8:40 p.m.
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
Summary: Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
URL: http://www.cenolan.com/fedora9/broadcom-wl/
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: chris(a)cenolan.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Estimated Hours: 0.0
This package contains Broadcom's IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n hybrid Linux device
driver for use with Broadcom's BCM4311-, BCM4312-, BCM4321-, and BCM4322
based hardware.
This is my first package for RPM Fusion. Jarod Wilson is co-maintainer and
Thorsten Leemhuis is my sponsor.
[cnolan@macbook SPECS]$ rpmlint wl-kmod.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[cnolan@macbook SPECS]$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/wl-kmod-5.10.27.6-2.fc9.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[cnolan@macbook SPECS]$ rpmlint
../RPMS/x86_64/kmod-wl-5.10.27.6-2.fc9.x86_64.rpm
kmod-wl.x86_64: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[cnolan@macbook SPECS]$ rpmlint
../RPMS/x86_64/kmod-wl-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64-5.10.27.6-2.fc9.x86_64.rpm
kmod-wl-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64.x86_64: W: no-documentation
kmod-wl-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized wl kernel
module(s) for 2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64
kmod-wl-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/lib/modules/2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64/extra/wl/wl.ko
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
[cnolan@macbook SPECS]$ rpmlint
../RPMS/x86_64/broadcom-wl-5.10.27.6-2.fc9.x86_64.rpm
broadcom-wl.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/broadcom-wl-5.10.27.6/LICENSE.txt
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[cnolan@macbook SPECS]$ rpmlint
../RPMS/x86_64/wl-kmod-debuginfo-5.10.27.6-2.fc9.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
I believe all 5 warnings above can be safely ignored but I am happy to stand
corrected!
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
8:42 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #1 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-10-27 21:42:22 ---
In case it isn't clear from the above: the SRPM, RPMs and spec file can be
found at:
http://www.cenolan.com/fedora9/broadcom-wl/
Cheers
Chris
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
8:51 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks| |2
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
9:22 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #2 from Jarod Wilson <jarod(a)wilsonet.com> 2008-10-27 22:22:28 ---
One brief initial comment: the spec file name and base rpm name should be the
same. i.e., if its going to be wl-kmod for the main (important) rpm and source
rpm name, the spec should be wl-kmod.spec to match. Oh. Never mind. Its that
way inside the actual SRPM. Will try to look at it some more tonight. Who
knows, maybe the vlanmode fix will help performance on my end...
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
10:54 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #3 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-10-27 23:54:05 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
One brief initial comment: the spec file name and base rpm name
should be the
same. i.e., if its going to be wl-kmod for the main (important) rpm and source
rpm name, the spec should be wl-kmod.spec to match. Oh. Never mind. Its that
way inside the actual SRPM. Will try to look at it some more tonight. Who
knows, maybe the vlanmode fix will help performance on my end...
My bad, I fixed it in the SRPM but forgot to upload the renamed spec file. It
is there now.
Regarding the performance, there are a couple of other parameters that can be
set using iwpriv:
[root@macbook ~]# iwpriv wlan0
wlan0 Available private ioctls :
set_leddc (8BE0) : set 1 int & get 0
set_vlanmode (8BE1) : set 1 int & get 0
set_pm (8BE2) : set 1 int & get 0
Unfortunately I can't find *any* documentation on what any of these do, except
for vlanmode which was responsible for preventing ssh/telnet connections.
Maybe worth trying to change the others and see if they make any difference?
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
8:15 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #4 from Jarod Wilson <jarod(a)wilsonet.com> 2008-10-28 21:15:13 ---
So I did briefly poke last night. Unfortunately, nothing I do seems to make any
significant difference to improve my throughput. For the time being, I think
I'm going to wind up punting, and just run MythTV under Mac OS X on this box,
at least until I get an rt2870 802.11n usb adapter and/or a second antenna
wire, which may or may not help... :\
(On the bright side, the ATI Remote Wonder II works extremely well under Mac OS
X, and MythTV playback performance is passable, though I have a scaling issue
left to figure out).
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
6:22 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |fedora(a)leemhuis.info
--- Comment #5 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2008-10-30 19:22:35
---
Sorry, I'm a bit busy with real life right now, hence I didn't find time to
take a closer look yet. But from a quick look there is one big missconception
in this package: you need to submit two source packages/spec files. One that
contains the userland stuff (e.g. the license) and one that contains only the
kmod.
Take for example a closer look at rt2860:
Userland package
http://cvs.rpmfusion.org/viewvc/rpms/rt2860/devel/?root=free
Kmod package:
http://cvs.rpmfusion.org/viewvc/rpms/rt2860-kmod/devel/?root=free
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
6:46 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #6 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-10-30 19:46:40 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Sorry, I'm a bit busy with real life right now, hence I
didn't find time to
take a closer look yet.
No probs.
But from a quick look there is one big missconception
in this package: you need to submit two source packages/spec files. One that
contains the userland stuff (e.g. the license) and one that contains only the
kmod.
Ok cool, I will change it around.
I actually did it that way at first then figured it seemed weird to build two
SRPMs that contain the exact same source. What is the reasoning behind using
two SRPMs when one seems to do the job?
Sorry for the n00b questions and thanks for your help!
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
6:49 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #7 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-10-30 19:49:38 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
So I did briefly poke last night. Unfortunately, nothing I do seems
to make any
significant difference to improve my throughput. For the time being, I think
I'm going to wind up punting, and just run MythTV under Mac OS X on this box,
at least until I get an rt2870 802.11n usb adapter and/or a second antenna
wire, which may or may not help... :\
Shame. I guess we won't know for sure whether its specifically a driver issue
until you can try it with the second antenna. I'd be interested to know whether
this driver really does support "n" standard.
(On the bright side, the ATI Remote Wonder II works extremely well
under Mac OS
X, and MythTV playback performance is passable, though I have a scaling issue
left to figure out).
Glad you got something working... but shame it had to be OSX and not Fedora!
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
7:25 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #8 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2008-10-30 20:25:39
---
What is the reasoning behind using two SRPMs when one seems to do the
job?
Two reasons:
(1) It prevents that the package with that contains the userland part gets
rebuilt everytime new kmods get build
(2) The userland packages doesn't get built for i586 and i686
The issue (1) is more of a problem when it comes to packages with big userland
parts (like the fglrx or nvidia drivers).
That could be circumvented this with the same trick that is getting used for
akmods. But back in the Fedora days it was agreed on that things like that make
the spec file ugly and complicate to understand. Hence even for packages like
this (with only small parts in userland) it was made mandatory to have separate
package that contains the userland bits.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
9:55 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #9 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-10-30 22:55:32 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> What is the reasoning behind using two SRPMs when one seems to
do the job?
Two reasons:
(1) It prevents that the package with that contains the userland part gets
rebuilt everytime new kmods get build
(2) The userland packages doesn't get built for i586 and i686
[...]
Thank you Thorsten, that makes sense.
I've repackaged it up into two separate SRPMs and fixed a couple of problems
along the way:
broadcom-wl:
http://www.cenolan.com/fedora9/broadcom-wl/broadcom-wl.spec
http://www.cenolan.com/fedora9/broadcom-wl/broadcom-wl-5.10.27.6-1.fc9.sr...
wl-kmod:
http://www.cenolan.com/fedora9/broadcom-wl/wl-kmod.spec
http://www.cenolan.com/fedora9/broadcom-wl/wl-kmod-5.10.27.6-3.fc9.src.rpm
Here are the rpmlint results:
[cnolan@macbook SPECS]$ rpmlint broadcom-wl.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[cnolan@macbook SRPMS]$ rpmlint broadcom-wl-5.10.27.6-1.fc9.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[cnolan@macbook noarch]$ rpmlint broadcom-wl-5.10.27.6-1.fc9.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[cnolan@macbook SPECS]$ rpmlint wl-kmod.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[cnolan@macbook SRPMS]$ rpmlint wl-kmod-5.10.27.6-3.fc9.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[cnolan@macbook x86_64]$ rpmlint kmod-wl-5.10.27.6-3.fc9.x86_64.rpm
kmod-wl.x86_64: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[cnolan@macbook x86_64]$ rpmlint
kmod-wl-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64-5.10.27.6-3.fc9.x86_64.rpm
kmod-wl-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64.x86_64: W: no-documentation
kmod-wl-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized wl kernel
module(s) for 2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64
kmod-wl-2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/lib/modules/2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64/extra/wl/wl.ko
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Best
Chris
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
12:21 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks|2 |3
AssignedTo|rpmfusion-package- |fedora(a)leemhuis.info
|review(a)rpmfusion.org |
--- Comment #10 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2008-11-02 13:21:28
---
Packages look quite good; some mostly minor issues:
= common issues =
- I think the macro
%define kmod_name wl
looks odd and is not worth the trouble, as
-- it's just use in one or two places per spec file
-- it unlikely that the kmod name will change
= broadcom-wl.spec =
- I'd say the README (http://www.broadcom.com/docs/linux_sta/README.txt) should
be part of the package, as it also contains a few informations for users (maybe
the rest should get stripped)
- Quoting from the README
Validate you don't have loaded (or built into the kernel) the
Linux community provided driver for Broadcom hardware. [...]
Is this a issue on Fedora? If yes then we should consider to blacklist the
module. But I'd like to avoid this, as it makes adding this driver to live-cds
harder (as we don't want to blacklist b43 in general)
= wl-kmod.spec =
- Please remove the
#define buildforkernels current
#define buildforkernels akmod
stuff
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
1:42 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #11 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-11-02 14:42:17 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Packages look quite good; some mostly minor issues:
= common issues =
- I think the macro
%define kmod_name wl
looks odd and is not worth the trouble, as
-- it's just use in one or two places per spec file
-- it unlikely that the kmod name will change
No probs. It was useful when we kept changing the name! ;)
= broadcom-wl.spec =
- I'd say the README (http://www.broadcom.com/docs/linux_sta/README.txt) should
be part of the package, as it also contains a few informations for users (maybe
the rest should get stripped)
- Quoting from the README
> Validate you don't have loaded (or built into the kernel) the
> Linux community provided driver for Broadcom hardware. [...]
Is this a issue on Fedora? If yes then we should consider to blacklist the
module. But I'd like to avoid this, as it makes adding this driver to live-cds
harder (as we don't want to blacklist b43 in general)
Yes, this is an issue on Fedora. The driver conflicts with bcm43xx, ssb, b43
and ndiswrapper kernel modules. I use the following when installing manually:
echo "blacklist bcm43xx" >> /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist
echo "blacklist ssb" >> /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist
echo "blacklist b43" >> /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist
echo "blacklist ndiswrapper" >> /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist
and also:
echo "alias wlan0 wl" >> /etc/modprobe.conf
I guess for the sake of upgrading/removing the RPM that would be better done
with a new single modprobe.d file "/etc/modprobe.d/broadcom-wl" perhaps?
As for the README.txt - should we use a stripped down version of the official
file or should we alter it to be more specific to Fedora/RPM installation?
= wl-kmod.spec =
- Please remove the
#define buildforkernels current
#define buildforkernels akmod
stuff
Cool. Thanks Thorsten.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
2:03 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #12 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2008-11-02 15:03:38
---
(In reply to comment #11)
> > Validate you don't have loaded (or built into the
kernel) the
> > Linux community provided driver for Broadcom hardware. [...]
> Is this a issue on Fedora?
Yes, this is an issue on Fedora. The driver conflicts with bcm43xx, ssb, b43
and ndiswrapper kernel modules. I use the following when installing manually:
Just a reminder for the next time: All packages normally should "just work" --
hence if you always need to do something manually to make the software that is
being packaged work (like you did) then you should make the package do it for
everyone.
echo "blacklist bcm43xx" >>
/etc/modprobe.d/blacklist
echo "blacklist ssb" >> /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist
echo "blacklist b43" >> /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist
echo "blacklist ndiswrapper" >> /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist
Then you should add a file /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist-for-broadcom-wl (or
something like that; just "blacklist" is to generic and might conflict with
other packages) with that stuff in it to the package.
Note that this will blacklist b43 even for broadcom hardware that is not
supported by b43. We should in the long term work towards a better solution
that doesn't have this problem.
echo "alias wlan0 wl" >> /etc/modprobe.conf
Is this really needed? That will break if people have more then one wlan device
in their system.
I guess for the sake of upgrading/removing the RPM that would be
better done
with a new single modprobe.d file "/etc/modprobe.d/broadcom-wl" perhaps?
Two different files (one for the blacklist; one for the alias) might be wise
As for the README.txt - should we use a stripped down version of the
official
file or should we alter it to be more specific to Fedora/RPM installation?
You choice. Stripped down is likely easier to maintain.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
4:39 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #13 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-11-02 17:39:07 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
Just a reminder for the next time: All packages normally should
"just work" --
hence if you always need to do something manually to make the software that is
being packaged work (like you did) then you should make the package do it for
everyone.
