Bug#655344: linux-image-3.1.0-1-kirkwood: Missing support for LaCie machines
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 17:49, Simon Guinot <simon@sequanux.org> wrote:
> Hi Tjalling,
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 04:39:28PM +0100, Tjalling wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:08, Arnaud Patard <arnaud.patard@rtp-net.org> wrote:
>> > Simon Guinot <simon@sequanux.org> writes:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> >> Package: linux-2.6
>> >> Version: 3.1.6-1
>> >> Severity: important
>> >>
>> >> Dear Maintainer,
>> >>
>> >> The kernel image provided by package linux-image-3.1.0-1-kirkwood don't
>> >> support the LaCie Kirkwood boards.
>> >>
>> >> Please, consider applying the following patch:
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/config/armel/config.kirkwood b/config/armel/config.kirkwood
>> >> index 1eae313..85b0c64 100644
>> >> --- a/config/armel/config.kirkwood
>> >> +++ b/config/armel/config.kirkwood
>> >> @@ -63,6 +63,12 @@ CONFIG_MACH_DOCKSTAR=y
>> >> CONFIG_MACH_OPENRD_BASE=y
>> >> CONFIG_MACH_OPENRD_CLIENT=y
>> >> CONFIG_MACH_OPENRD_ULTIMATE=y
>> >> +CONFIG_MACH_NETSPACE_V2=y
>> >> +CONFIG_MACH_INETSPACE_V2=y
>> >> +CONFIG_MACH_NETSPACE_MAX_V2=y
>> >> +CONFIG_MACH_D2NET_V2=y
>> >> +CONFIG_MACH_NET2BIG_V2=y
>> >> +CONFIG_MACH_NET5BIG_V2=y
>> >> CONFIG_MACH_T5325=y
>> >>
>> >> ##
>> >> @@ -172,6 +178,11 @@ CONFIG_GPIO_SYSFS=y
>> >> # CONFIG_DRM is not set
>> >>
>> >> ##
>> >> +## file: drivers/hwmon/Kconfig
>> >> +##
>> >> +CONFIG_SENSORS_GPIO_FAN=m
>> >> +
>> >> +##
>> >> ## file: drivers/i2c/Kconfig
>> >> ##
>> >> CONFIG_I2C=y
>> >> @@ -244,6 +255,8 @@ CONFIG_ISDN_DIVAS_MAINT=m
>> >> CONFIG_NEW_LEDS=y
>> >> CONFIG_LEDS_CLASS=y
>> >> CONFIG_LEDS_GPIO=y
>> >> +CONFIG_LEDS_NS2=y
>> >> +CONFIG_LEDS_NETXBIG=y
>> >> CONFIG_LEDS_TRIGGERS=y
>> >> CONFIG_LEDS_TRIGGER_TIMER=y
>> >> CONFIG_LEDS_TRIGGER_DEFAULT_ON=y
>> >
>> > Does this really need to be built-in ? (side note: if it can't work as
>> > module, why is it a tristate and not a boolean in kernel config ?)
>> >
>> It seems a bit odd that Sheeva plug, Guru plug, Dockstar, OpenRD, Qnap
>> and others(?) support is built-in, but support for Lacie is not. I'm
>> not a (kernel)developer, so I don't know what problems this will bring
>> up. But as a user I would appreciate it if Lacie support was in the
>> standard kernel. If there is any reason this is not possible, I'll
>> accept that off course.
>
> I think there is a misunderstanding here. Arnaud is speaking about the
> LED support. Build the LEDs drivers as modules is correct.
>
Ah, I misunderstood. Excuse me.
regards, Tjalling
> Simon
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAk8PDv0ACgkQgtp0PDeOcDo8mACcD+EeLxTxfRUS4KlXZ98ll7r2
> YxsAoJJBRJ19FZ07W8o6rdhSwEhKbquJ
> =gv6E
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
Reply to: