On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 09:19 +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > Pavel Roskin wrote: > > I'm sorry, but considering your original patch, I just cannot be sure > > that you will get the PCMCIA IDs right. I cannot be sure I'll get it > > right myself. It requires a lot of searching and detective work. > We can always begin with the set that is common to both (PCMCIA) drivers. > You're proposing to do nothing but at the same time you say that HostAP > claims it can support some cards when it actually doesn't, which is a > rather important bug IMHO. > I understand that you're maintaining orinoco and not hostap but this is > an issue that affects your "users" too, not to mention the overall > quality of the kernel. I understand, but I don't have all possible cards, and I depend on what users are reporting. In absence of reports, I prefer to work on things I can actually test. > My patch affected a douzine of PCMCIA IDs, don't you think we can safely > correct these? 0156:0002 alone is going to be a big headache. Basically, you would need to replace it with textual IDs for all Lucent cards and remove the numeric ID. > > On the other hand, I haven't heard many complains about the ID clash > > recently. It seems to me that users learned how to deal with it. > > Distributions do a great job too. For instance, Fedora renames network > > devices based on the MAC addresses, so the same configuration will work > > with either orinoco of hostap. > > > > Of course, those who want to run an 802.11b AP know that they should > > choose hostap, but most users don't need that. > You haven't heard many complaints recently because there aren't many > users recently... > > And this is not about network interface names or AP mode. > You may disagree, but IMO HostAP is a *much* better driver for Prism2 > devices in all modes. Well, I agree that there are many things in hostap that are not in orinoco, such as firmware download and WPA. > And if you have both drivers compiled as modules (as most distributions > do) you have to either blacklist orinoco or manually unbind the driver > from the hardware using /sys. The later is true for the drivers compiled into the kernel as well. > I'm maintaining hostap-utils for Debian and we are shipping a blacklist > for orinoco for years because of the numerous reports of users who > weren't be able to use HostAP. > This is suboptimal though, since it breaks (= no driver loaded) when the > user actually has a Lucent Orinoco card. I agree, that's suboptimal. > I understand your reluctance but I think it's way past the time you > should have passed Prism2 to HostAP. I actually hoped that some userspace solution would appear that would make it unnecessary to handle it in the drive. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
