On 1 December 2011 13:02, Pedro Francisco <pedrogfrancisco@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 23:09 +0000, Pedro Francisco wrote: >>> Right thread though, >> >> May be (as few of us can remember the origins of this thread), but >> you've replied at the wrong point. By this time the conversation has >> changed, and your reply has nothing to do with the message that you've >> replied to. And that's what replies should be (one message in reply to >> another *particular* message). You need to go further back, and make >> your reply to the right place. It's the only way that it'll make any >> sense to anybody reading it. > > I'm not following your point. I replied to the first message, the one > which started the thread. > > I saw a bad review, quickly scanned the thread to see if anyone else > had seen a pattern on what was working badly (networking related) and > decided to add my information, namely the peripheral possibly > responsible and a possible solution which I'm occasionaly working on. > Indeed, it's been so long since the thread started and the original post was only worth such a cursory glance that most people have probably forgotten this was a detail in the review (I know I had). Just thought I'd chime in that my laptop is still happily using iwl3945 in F16 without noticeable connection problems. (Yes, it's faster if I connect it via ethernet, but I've always expected that.) Thanks if you're actually working on improving support for this chipset. -- imalone -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
