netdev - Re: wireless extensions vs. 64-bit architectures

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 08 Mar 2007 23:36:12 +0100
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	jt@....hp.com
Cc:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	Jouni Malinen <jkm@...icescape.com>,
	Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>,
	Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: wireless extensions vs. 64-bit architectures

On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 14:30 -0800, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:

> 	Then, I assume that the powerpc64 must be using a magic
> version of iwconfig to configure wireless interfaces, because I only
> ever got one other bug report on the issue. They should have sent the
> patch to Johannes, because now I know about their unauthorised version
> of iwconfig.

There probably aren't many powerpc64 users that actually use wireless on
it since, well, most such machines are pretty stationary and
well-equipped with gigabit ethernet :)

May I ask who this was though? Some distro?

johannes

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (191 bytes)