Re: [Gnewsense-dev] r8169 module is disabled

[Marek Buras]

Sam Geeraerts <address@hidden> writes:
> Both are a lot of work, but the second is more work than the first. Our
> current implementation is imperfect (e.g. r8169 doesn't work), but I
> don't see the advantage of choosing the second option.
>

I understand and I don't even find current imlementation that
inconvenient (both have their drawbacks). Just asked to make sure if
there is other (maybe better/easier) way of doing things.

Anyway I've tested that kernel built the way described earlier and I
consider RTL8169 support stable. I've looked at r8169.c to make sure it
really doesn't contain any code that tries to load non free firmware and
everything is "pure" there. So, is it okay to include those patches and
update the package to 46gnewsense2? Or maybe there is more work to do
and you need help with something?

Happy hacking!
-- 
Marek Buras
cyfr0n (at) go2.pl