Return-path: Received: from mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net ([204.127.131.117]:61187 "EHLO mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750952AbZALPFZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:05:25 -0500 Message-ID: <496B5C2D.4030607@lwfinger.net> (sfid-20090112_160528_923319_7802EE29) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:05:17 -0600 From: Larry Finger MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jayant Sane CC: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Newbie question on 2.6.28-rc8-wl References: <496A27FA.5030508@lwfinger.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jayant Sane wrote: > > Thank you. > > Again pardon my ignorance here.. > > It seems that I can either get 2.6.28-wl or 2.6.28-rc8 per your suggestions below but not 2.6.28-rc8-wl > > And I know it is possible to have the kernel version reported as 2.6.28-rc8-wl. How can I get that? The -wl part comes from the presence of a file named "localversion-wireless" in the wireless-testing directory. This file has one line with the contents of that line being "-wl" (without the quotation marks, or course). If you are compiling this particular kernel to get some wireless driver, then 2.6.28-wl is likely to be better than 2.6.28-rc8-wl. Please elaborate your reason for being told to get the -rc8 variant. Larry