you're *able* to maintain more
packages, but I guess you too have limits, which could mean that your
responsiveness would get lower.
Of course, you're the one who chooses how much you contribute. But in
IPW3945's case, since it was slower than usual, and I know you're doing
Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Philippe Cloutier wrote:
> > See #363967. I heard some doubts about panthera's ability to handle
> > more stuff, so maybe you can offer help.
>
> thanks you for your trust in me, this makes me very happy.
Daniel, don't take this personally, don't be unhappy. I know your TO
Hi,
On 11/11/06, Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have just updated http://www.wooyd.org/debian/ipw3945-daemon/
with the new version of the package, which I consider to be uploadable
quality. If you have a chance, please test it. Unless some major issue
will pop up, I'
On 11/12/06, Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> I think we should wait until the next firmware version is out;
> that way we'll avoid the binary only regulatory daemon.
Yes, but that could be released too late for inclusion in etch - if it's not
too late already :-)
I agree comple
ted the packages of
>Jurij, and they work nicely (except for a point I believe is being
>addressed)
I have just uploaded the ipw3945d package (thanks a lot for comments,
Loic!). While it sits in NEW, you can get it from
http://www.wooyd.org/debian/ipw3945-daemon/
Best
I demand that David Weinehall may or may not have written...
[snip]
> I think we should wait until the next firmware version is out;
> that way we'll avoid the binary only regulatory daemon.
Yes, but that could be released too late for inclusion in etch - if it's not
too late already :-)
--
| D
packages are done well and are working
> flavously on my Thinkpad. Could someone compare them to the packages
> listed above?
Yes.
The -ucode package is already provided by firmware-ipw3945, thus a non-issue.
The module source package from Kanotix is the one mentioned by Loic. Further
info at [1].
Thanks, Kel.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2006/11/msg00156.html
i Golov
[1] http://kanotix.com/files/debian/pool/contrib/i/ipw3945/
[2] http://kanotix.com/files/debian/pool/non-free/i/ipw3945d/
--
^^^| Evgeni -SargentD- Golov ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
d(O_o)b | PGP-Key-ID: 0xAC15B50C
>-|-< | WWW: http://www.die-welt.net ICQ: 54116744
/ \| IRC: #sod @ irc.german-freakz.net
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 11:42:17AM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here's a short status of IPW3945 in Debian:
> IPW3945 needs three things: firmware (binary blob), driver, and daemon
> (non-free):
> - firmware is in firmware-ipw3945, up-to-date wi
Hi,
Here's a short status of IPW3945 in Debian:
IPW3945 needs three things: firmware (binary blob), driver, and daemon
(non-free):
- firmware is in firmware-ipw3945, up-to-date with upstream
(<http://bughost.org/ipw3945/>) at version 1.13 in etch/testing;
mainta
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 06:32:09PM -0300, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> If you need help, I can test and/or help fixing bugs. I have the
> hardware and I'm eager to stop using ubunu's packages for this.
I have just updated http://www.wooyd.org/debian/ipw3945-daemon/
with the new versio
On 11/8/06, Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The only thing I could find was http://www.wooyd.org/debian/ipw3945-daemon/
Yes, this is my site and ipw3945-daemon is the work in progress.. We
had some discussions about its design issues recently [0], which are
pretty much se
Philippe Cloutier wrote:
> See #363967. I heard some doubts about panthera's ability to handle more
> stuff, so maybe you can offer help.
thanks you for your trust in me, this makes me very happy.
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email: [EMAIL PROT
On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 08:59:15AM -0300, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am wondering what is the status/current work being done on
> supporting the ipw3945 wireless card on Debian. In non-free I can find
> the firmware package, but I couldn't find the non-free regulatory
&
See #363967. I heard some doubts about panthera's ability to handle more
stuff, so maybe you can offer help.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 08:59:15AM -0300, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> And currently, there are problems with the debian version of 80211 and
> the 1.0 driver from intel, that prevented me from compiling it by
> hand.
It's not really a problem. Just make sure that the ipw3945 is compi
Hi,
I am wondering what is the status/current work being done on
supporting the ipw3945 wireless card on Debian. In non-free I can find
the firmware package, but I couldn't find the non-free regulatory
daemon nor the free kernel driver. I would like to work on that, but I
don't want to
On 10/09/06 07:42:03PM -0700, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Actually, it can't do even that. According to installation
> instructions, it can be run without root privileges, as long as it has
> read/write access to a rather small subset of files in the /sys tree.
> That's how I plan to make it work in t
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 02:43:55PM -0400, Jim Crilly wrote:
> On 10/09/06 08:38:46AM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > Jim Crilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Intel's daemon isn't as bad as the Atheros HAL or nVidia's blob
> >
> > Could you please elaborat on that? why is ath_hal.ko or
On 10/09/06 08:38:46AM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Jim Crilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Intel's daemon isn't as bad as the Atheros HAL or nVidia's blob
>
> Could you please elaborat on that? why is ath_hal.ko or nvidia.ko worse
> than intel's daemon?
>
> The only real difference is
Jim Crilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Intel's daemon isn't as bad as the Atheros HAL or nVidia's blob
Could you please elaborat on that? why is ath_hal.ko or nvidia.ko worse
than intel's daemon?
The only real difference is that intel's daemon doesn't run in
kernelspace. Why is is that better
On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 06:48:17PM -0400, Jim Crilly wrote:
> On 10/08/06 02:30:14PM -0700, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 07:57:27PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > > Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > > > * Package name: ipw3945-daemon
>
On 10/09/06 12:11:28AM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Jim Crilly said:
> > Most people are willing to deal with firmware since they don't run on the
> > host CPU but only on the card that they're controlling. Intel's daemon
> > isn't as bad as the Atheros HAL or nVidia's
This one time, at band camp, Jim Crilly said:
> Most people are willing to deal with firmware since they don't run on the
> host CPU but only on the card that they're controlling. Intel's daemon
> isn't as bad as the Atheros HAL or nVidia's blob, but it's still non-free
> and non-necessary. OpenBS
On 10/08/06 02:30:14PM -0700, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 07:57:27PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > > * Package name: ipw3945-daemon
> > > Version : 1.7.22
> > > Upstream Author : Intel Corpor
On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 07:57:27PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Jurij Smakov wrote:
> > * Package name: ipw3945-daemon
> > Version : 1.7.22
> > Upstream Author : Intel Corporation
> > * URL : http://http://bughost
Jurij Smakov wrote:
> * Package name : ipw3945-daemon
> Version : 1.7.22
> Upstream Author : Intel Corporation
> * URL : http://http://bughost.org/ipw3945/
> * License : Redistribution only (non-free)
> Programming Lang: available o
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ipw3945-daemon
Version : 1.7.22
Upstream Author : Intel Corporation
* URL : http://http://bughost.org/ipw3945/
* License : Redistribution only (non-free)
Programmin
28 matches
Mail list logo
