC8B421.9090308@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:01:53 -0700
From: Gus Wirth <gwirth79@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4BC2CB9E.4050309@aon.at>
In-Reply-To: <4BC2CB9E.4050309@aon.at>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Patch batman-adv for kernel 2.6.15
Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
	<b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
	<b.a.t.m.a.n.lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.open-mesh.org/mm/options/b.a.t.m.a.n>,
	<mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.open-mesh.org/pipermail/b.a.t.m.a.n>
List-Post: <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.open-mesh.org/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n>,
	<mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=subscribe>
To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking <b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>

On 04/12/2010 12:28 AM, Franz B=F6hm wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> I am trying to get batman-adv (kernelland) running on Ubiquiti Networks=20
> hardware. Unfortunately the Ubiquiti SDK uses kernel 2.6.15 and=20
> batman-adv needs at least 2.6.20. I did have some success in patching=20
> and running batman-adv-kernelland 0.1 (r1176). I would of course prefer=20
> using batman-adv 0.2 but I do have problems implementing the older=20
> kernel workqueue API.

I'm doing a lot of work with Ubiquiti devices and have had great success
with the stock OpenWrt trunk in their Bullet2HP, regular Bullet and
MiniStation and PicoStation products. Their XR2 and XR9 cards are giving
me problems right now, so I can't recommend them.

Which SDK are you working with, and for which product?

Is there any particular reason you want to use their SDK?

It might be possible to just substitute the kernel and keep the rest of
the SDK as is. Unless there is something tied directly to the kernel,
that may be an easier approach.

Gus