Re: Kernel 2.6.38 for squeeze
Hi,
I've been using my own backport of the Debian kernel, and when I saw
that someone wants to upload it to backports.d.o, I wrote that I needed
the options for my WiFi card.
I've been replied to that I should ask the kernel team, which I really
agree with. So, please consider adding these options by default:
CONFIG_RT2800PCI_RT33XX
CONFIG_RT2800PCI_RT35XX
CONFIG_RT2800USB_RT33XX
CONFIG_RT2800USB_RT35XX
It really does work for me (eg: my USB WiFi-N card is detected and
working), and it seems a quite widespread shipset. I could find it for
really cheap in Shanghai (70 yuan, which is about 7.5 euros).
Cheers, and keep on the good work,
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
On 04/17/2011 12:01 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 04/16/2011 05:40 PM, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> yesterday I prepared a backport for linux-2.6 2.6.38-3, which works for
>> me, but I would like to get some feedback from others before I'm going
>> to upload it to squeeze-backports.
>>
>> It's available for amd64 from here:
>>
>> http://tretkowski.de/debian/squeeze-backports/
>>
>> The linux-base package was splitted out from the linux-2.6 package, you
>> need it as well.
>>
>> So please give it a try, and send feedback.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Norbert
>
> Hello Norbert,
>
> I have an old laptop with a bad internal WiFi board, so I bought a newer
> RaLink driver. To make it work, I had to add the option "rt2800usb -
> Include support for rt33xx devices (EXPERIMENTAL)" and "rt2800usb -
> Include support for rt35xx devices (EXPERIMENTAL)". These are not
> activated in your build (I've just checked).
>
> I believe that one of the most important point of running a backported
> kernel is to have such drivers for newer hardware. Could you please
> include the option above? The options to activate are as below:
>
> CONFIG_RT2800PCI_RT33XX
> CONFIG_RT2800PCI_RT35XX
> CONFIG_RT2800USB_RT33XX
> CONFIG_RT2800USB_RT35XX
>
> If you include the above options, I'll be able to test your backport
> instead of the quick and dirty one that I did myself.
>
> Cheers, and thanks for the work,
>
> Thomas
>
>
Reply to: