[shr-testing] kernel with working g_ether to Windoze connection?

[Davide Scaini]

AFAIK this is a .28 mispelled... or at least is what uname -r answers
(2.6.29-rc3)... anyway you've been very kind ;-) but i still don't have wifi
working.
f


On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Davide Scaini <dscaini at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thank you very much! I'm downloading it... i'll give feedback.
> Thanks
> d
>
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Joel Newkirk <freerunner at newkirk.us>wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 7 May 2009 18:31:39 +0200
>> Davide Scaini <dscaini at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I am searching for a really olg 2.6.28 kernel... (and not a .28
>> > mispelled that in fact it's a .29...) where can i find it? (I'm
>> > talking about something of the mid april...)
>> > thanks
>> > d
>> >
>> > Ps: wifi worked nicely on that, i just used
>> > some /etc/network/interfaces files and getted eth0 up from
>> > shr-setting panel... now it semms that with .29 kernels the interface
>> > is not really "responding" and i get kernel panics when insisting on
>> > ifup ifdown eth0 [sorry i can't be more precise since i haven't found
>> > the point where it breaks]
>>
>> I stuffed the April 14th kernel and modules up on my server, you can
>> pull them from
>>
>> http://newkirk.us/om/testing/uImage-2.6.28-oe1+gitr119785+2bea5c68313577b214b872b0edc5968db0cf3b68-r3.2-om-gta02.bin
>>
>> http://newkirk.us/om/testing/modules-2.6.28-oe1+gitr119785+2bea5c68313577b214b872b0edc5968db0cf3b68-r3.2-om-gta02.tgz
>>
>> I'll leave them there through the weekend if your or anyone wants them.
>>
>> j
>>
>>
>> > 2009/5/7 Vasco Névoa <vasco.nevoa at sapo.pt>
>> >
>> > > Thanks, Paul.
>> > > I ended up upgrading from shr-testing to shr-unstable, and the
>> > > problems are gone.
>> > > So, the non-functional kernel+g_ether must have been:
>> > >
>> > >
>> http://shr.bearstech.com/shr-testing/images/om-gta02/uImage-2.6.28-stable+gitr0e5fe639e234cdeb11d8441f19c5b3109a8b6a17-r2-om-gta02.bin
>> > > And the current working one is:
>> > >
>> > >
>> http://shr.bearstech.com/shr-unstable/images/om-gta02/uImage-2.6.29-oe10+gitr119805+f656a97d946a2529630c9770a72c10a24dc397f9-r3.4-om-gta02.bin
>> > >
>> > > I was just surprised to see the problem getting fixed and lost and
>> > > refixed at least 2 times in a row. It feels like someone made a
>> > > patch and it just doesn't stick - maybe it didn't make it upstream
>> > > and sometimes it isn't appllied? I don't know the kernel source
>> > > stream from vanilla down to SHR, so I'm talking out of my...
>> > > imagination. ;) Anyway, I'm glad it is solved, and I hope it
>> > > doesn't come back so easily again.
>> > >
>> > > Citando Paul Fertser <fercerpav at gmail.com>:
>> > >
>> > > > Vasco Nevoa <vasco.nevoa at sapo.pt> writes:
>> > > >>> Why don't you just specify which kernel revision works and which
>> > > >>> doesn't? How any kernel dev is supposed to solve your problems
>> > > >>> if you even don't properly describe it? Why don't you use the
>> > > >>> kernel that worked on your FR in the meantime?
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >> If I knew, I wouldn't have a problem, would I? :)
>> > > >
>> > > > At least you know the date (and the place you downloaded) the
>> > > > kernel had no problems and the problematic revision you use now,
>> > > > but you don't specify it.
>> > > >
>> > > > The kernel commit that finally fixed RNDIS issues was
>> > > > f63e59c84aa21d2745f115209bf949eca27008b1 and it was added to
>> > > > andy-tracking branch on Mar 16. I don't see anything related since
>> > > > then. Since you don't specify what revision you use now, i'm
>> > > > unable to even say if your rev includes the commit or not.
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Be free, use free (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html)
>> > > > software! mailto:fercerpav at gmail.com
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Openmoko community mailing list
>> > > community at lists.openmoko.org
>> > > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
>> > >
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/community/attachments/20090508/617e068c/attachment.htm