| 1 |
Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
..... farrrrr tooooo long............. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Stroller. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
In summary and simple conclusion, yes you are wrong. So that makes 2 out |
| 10 |
of the 4 or 5 active Mobile herd devs who say you're wrong. brix is 100% |
| 11 |
correct. Let me give you an explaination.... |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
"The firmware itself does not depend on wireless-tools for operation. |
| 15 |
DEPEND/RDEPEND/PDEPEND in ebuilds are not for what you might |
| 16 |
want to use along with the package in question - it is for technical |
| 17 |
dependencies such as libraries and utilities." |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
There ya go. Explained. In fact, you actually explained the logical |
| 20 |
reason in your e-mail, surprised you didn't notice it. But I'll |
| 21 |
highlight it for you. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
acx100 and rt2500 contain drivers. prism54 is a driver. ipw2200 is a |
| 24 |
driver. They depend on wireless-tools. The firmware, which in 2 of these |
| 25 |
cases are in seperate packages, do not depend on wireless-tools. And for |
| 26 |
a last example which I just thought of... ndiswrapper acts the sameway. |
| 27 |
Considering the Windows drivers are more of a "firmware" and ndiswrapper |
| 28 |
is the driver. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Doug Goldstein <cardoe@g.o> |
| 32 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~cardoe/ |
Archives