From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.17-rc6] Remove Prism II support from Orinoco Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:55:01 -0400 Message-ID: <20060612205501.GB24632@redhat.com> References: <20060610175010.GA4617@divinity> <20060610180850.GP7420@redhat.com> <20060611222719.GA13139@redhat.com> <20060611224054.GB13139@redhat.com> <20060611224954.GA2880@divinity> <20060612152434.GA14851@tuxdriver.com> <20060612153958.GA6719@divinity> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "John W. Linville" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, proski@gnu.org, hermes@gibson.dropbear.id.au Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:37019 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751146AbWFLUzl (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:55:41 -0400 To: Faidon Liambotis Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060612153958.GA6719@divinity> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 06:39:58PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > FWIW, I think we've experienced a similar situation like this in the > past in the networking land and the consensus was to completely remove > the other driver. I'm referring to e100/eepro100, of course. The difference with e100/eepro100, was that there the interface name remained constant regardless of which driver you were using, which isn't the case with orinoco->hostap. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk