2.6.22 kernel and WiFi

[Sam Varshavchik]

Mark Haney writes:

> Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>> Mark Haney writes:
>> 
>>> You know, replies like this really irritate me. Not only do they not
>>> answer the question, you get a nice little 'lecture' on 'linux for
>>> linux'.  Let me see if I can set things straight.  I had NO CHOICE in
>>> laptops.  I got what I was given by the company.
>> 
>> Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
>> 
>> Let me get this straight:
>> 
>> 1) Your company gave you a laptop, presumably preconfigured with MS
>> Windows.
>> 
> Nope.  It had no OS.

<wink> <wink> <nudge> <nudge>

> Um, my company, being a bunch of geeks actually ENCOURAGE us to test new
> stuff.

Huh? How come such a bunch of geeks didn't know about Broadcom's (lack of) 
support, on Linux, and foisted this laptop off on you? It's not such a big 
secret, after all.


>        And the wireless isn't busted.  Since you apparently don't
> bother reading the entire thread, I'll say it slowly.
> It...works...but...will...it...work...with....2.6.22?

Now try reading, equally slow, my initial reply, with the answer: maybe, if 
you pray to the right gods.

>>>                                            I CHOSE to run linux
>>> on it since I detest windows and refuse to buy tools when open source
>>> options are better.  Therefore I was unable to do any 'homework'.
>> 
>> Did you also "choose" to do something this dumb all by yourself, or did
>> someone tell you to do it?
> 
> This dumb?  My friend, I've been running linux since Slackware 3.  I
> know what I'm doing with it.

I don't agree.  Nobody who knows what they're doing would choose to waste 
their time with the ndiswrapper drivel.

>                              For years, I've been on the RH and Fedora
> mailing lists since I prefer those OS's (because I live in NC and have a
> loyal streak in me.) and until recently been very happy with the Fedora
> community.  As I said, your first post irritated me.

Yes, I can see that. Sometimes, when reality hits one in the face, the 
feeling is not very pleasant.

And the reality is, whether you like it or not, is that folks who are in the 
know, and who are up to speed in this particular area, don't give a friggin 
hoot about ndiswrapper, and will expend no effort into making sure that 
ndiswrapper works. This is because they just don't care a fig about hacking 
MS-Windows device drivers into running on Linux. They'd rather spend 
whatever time they have into developing free, native Linux drivers for 
hardware whose manufacturers work with the Linux community and support it.

So, basically, the current and future ndiswrapper situation is simply with: 
if it works, great, if not, you're boned. And, nobody will be able to tell 
you, with absolute certainty, if your hardware will work. The best you can 
hope to get, until you actually try it, is an educated guess.

And if you want to prove me wrong, the way to do that is to simply trot out 
someone who'll give you the definitive answer. I think I'll just sit and 
wait here, until this happens. I have plenty of time.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20070718/74ee2e11/attachment-0001.sig>