Re: ITP: Intel e1000 gigabit NIC driver kernel module
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 04:06:36PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 03:34:40PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> > > http://support.intel.com/support/network/adapter/1000/software.htm
> > >
> > > The license is GPL or BSD+Intel patent clause. My package is based on
> > > files written by Steve Halsam <firstname.lastname@example.org> for the device3dfx
> > > package, which is currently maintained by Zephaniah E. Hull
> > > <email@example.com>, and licensed under the GPL
> > > (/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL); this information is given in the
> > > copyright file of my package.
> > This is part of the standard kernel now in 2.5.
> How many 2.5 kernels are packaged in Debian? None currently, because it's
> 2.5 and generally considered not ready for the world yet.
Heh, it is now part of 2.4.20 :)
I already have packaged e1000, if you want to be the maintainer
of it, be my guest, it would make my live easier ;)
Hmmm, reading your mail, you also have packaged it...
> I don't know how easy it is to get the e1000 source, but the driver search
> page Intel's other pages direct you to for the Linux driver is 100%
> Windows only. The current version of the e100 driver is GPL, but the
> version in Debian is under another license and placed in non-free because
> of patent issues (which have obviously since been resolved..) I had to
> find the current driver because I needed ethtool support for ifplugd.
Ok, ok, I am a little bit slow with the e100 package, but that is
because if the new package breaks because the source is not ok,
it will cost the company I work for a lot of money...
> I realise we're talking about a package with a limited lifespan, but
> consider that the standard kernel for woody was still 2.2 with the option
> of 2.4. I think it's safe to suggest that sarge will not be using 2.6 or
> 3.0 or whatever they wind up calling it as its primary kernel. I think
> the package has some value to those with the hardware.
I think an e1000 package is worth it, even though it is already
in 2.4.20. Not everybody has the means to "just" switch to
2.4.20. Before using 2.4.20, a lot of regression testing has to
be done. And even in 2.4.18, we get "a lot" of kernel oopses...
By now we figured out it is not the e100 driver... But we needed
4 kernel releases and switching between e100 and eepro100 to find
Testing a single module is much easier...
mail up 96+03:04, 4 users, load 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
mistar1 up 28+13:49, 19 users, load 0.60, 0.67, 0.65
Let your government know you value your freedom: sign the petition: