Return-path: Received: from bay0-omc3-s24.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.224]:13857 "EHLO bay0-omc3-s24.bay0.hotmail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751674AbXLLGcH convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2007 01:32:07 -0500 Message-ID: (sfid-20071212_063213_851933_665DD91E) From: Joachim Frieben To: Subject: RE: Misleading PCI id information on chipsets supported by ath5k Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 06:32:06 +0000 In-Reply-To: <59117.84.58.189.94.1197434396.squirrel@webmail.madwifi.org> References: <59117.84.58.189.94.1197434396.squirrel@webmail.madwifi.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 05:39:56 +0100 > Subject: Re: Misleading PCI id information on chipsets supported by ath5k > From: mrenzmann@madwifi.org > To: jfrieben@hotmail.com > CC: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org > ... > If at all, PCI IDs can be seen as evidence but should not be regarded > authoritative in terms of chipset identification. ath_info does a better > job here. > > Bye, Mike Sure, that's what I wrote in my last mail ".. either the PCI id is not an appropriate way to label whether a device is supported or not .." - which brings me back to my initial request to update the ath5k information page in order to account for this ambiguity. ~jf _________________________________________________________________ Importieren Sie ganz einfach Ihre E-Mail Adressen in den Messenger! http://messenger.live.de/community/neuekontakte_adressimport.html