Sure. I was thinking that the ndiswrapper package doesn't blacklist any modules
when installed (the user has to do it manually) but I understand now that this
is because ndiswrapper may be used for a variety of drivers so the blacklisted
modules would be different depending on the driver(s) installed using
ndiswrapper.
Then you should add a file /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist-for-broadcom-wl
(or
something like that; just "blacklist" is to generic and might conflict with
other packages) with that stuff in it to the package.
Note that this will blacklist b43 even for broadcom hardware that is not
supported by b43. We should in the long term work towards a better solution
that doesn't have this problem.
Ok, I've now included /etc/modprobe.d/broadcom-wl-blacklist file in the
userland package.
> echo "alias wlan0 wl" >> /etc/modprobe.conf
Is this really needed? That will break if people have more then one wlan device
in their system.
I've tested it without this alias and it seems it is not needed (at least on my
setup). I will maybe include something about it in the README.txt because it
may be required for some people or for people who wish to configure their
broadcom card to use a specific interface.
You choice. Stripped down is likely easier to maintain.
Think I'll go with a new README.txt since the information we should provide
probably differs significantly from the info in the standard README.txt
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
6:16 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #14 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-11-02 19:16:12 ---
Updated specs and SRPMs:
broadcom-wl:
http://www.cenolan.com/fedora9/broadcom-wl/broadcom-wl.spec
http://www.cenolan.com/fedora9/broadcom-wl/broadcom-wl-5.10.27.6-2.fc9.sr...
wl-kmod:
http://www.cenolan.com/fedora9/broadcom-wl/wl-kmod.spec
http://www.cenolan.com/fedora9/broadcom-wl/wl-kmod-5.10.27.6-4.fc9.src.rpm
The bundled README.txt is here:
http://www.cenolan.com/fedora9/broadcom-wl/README.txt
Feedback welcome!
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
6:31 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #15 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-11-02 19:31:24 ---
One thing:
For the broadcom-wl package I couldn't decide whether it was better to chmod
the files in the %prep section and use -m0644 in %install or whether just to
use
%defattr(644,root,root,755)
in the %files section? Both seem to achieve the same thing, but is one way
better than the other?
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
5:09 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #16 from Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at> 2008-11-04 06:09:17 ---
Are you SURE you want to call this just wl-kmod? I think this is a really too
generic name and may cause name conflicts with other drivers at some point in
the future.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:13 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #17 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2008-11-04 10:13:39
---
(In reply to comment #16)
Are you SURE you want to call this just wl-kmod?
Yes, I think that's the best idea.
I think this is a really too generic name and may cause name
conflicts with
other drivers at some point in the future.
That afaics only could happen if another kernel module would be called "wl" as
well; then we have a real problem already, as kernel module names need to be
unique -- the package naming then is the least of our problems.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
10:01 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #18 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2008-11-04 11:01:47
---
(In reply to comment #15)
One thing:
For the broadcom-wl package I couldn't decide whether it was better to chmod
the files in the %prep section and use -m0644 in %install or whether just to
use
%defattr(644,root,root,755)
in the %files section? Both seem to achieve the same thing, but is one way
better than the other?
I'd say using install with -m0644 is the best; one less line in the spec than a
explicit chmod during %prep; and a defattr might backfire sooner or later
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
1:09 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks|3 |4
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #19 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2008-11-04 14:09:30
---
Both packages approved; some minor issues nevertheless should get fixed in
broadcom-wl.spec:
- as mentioned in comment #17, please use install -m0644 and the standard
deattr in the files section
- Thx for the readme, but i dislike this part a bit:
echo "alias eth0 wl" >> /etc/modprobe.conf
I think it's way better to suggest a create a file in /etc/modprobe.d/
I sponsered you in FAS; shall I take care of importing and initial builds for
you (then please provide a update package that fix the issues mentioned above)?
That might make things easier for both of us ;-)
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
1:38 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #20 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-11-04 14:38:25 ---
(In reply to comment #19)
Both packages approved; some minor issues nevertheless should get
fixed in
broadcom-wl.spec:
Yes, fair points.
I sponsered you in FAS; shall I take care of importing and initial
builds for
you (then please provide a update package that fix the issues mentioned above)?
That might make things easier for both of us ;-)
Thanks. I know it may be a pain but I'm keen to try doing the importing and
initial builds myself that way I'll understand the process better... If that is
ok with you then I'll try to catch up with you on IRC.
