[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: orinoco wireless with WEP under kernel 2.6.14-2-686



On Thursday, 29 December 2005 at 18:07:04 +0100, Richard Mittendorfer wrote:
> Also sprach Richard Lyons <richard@the-place.net> (Thu, 29 Dec 2005
> 16:30:33 +0000):
> > On Thursday, 29 December 2005 at 13:48:28 +0100, Richard Mittendorfer
> > wrote:
> > > Also sprach Richard Lyons <richard@the-place.net> (Thu, 29 Dec 2005
> > > 10:59:24 +0000):
> > [...]
> > > >           level=-88 dBm Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:305 
> > > >           Rx invalid [...]
> > >                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > Never seen this before. There's the problem for sure. 
> > > 
> > > Does this card work with earlier kernels? Is udev in use?
> > 
> > Yes, udev is in use.  I am almost certain that I had the same
> 
> ..and earlier kernels do?

I don't think I have any earlier kernels on the laptops now.

[...]
> I've heard about various issues with newer (>12) kernels and udev that
> was no recent enough. But I can't tell of any such probs I had my own. I
> don't even use udev :) 

Th 2.6.14 is pretty recent.  Maybe I'll give it another try in a few
weeks when things have moved on a bit.  The main snag I have hit from
the udev is that the usb mouse is unusable.  If I don't come across a
method of solving that, I'll have to abandon the Thinkpad for cad or
graphics work -- my finger gets sore on the trackpoint.
> 
> I just recall, there have been some pcmcia changes[1] in newer kernels
> (besides udev). HTH. Likely you'll have more success with an older kernel
> release. 

I don't think I shall go to the trouble of getting an older kernel
installed.  The Thinkpads are wonderful -- far nicer and more solid than
the dells for example -- but there are things I have never got working
(sound, modem, etc.) so I suppose I shall limit the effort I spend on them as
their uses are consequently limited.

> I luckily own a cardbus card and have not used the pcmcia ether card for
> quite a while now. 

I'm so ignorant I don't know the difference - or even which it is I
have.

Thanks again.

-- 
richard



Reply to: