https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844211
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844211#c5
Volker Kuhlmann changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEEDINFO |NEW
InfoProvider|volker3204@paradise.net.nz |
--- Comment #5 from Volker Kuhlmann 2013-12-02 15:49:00 NZDT ---
I realise what the issues around packman are. Note that this bug is not about
adding packman to the repo list, it is about abysmal support of any kind for
users forced to use this hardware in their laptops (which works robustly btw,
once the wl module is installed).
Please re-read comment #1 carefully. The problems are:
hwinfo --wlan is completely useless. Zero bytes output. I would expect it to
tell me that the wl driver suports this chip, even if it does not offer to
install the driver.
yast is equally useless, and there I definitely would expect better. I noted in
previous comments what the Linux options for this broadcom chip are.
Essentially, I am expecting yast to tell me the same thing. If it then tells me
"sorry no OSS driver that can be automatically installed" fine, no problem, I
can start looking. If it tells me "suggested action: install wl kernel module
in package broadcom-wl from third-party repo" that would be brilliant. However
yast appears to be doing something, while in actual fact it says absoluely
nothing and does absolutely nothing - it only pretends to.
Addressing this bad user experience is the purpose of this bug report.
Yes lspci is the only piece of software that says anything useful at all,
however having to search the Internet for chip numbers and Linux drivers is
sub-optimal for user-friendly Linux distros! In general, if there is no OSS
driver I expect a distro to tell me what proprietory drivers there are, if
there are any, and what their names are. I don't expect them to be installed if
that is not possible, as in the case of packman.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.