From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:27785 "EHLO c60.cesmail.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753702Ab1GORC5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:02:57 -0400 Message-ID: <4E2072BF.6000306@gnu.org> (sfid-20110715_190300_373848_4451EBBA) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:02:55 -0400 From: Pavel Roskin MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christian Lamparter CC: Roman Shishkin , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Binary for carl9170 References: <201107141119.08932.chunkeey@googlemail.com> <201107151509.23258.chunkeey@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <201107151509.23258.chunkeey@googlemail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/15/2011 09:09 AM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > On Friday 15 July 2011 14:31:07 Roman Shishkin wrote: >> Source code avaliable of course, but I need just the binary of 1.9.4. >> Probably lot of casual linux users needs this binary too :) > Oh no, the firmware is supposed to be shipped by the distribution and > not "installed by hand". After all, they provide compiled and fully tested > packages for kernel+driver+userland and in doing so verify that no > malicious code compromises the system's security. Christian, I think the latest firmware needs to be on the site. I understand that you want to keep the entry barrier high, but it's hurting wrong people. I made some changes to the ath module and wanted to make a quick check that carl9170 is OK. First I found that the 1.9.2 firmware won't work with wireless-testing. Then I found that the binary is not there. Then I downloaded the sources and ran "make -C toolchain". After a long download, I got configure: error: Building GCC requires GMP 4.2+, MPFR 2.3.1+ and MPC 0.8.0+. Try the --with-gmp, --with-mpfr and/or --with-mpc options to specify No big deal, I'll need to install some libraries and restart make. But that's more time to spend on something I thought would take minutes. And I'll have to keep the toolchain somewhere if I want to compile future version of the firmware. At this point I start having doubts whether it's easier just to look at my changes more carefully and send them. I was complaining recently that AR5210 hard to get to work (it only works on old motherboards), but I think I can get it to work faster than AR9170. Not providing the binary hurts potential tester and contributors. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin