On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 19:08 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote: > On Friday 23 January 2009 19:01:00 Larry Finger wrote: > > The driver can certainly be coded to look for the open-source firmware > > names before trying to load vendor firmware. That way there will not > > be any confusion. > > I already posted that, but in case you missed it: > http://bu3sch.de/patches/wireless-testing/20081227-1821/patches/008-b43-probe-open-fw.patch Preferring the proprietary firmware over the open firmware (for now) seems like the best approach at this time. Many people will be quite happy with the open firmware that we can actually ship in distros, and those that aren't can do the fwcutter stuff and get their own proprietary firmware. If for some reason the open firmware isn't working, use fwcutter and get the proprietary firmware, which you would have had to do before anyway. And those people with chips that aren't supported by the proprietary firmware yet still have to use the fwcutter, which they would have had to do anyway. Win all around. If in the future there's a set of chips that the open firmware is known to work exceptionally well on, it could be preferred over the proprietary firmware at that point. Dan -- 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
