Re: Acer 5002WLMi, Debian, and a nasty wireless chip
On Monday 30 January 2006 15:04, Barry, Christopher wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Goodenough [mailto:david.goodenough@btconnect.com]
> > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 9:57 AM
> > To: debian-laptop@lists.debian.org
> > Subject: Re: Acer 5002WLMi, Debian, and a nasty wireless chip
> >
> > On Monday 30 January 2006 14:49, sjb wrote:
> > > Hi, All -
> > >
> > > Love my laptop, hate my wireless (Broadcom 4318), and am
> > > wondering if anyone has/had:
> > >
> > > a) any good response with the Broadcom43xx driver in
> >
> > development w/ the
> >
> > > above system &/or the above wireless card.
> > >
> > > b) any knowledge/experience of an acpi/ acer_acpi patch for
> >
> > the 2.6.15
> >
> > > kernel? I've got the source for the driver itself, but it
> >
> > doesn't like
> >
> > > to install.
> > >
> > > c) any new ideas for getting the 4318 to work under
> >
> > ndiswrapper, *other*
> >
> > > than the usual ones involving ndiswrapper -i, for
> >
> > conffile...do, and the
> >
> > > like?
> > >
> > > thanks for any hints, clues tips or tricks.
> > >
> > > Steph
> >
> > Although it is for a slightly different Acer one thing I
> > found was that I
> > could enable the wireless card (a mini-PCI one) by interrupting pin 13
> > on the edge connector. I did this with a permanent marker pen.
> > Then the card was visible to lspci and I could point a driver
> > at it. That
> > way I did not need the acer_hk driver to enable the wireless card.
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> > --
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-laptop-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> > listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
> Cool!
> How the heck did you know to do THAT!?
>
>
> -C
A combination of Googling and finding the pin outs for the mini-PCI spec which
specifically reserve pin 13 as a "suppress wireless" pin. I suppose they
thought that wireless addon card was a likely use of mini-PCI and there was
all the fuss about wireless cards interfering with aircraft systems (which
largely seems to be wrong) at the time the spec was being written.
David
Reply to: