Return-path: Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.247]:21768 "EHLO an-out-0708.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753158AbYBLHxp (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2008 02:53:45 -0500 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id d31so1210854and.103 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 23:53:42 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <40f31dec0802112353v1c9ba229j796a44ff60cf5fc8@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20080212_075348_235338_EAFAEC2F) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 09:53:42 +0200 From: "Nick Kossifidis" To: "Dan Williams" Subject: Re: madwifi is not fully open source Cc: "Budhee Jamaich" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1202770112.6824.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 References: <57314e840802111427i7e8d00capbe430727faff78a1@mail.gmail.com> <1202770112.6824.35.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > Not opening the RF regulatory code is the solution that Atheros took. I > can't (off the top of my head) think of any other vendor who has done > this. Other vendors are much more open-source friendly while still > following what they believe is a sufficient interpretation of the > regulations. > There are also vendors that haven't even provided any driver for linux/bsd. At least Atheros provided us with a driver that worked (and it worked pretty well/helped on net80211 stack etc) and on the early days they even provided support on the lists. Let's be more easy on them, they also did what their lawyers told them ;-) -- GPG ID: 0xD21DB2DB As you read this post global entropy rises. Have Fun ;-) Nick