Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 190997
Review Request: linux-wlan-ng
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:32 EST
Spec URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng.spec SRPM URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng-0.2.3-1.src.rpm Description: The linux-wlan package is a linux device driver and subsystem package that is intended to provide the full range of IEEE 802.11 MAC management capabilities for use in user-mode utilities and scripts. The package currently supports the Intersil 802.11b Prism2, Prism2.5, and Prism3 reference designs for PCMCIA, PCI, and USB. Additionally, the package includes support for PLX9052 based PCI to PCMCIA adapter with a few different PCMCIA cards.
This doesn't seem to follow the current kernel module system documented in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/KernelModuleProposal Any particular reason why not? I think there will be a large number of blockers otherwise.
Spec URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng.spec SRPM URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng-kmod-0.2.3-2..src.rpm Spec URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng-tools.spec SRPM URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng-tools-0.2.3-2.src.rpm These packages start to use the system mentioned in Comment #1. However, I am not clear on some of the documentation. The kmod .spec file contains, at a minimum, the following issues: 1. Several macros are hardcoded because I have not yet figured out kmodtool. 2. The install process is convoluted because linux-wlan-ng's install process is not very flexible. Both of these issues are labeled with FIXME in the .spec file. I plan to continue work on these issues.
When trying to build the kernel module package I receive the following error sh: line 0: fg: no job control sh: line 0: fg: no job control error: Architecture is not included: i386
try with: rpmbuild -ba linux-wlan-ng.spec --target=i686
Thankyou!
The spec file for the kmod is harcoded to an old kernel version. Needs to be changed.
Created attachment 129010 [details] adjust kmod-package to kmod standard (In reply to comment #2) > These packages start to use the system mentioned in Comment #1. Attached patch (quick hack -- I left also a fixme for you) will bring it more in line with the kmod-standard > However, I am not clear on some of the documentation. I'm working on it currently (and needed a package to look at it closer again -- that's why I created the patch)
Where does one get the current kmodtool?
devel branch of thinkpad-kmod or lirc-kmod in CVS.
Integrates Thorsten's changes: Spec URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng.spec SRPM URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng-kmod-0.2.3-3.2.6.16_1.2096_FC5.src.rpm Spec URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng-tools.spec SRPM URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng-tools-0.2.3-3.src.rpm
New version: http://flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng-kmod-0.2.5-1.2.6.17_1.2647.fc6.src.rpm http://flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng.spec http://flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng-tools-0.2.5-1.src.rpm http://flyn.org/SRPMS/linux-wlan-ng-tools.spec Does the kmodtool tool now bring in a dependency on <modname>-common? These packages now require this. Should I rename linux-wlan-ng-tools to linux-wlan-ng-common?
Does linux-wlan-ng plan on ever including itself within the upstream kernel? If not, then this does not satisy our requirements for kernel module inclusion.
It's been four months since Warren added his question and in that time there's been no response. I think it's about time to close this ticket; I'll do so soon if there's no further comment.
From the FAQ :- >Q: When will linux-wlan-ng be merged into the mainline kernel? > > Short answer: Never. > > First, the linux-netdev people will soundly reject this driver. > I don't begrudge them for this; indeed in their position I'd do > exactly the same. It's a sound engineering decision. > > linux-wlan-ng is obselete, and effort spent fixing it is better > spent elsewhere. You can't even buy the hardware any longer. > ... It's never going to be easy to maintain this package, so I'd vote to close this one. Richard
Please remember to fix up the blockers when you close tickets like this.