The updated drivers are here:
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/Detail_Desc.aspx?DwnldID=17509&lang=eng&ProdId=3299
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/Detail_Desc.aspx?DwnldID=15815&lang=eng&ProdId=3024
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/Detail_Desc.aspx?DwnldID=14688&lang=eng&ProdId=3413
Jeff
-
Barney Cordoba wrote this message on Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 14:58 -0700:
> This kind of stupidity really irritates me. The commercial use of FreeBSD is
> the only reason that there is a project, and anyone with 1/2 a brain knows
> that companies with products based on freebsd can't just upgrade the
Barney,
I think everyone on-list understand you’re upset. You’ve made that clear.
However, (and I’ll put my vendor hat on), the project does not exist solely for
the benefit of the companies who choose to use it in their product(s).
Given same, your statement that “the commercial use of FreeB
This kind of stupidity really irritates me. The commercial use of FreeBSD is
the only reason that there is a project, and anyone with 1/2 a brain knows that
companies with products based on freebsd can't just upgrade their tree every
time some geek gets around to writing a patch. Maybe its the r
It's not an either/or. Until last July there was both. Like F'ing Intel isn't
making enough money to pay someone to maintain a FreeBSD version.
On Wednesday, August 13, 2014 2:24 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Aug 13, 2014, at 8:24, Barney Cordoba via freebsd-net
> wrote:
>
> Negative Pr
Barney Cordoba via freebsd-net wrote this message on Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 06:24
-0700:
> Ok. It was a lot more convenient when it was a standalone module/tarball so
> you didn't have to surgically extract it from the tree and spend a week
> trying to get it to compile with whatever version you h
> On Aug 13, 2014, at 8:24, Barney Cordoba via freebsd-net
> wrote:
>
> Negative Progress is inevitable.
Many here undoubtedly consider the referenced effort to be the opposite.
Jim
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.or
Ok. It was a lot more convenient when it was a standalone module/tarball so you
didn't have to surgically extract it from the tree and spend a week trying to
get it to compile with whatever version you happened to be running. So if
you're running 9.1 or 9.2 you could still use it seamlessly.
N
On 8/12/2014 9:16 PM, Barney Cordoba via freebsd-net wrote:
I notice that there hasn't been an update in the Intel Download Center since
July. Is there no official support for 10?
Hi,
The latest code is committed directly into the tree by Intel
eg
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-he
