On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Chuck Hast wrote:
> On 8/7/06, Eben King <eben01@verizon.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Chuck Hast wrote:
>>
>> > On 8/7/06, Eben King <eben01@verizon.net> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Chuck Hast wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > RF-mobile:/ # uname -r
>> >> > 2.6.16.13-4-default
>> >>
>> >> OK, you have a modified-by-your-distro kernel. If you didn't configure
>> >> and compile your kernel, someone else did. The only other person
>> >> (presumably) is your distro maintainer.
>> >>
>> >> > RF-mobile:/ # find /usr/src/linux-`uname -r` -name \*.[ch] | xargs grep '"wlan"'
>> >> > find: /usr/src/linux-2.6.16.13-4-default: No such file or directory
>> >>
>> >> The kernel source isn't installed to /usr/src/linux-2.6.16.13-4-default
>> ,
>> >> so find can't look there.
>> >>
>> >> What type of NICs are they? Are they using the kernel drivers, or
>> >> something like ndiswrapper?
>> >
>> > This is the funny part, the laptop (ibm T42) has drivers for the internal
>> > wifi card, and they load up just fine, it is the one that calls the wifi
>> > nic eth1 vice wlan something. My desktop which uses a PCI wireless card
>> > with the broad- com chips uses ndiswrapper, that one comes up as wlan0...
>> > The ibm uses a intel chipset.
>>
>> Hypothesis: wireless cards which get their drivers from ndiswrapper will get
>> the device "wlanX"
>>
>> Supporting evidence: your two machines, and my laptop
>>
>> > I guess I could install the kernel source, I am sure it is on the DVD
>> > somewhere. Just seems strange that on one machine the wireless piece is
>> > a eth device and on another one using the same OS it is a wlan
>> > device... Perhaps I am just picking nits here but it just does not look
>> > right...
>>
>> Probably easier would be to make the appropriate links and edits, without
>> recompiling squat. Actually easiest would be "deal with it", but that's
>> not going to happen.
>>
>> I swear modules.conf used to have an "alias eth0 foo" statement, but I
>> can't find it now.
>>
> OK, you are seeing the same thing,
Actually I'm not, but then I'm not using ndiswrapper either. It's just that
those three machines fit the pattern of "ndiswrapper -> wlan, kernel ->
eth". If someone comes up with a machine which *doesn't* fit that pattern,
then that hypothesis is out the window.
> sounds like it is a habit then. Just looks messy, I guess that is the
> price we pay for not having to deal with some of the stuff that you get
> with windows, like viruses, worms and other stupidity. At least it is more
> cosmetic.
Well, if it is ndiswrapper that chooses the interface to be "wlanX", you
could edit the source and change it to whatever you want.
> I guess the fix is a re-compile,
Maybe of ndiswrapper only.
> I was thinking that modules used to have the alias thing too.
Maybe that was under 2.4.
-- -eben QebWenE01R@vTerYizUonI.nOetP http://royalty.no-ip.org:81 An ASCII character walks into a bar and orders a double. "Having a bad day?" asks the barman. "Yeah, I have a parity error," replies the ASCII chrcter. The barman says, "Yeah, I thought you looked a bit off." - Skud ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 15:50:58 EDT