Thanks
Chris
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
8:37 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #21 from Jarod Wilson <jarod(a)wilsonet.com> 2008-11-04 21:37:12 ---
Forgot to mention... A buddy of mine actually bought a dell studio hybrid w/the
same wireless card, and even with the two antenna in the hybrid, both this
driver and ndiswrapper work only marginally better than they do in my case. :\
Seems perhaps an issue with this particular card, since the AppleTV's similar
card works quite well w/ndiswrapper. I'll have to try the wl driver w/the
AppleTV one of these days...
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
12:04 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #22 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2008-11-05 13:04:36
---
(In reply to comment #20)
Thanks. I know it may be a pain but I'm keen to try doing the importing and
initial builds myself that way I'll understand the process better...
Yeah, that's also the usual Fedora way and it has some benefits. But otoh the
inital import sometimes is hard, frustrating and time-consuming and that's why
I normally offer help for the first package ;-)
If that is ok with you then I'll try to catch up with you on IRC.
Sure.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:29 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #23 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-11-05 22:29:13 ---
(In reply to comment #21)
Forgot to mention... A buddy of mine actually bought a dell studio
hybrid w/the
same wireless card, and even with the two antenna in the hybrid, both this
driver and ndiswrapper work only marginally better than they do in my case. :\
Seems perhaps an issue with this particular card, since the AppleTV's similar
card works quite well w/ndiswrapper. I'll have to try the wl driver w/the
AppleTV one of these days...
It would be cool to see some benchmarking with iperf using the various
different drivers/cards. I intend (sometime) to try find me a "n" router from
work and set up some tests to see exactly what throughput this is capable of
compared with ndiswrapper.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:39 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #24 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-11-05 22:39:03 ---
(In reply to comment #22)
Yeah, that's also the usual Fedora way and it has some benefits.
But otoh the
inital import sometimes is hard, frustrating and time-consuming and that's why
I normally offer help for the first package ;-)
Some help would be much appreciated!
So, according to the wiki, I need to post asking for a directory to be created
in the CVS (FWIW it isn't clear here whether I just need one directory or one
for each SRPM).
Anyway, here goes...
Package CVS request
======================
Package Name: wl-kmod
Short Description: Broadcom STA wireless kernel module driver
Owners: cnolan jarod
Branches: F-8 F-9 F-10
InitialCC:
----------------------
License tag: nonfree
This raises a question: will we be releasing this for F-8 also?
I keep popping in to IRC put you always seem to be AFK - I'll keep trying!
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:07 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #25 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2008-11-07 10:07:47
---
(In reply to comment #24)
Package Name: wl-kmod
Short Description: Broadcom STA wireless kernel module driver
Owners: cnolan jarod
Branches: F-8 F-9 F-10
InitialCC:
branch created; assumed you wanted one for broadcom-wl as well, hence I created
one ;-)
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
11:01 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
Teguh DC <dheche(a)songolimo.net> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dheche(a)songolimo.net
--- Comment #26 from Teguh DC <dheche(a)songolimo.net> 2008-11-07 12:01:34 ---
I'm testing this package (src.rpm downloaded from cenolan site), but sometimes
my system (the entire os) is completly freeze.
I'm testing with WPA/WPA2 encryption
This is snippet from wpa_supplicant.log
CTRL-EVENT-SCAN-RESULTS
Trying to associate with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (SSID='HotGazebo' freq=2412 MHz)
Association request to the driver failed
Associated with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
WPA: 4-Way Handshake failed - pre-shared key may be incorrect
CTRL-EVENT-DISCONNECTED - Disconnect event - remove keys
Authentication with 00:00:00:00:00:00 timed out.
CTRL-EVENT-DISCONNECTED - Disconnect event - remove keys
No network configuration found for the current AP
CTRL-EVENT-DISCONNECTED - Disconnect event - remove keys
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
8:20 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #27 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-11-07 21:20:54 ---
(In reply to comment #26)
This is snippet from wpa_supplicant.log
CTRL-EVENT-SCAN-RESULTS
Trying to associate with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (SSID='HotGazebo' freq=2412 MHz)
Association request to the driver failed
Associated with xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
WPA: 4-Way Handshake failed - pre-shared key may be incorrect
CTRL-EVENT-DISCONNECTED - Disconnect event - remove keys
Authentication with 00:00:00:00:00:00 timed out.
CTRL-EVENT-DISCONNECTED - Disconnect event - remove keys
No network configuration found for the current AP
CTRL-EVENT-DISCONNECTED - Disconnect event - remove keys
That doesn't tell us anything about your system freezing; it only tells us that
wpa_supplicant is failing to associate with the access point using the
pre-shared key you provided. What makes you think that the system freezes are
in any way connected to the wl kernel module?
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:12 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #28 from Teguh DC <dheche(a)songolimo.net> 2008-11-07 22:12:59 ---
(In reply to comment #27)
That doesn't tell us anything about your system freezing; it only
tells us that
wpa_supplicant is failing to associate with the access point using the
pre-shared key you provided. What makes you think that the system freezes are
in any way connected to the wl kernel module?
Yup, maybe the log file didn't tell what happen, i don't know where should i
find good clue. /var/log/messages didn't tell what happen too. Only some info
about :
NetworkManager: <info> Activation (eth1/wireless): association took too long
--snip--
Nov 6 15:52:36 foutain NetworkManager: <info> Config: set interface ap_scan
to 1
Nov 6 15:52:36 foutain NetworkManager: <info> (eth1): supplicant connection
state change: 0 -> 2
Nov 6 15:52:45 foutain NetworkManager: <info> (eth1): supplicant connection
state change: 2 -> 3
Nov 6 15:52:48 foutain NetworkManager: <info> (eth1): supplicant connection
state change: 3 -> 4
Nov 6 15:52:48 foutain NetworkManager: <info> (eth1): supplicant connection
state change: 4 -> 5
Nov 6 15:54:44 foutain kernel: imklog 3.18.1, log source = /proc/kmsg started.
Nov 6 15:54:44 foutain kernel: Initializing cgroup subsys cpuset
Nov 6 15:54:44 foutain kernel: Linux version 2.6.26.6-79.fc9.x86_64
(mockbuild@) (gcc version 4.3.0 20080428 (Red Hat 4.3.0-8) (GCC) ) #1 SMP Fri
Oct 17 14:20:33 EDT 2008
As you can see, on 15:52:48 i should reboot my system because that completly
lock up.
I'm sure this is somehow related to wl kernel module. I boot up my laptop,
login to it, doing nothing, NM automagicly fire up wifi connection ... asked
about wpa passphrase, i enter it correctly (yes i'm sure), NM asked again, i
enter it again (3-4 times still not success), suddenly system freeze.
After reboot about 3-4 times, i gave up, switch back to ndiswrapper, my system
are usable again now.
Please guide me to find more clue.
Thanks in advance.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:16 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #29 from Teguh DC <dheche(a)songolimo.net> 2008-11-07 22:16:54 ---
Chris, forgot to ask, are you already test this driver with 64bit system too ?
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
10:02 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #30 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-11-07 23:02:35 ---
(In reply to comment #25)
branch created; assumed you wanted one for broadcom-wl as well, hence
I created
one ;-)
Thanks Thorsten. I imported and built broadcom-wl but seems you forgot to add
me to ACLs for wl-kmod:
**** Access denied: cnolan is not in ACL for rpms/wl-kmod/F-8
cvs commit: Pre-commit check failed
cvs [commit aborted]: correct above errors first!
cvs commit: saving log message in /tmp/cvsQ54cWs
;-)
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
8:03 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #31 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2008-11-08 09:03:00
---
(In reply to comment #30)
(In reply to comment #25)
> branch created; assumed you wanted one for broadcom-wl as well, hence I created
> one ;-)
Thanks Thorsten. I imported and built broadcom-wl but seems you forgot to add
me to ACLs for wl-kmod:
I did add the ACL rule, but there was stupid typo in it :-/ Sorry, fixed now
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
4:17 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #32 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-11-08 17:17:22 ---
(In reply to comment #31)
I did add the ACL rule, but there was stupid typo in it :-/ Sorry,
fixed now
Thanks!
Can't seem to build on F8 - is there something peculiar with F8 version of
kmodtool? It seems to incorrectly define "kernel_versions" and ultimately fails
to build
Build log here:
http://buildsys.rpmfusion.org/logs/fedora-8-rpmfusion_nonfree/1641-wl-kmo...
This looks wrong to me:
%define kernel_versions
2.6.26.6-49.fc8___%{_usrsrc}/kernels/2.6.26.6-49.fc8-%{_target_cpu}
2.6.26.6-49.fc8PAE___%{_usrsrc}/kernels/2.6.26.6-49.fc8PAE-%{_target_cpu}
Chris
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
6 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #33 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-11-08 19:00:19 ---
Fixed the problem in spec file and committed the changes.
Build for F-8 and F-9 successfully completed. Job ID's 1644 and 1645.
C
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
10:25 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #34 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2008-12-23 11:25:12 ---
Few things to add here:
1) I want to update the driver to 5.10.27.11 - I have all the sources ready and
tested locally but I can't get access to the CVS server any more: keep getting
Permission denied errors. I posted to the mailing list and Xavier tried helping
but I still can't get access.
2) I did open a bug report about the PAE kernel but it seems it was deleted (at
least I can't find it). There does appear to be some kind of difficulty with
this module and the PAE kernel - I don't know if it is specific to this kmod or
a problem with kmodtool but here is the info I have:
a) Installing on a PAE kernel wants to pull in the non-PAE kernel as a
dependency
b) Installing on a PAE kernel it doesn't actually seem to install the
"wl.ko"
module into the PAE kernel modules path so it isn't available through modprobe.
Best
Chris
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
9:27 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
Jarod Wilson <jarod(a)wilsonet.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jarod(a)wilsonet.com
--- Comment #35 from Jarod Wilson <jarod(a)wilsonet.com> 2008-12-23 22:27:29 ---
No clue what's up with cvs, but I can check stuff in for you if you like, just
so we can get it out there ASAP.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
11:20 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #36 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2008-12-26 12:20:25
---
(In reply to comment #34)
Few things to add here:
1) I want to update the driver to 5.10.27.11 - I have all the sources ready and
tested locally but I can't get access to the CVS server any more: keep getting
Permission denied errors. I posted to the mailing list and Xavier tried helping
but I still can't get access.
ping me on IRC, I'll try to help
2) I did open a bug report about the PAE kernel but it seems it was
deleted (at
least I can't find it). There does appear to be some kind of difficulty with
this module and the PAE kernel - I don't know if it is specific to this kmod or
a problem with kmodtool but here is the info I have:
a) Installing on a PAE kernel wants to pull in the non-PAE kernel as a
dependency
You have to install kmod-wl-PAE if you run a PAE kernel
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
4:54 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
--- Comment #37 from Chris Nolan <chris(a)cenolan.com> 2009-01-04 17:54:07 ---
(In reply to comment #36)
You have to install kmod-wl-PAE if you run a PAE kernel
But if one installs package "broadcom-wl" when running a PAE kernel it
doesn't
appear to automatically pull in kmod-wl-PAE. I don't know if this is a feature
or a bug, but it is leading to some confusion for those running PAE kernels.
On another note:
I just updated all the packages to 5.10.27.12 and then found that I needed a 1
line patch for F-8 to make it build. Do I need to re-do all the other branches
to include this patch (and thus keep all branches consistent) or since F-8 is
EOL in like 3 days and the patch isn't required in newer branches can I just
leave the patch out of the other branches? (it would only be removed anyway at
a later date since it isn't required) Hope that made sense...?
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
6:13 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 96] Review request: broadcom wireless kmod (wl-kmod)
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #38 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> 2009-01-04 19:13:57
---
(In reply to comment #37)
(In reply to comment #36)
> You have to install kmod-wl-PAE if you run a PAE kernel
But if one installs package "broadcom-wl" when running a PAE kernel it
doesn't
appear to automatically pull in kmod-wl-PAE.
Correct. A yum-plugin would be needed to do that. Such a plugin does not exists
afaik
I don't know if this is a feature or a bug,
Not sure myself what the answer is
but it is leading to some confusion for those running PAE kernels.
The world is not perfect. Yes, a yum plugin that would fix this would be great,
but I never found the time to write one
I just updated all the packages to 5.10.27.12 and then found that I
needed a 1
line patch for F-8 to make it build. Do I need to re-do all the other branches
to include this patch (and thus keep all branches consistent) or since F-8 is
EOL in like 3 days and the patch isn't required in newer branches can I just
leave the patch out of the other branches? (it would only be removed anyway at
a later date since it isn't required) Hope that made sense...?
I'm not even sure that I understand the question. There is no reason or need
why the contents in each branch must be identical with the others. Just the
upgrade path needs to be sane (e.g. EVR in F8 needs to be lower than the one
fromF9 and later)
BTW, closing, this is fixed.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
5835
days inactive
5904
days old
rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
39 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
RPM Fusion Bugzilla