Re: ancient ieee80211/ipw2200 drivers in recent kernel (2.6.14)

Re: ancient ieee80211/ipw2200 drivers in recent kernel (2.6.14)

[Horms]

On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 11:30:09PM +0600, Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I've encountered the problem with 2.6.14 kernels: they are shipped
> with ancient version of ipw2200 drivers (1.0.0 while current version
> is 1.0.7) and ancient version of ieee80211 subsystem (copyrighted as
> 2004, so also outdated).
> 
> This breaks compilation of module from ipw2200-source package (because
> it links against in-kernel ieee80211).

I assume the problem you are seeing is a headers problem.

> Is there way to modularize builds to exclude ieee80211 or just disable
> it (along with ipw2200) because it is outdated and current vesion is
> shipped in ieee80211-source package?

Probably the best place to start is to ping netdev to find out if
there are any plans to update IPW2200 in Linus's tree. I've CCed
that list, hopefully someone can shed some light on this.

-- 
Horms

Re: ancient ieee80211/ipw2200 drivers in recent kernel (2.6.14)

[Alejandro Bonilla Beeche]

Horms wrote:

>On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 11:30:09PM +0600, Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
>  
>
>>Hello,
>>
>>I've encountered the problem with 2.6.14 kernels: they are shipped
>>with ancient version of ipw2200 drivers (1.0.0 while current version
>>is 1.0.7) and ancient version of ieee80211 subsystem (copyrighted as
>>2004, so also outdated).
>>
>>This breaks compilation of module from ipw2200-source package (because
>>it links against in-kernel ieee80211).
>>    
>>
The .deb will need to run the remove-old script included in the new 
versions of the driver/stack.

>
>I assume the problem you are seeing is a headers problem.
>
>  
>
>>Is there way to modularize builds to exclude ieee80211 or just disable
>>it (along with ipw2200) because it is outdated and current vesion is
>>shipped in ieee80211-source package?
>>    
>>
>
>Probably the best place to start is to ping netdev to find out if
>there are any plans to update IPW2200 in Linus's tree. I've CCed
>that list, hopefully someone can shed some light on this.
>
>  
>
Not really. Basically, only stable versions of the driver make it into 
Mainline, and currently 1.0.8 is being tested to move into mainline 
(first -mm, then when people decide move to Linus)

Basically, when installing 1.0.8 and ieee80211-1.1.5, the .deb packages 
or whatever will need to run the remove-old script that is included in 
the source in order to make the new versions compile.

.Alejandro

Re: ancient ieee80211/ipw2200 drivers in recent kernel (2.6.14)

[Mikhail Gusarov]

You (horms@verge.net.au) wrote:

 >> I've encountered the problem with 2.6.14 kernels: they are shipped
 >> with ancient version of ipw2200 drivers (1.0.0 while current
 >> version is 1.0.7) and ancient version of ieee80211 subsystem
 >> (copyrighted as 2004, so also outdated).
 >> 
 >> This breaks compilation of module from ipw2200-source package
 >> (because it links against in-kernel ieee80211).

 H> I assume the problem you are seeing is a headers problem.

Ah, yes. The other problem is two copies ipw2200.ko & ieee80211*.ko
modules being installed: the ones included in kernel and others
compiled as external modules. I suppose this may lead to the problems
with depmod.

 >> Is there way to modularize builds to exclude ieee80211 or just
 >> disable it (along with ipw2200) because it is outdated and current
 >> vesion is shipped in ieee80211-source package?

 H> Probably the best place to start is to ping netdev to find out if
 H> there are any plans to update IPW2200 in Linus's tree. I've CCed
 H> that list, hopefully someone can shed some light on this.

So, having in mind the two levels of 'stablenesss': kernel
'stableness' and modules 'stableness' :) we should find the way to
exclude discussed modules from the build, because in-kernel versions
will always be, erm..., slightly (1.0.0 is mentioned only as 'stone
age' in the mailing list of ipw2200 developers) outdated due to fact
integration and testing gets some time in upstream kernels. I propose
just to disable compilation of this drivers: everyone will be able to
compile the recent version using ipw2200-source we provide.

-- 
Mikhail Gusarov
ICQ UIN: 111575219
JID: dottedmag@jabber.dottedmag.net

Re: ancient ieee80211/ipw2200 drivers in recent kernel (2.6.14)

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 12:54:09PM +0600, Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
> So, having in mind the two levels of 'stablenesss': kernel
> 'stableness' and modules 'stableness' :) we should find the way to
> exclude discussed modules from the build, because in-kernel versions
> will always be, erm..., slightly (1.0.0 is mentioned only as 'stone
> age' in the mailing list of ipw2200 developers) outdated due to fact
> integration and testing gets some time in upstream kernels. I propose
> just to disable compilation of this drivers: everyone will be able to
> compile the recent version using ipw2200-source we provide.

The kernel drivers aren't stable but obsolete.  Because of that ever
distribution that supports it's users must patch in a more recent one,
which is what we should do for debian aswell.

It's a pity the braindead Intel policies don't allow us to have an uptodate
driver in mainline.

Re: ancient ieee80211/ipw2200 drivers in recent kernel (2.6.14)

[Horms]

On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 04:26:21PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 12:54:09PM +0600, Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
> > So, having in mind the two levels of 'stablenesss': kernel
> > 'stableness' and modules 'stableness' :) we should find the way to
> > exclude discussed modules from the build, because in-kernel versions
> > will always be, erm..., slightly (1.0.0 is mentioned only as 'stone
> > age' in the mailing list of ipw2200 developers) outdated due to fact
> > integration and testing gets some time in upstream kernels. I propose
> > just to disable compilation of this drivers: everyone will be able to
> > compile the recent version using ipw2200-source we provide.
> 
> The kernel drivers aren't stable but obsolete.  Because of that ever
> distribution that supports it's users must patch in a more recent one,
> which is what we should do for debian aswell.
> 
> It's a pity the braindead Intel policies don't allow us to have an uptodate
> driver in mainline.

Christoph, 

do I take that comment to mean that upstream can't update the
drivers but Debian can? And if so, do you recommend updating 
Debian's kernel packages, or putting the updates elsewhere?

-- 
Horms

Re: ancient ieee80211/ipw2200 drivers in recent kernel (2.6.14)

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 12:29:20PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> do I take that comment to mean that upstream can't update the
> drivers but Debian can? And if so, do you recommend updating 
> Debian's kernel packages, or putting the updates elsewhere?

Well, we could upstream, but so far no one is annoyed enough to
overrid the driver maintainer.  I'd suggest merging a more recent
driver into the debian kernel package.

Re: ancient ieee80211/ipw2200 drivers in recent kernel (2.6.14)

[Harald Welte]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 959 bytes --]

On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 12:21:00AM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 12:29:20PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > do I take that comment to mean that upstream can't update the
> > drivers but Debian can? And if so, do you recommend updating 
> > Debian's kernel packages, or putting the updates elsewhere?
> 
> Well, we could upstream, but so far no one is annoyed enough to
> overrid the driver maintainer.  

This is outrageous.

Do you know any contacts at Intel to whom we could complain?  I guess
there would be many people willing to write a nice email about how
impractical (actually, insane) such a policy is?

-- 
- Harald Welte <laforge@gnumonks.org>          	        http://gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
                                                  (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]