Slashdot Mirror
State of WLAN Support on Linux?
ntropic asks: "I/ve recently bought a Belkin 802.11G USB adapter and was dismayed to find, after a few hours of struggling with it, that there seems to be no one who has managed to get it working under Linux. During the search for clues, it seemed that sum total of Linux support for wireless networking are the linux-wlan project, and the linuxant wrappers for Windows drivers. The former seems to support only Prism chipsets while the latter is a commercial solution, albeit quite an inexpensive one. Is that all, or are there better sources for wireless networking support?"
http://ndiswrapper.sourceforge.net/ Lets you use original Windows drivers on linux. Not pretty, but it works pretty well. Meanwhile, blame manufacturers.
What about ndiswrapper? Have you tried that yet? Some distros have ndiswrapper built/shipped with them. (SUSE does, IIRC) You'll have particular issues with wireless cards that use Broadcom chipsets - Broadcom won't release info about the chipset to any open-source groups. However, if you can get your hands on and can compile ndiswrapper for your machine, it should work well. Ndiswrapper has come a long way since I first tried it, and it's the only way I can use the Broadcom AirFoce 54g on my Acer laptop.
I've used the Linuxant software in the past when ndiswrapper failed me. The support was excellent and they support almost any wireless device you can think of. $20 isn't bad either, for a lifetime license....
As far as the "state of WLAN support", blame the people who build the chipsets (Broadcom, et al) and market forces. If they were willing to either open up the necessary information to linux developers or have their own coders write drivers for linux we'd not have this problem. Of course, if Linux had greater marketshare, we'd probably see more linux drivers as well. This argument goes for most hardware and linux in general, though....
My MythTV HowTo
Manufacturer won't release information on hardware. So the only way to find out how to interface with it is to reverse engineer the windows driver, a tedious enterprise. If it's really an issue, return the product and tell the retailer why it is being returned. Enough people doing that, the manfacturer will have to bend if it wants the business.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Notice that vendors are not being asked to modify the drivers in each release. We're asking them to release open source drivers - "we" will do the neccesary job to integrate them and maintain them in the kernel. Hell, release drivers even if they're against a 2.4 kernel, people will port them to 2.6, it won't be easy but it's certainly easier than reverse engineering or writing the driver from scratch (unless the drivers is a complete crap)
So the "unstable API" has not sense. By the way, notice that the kernel API _is_ stable: for a single version. No, this is not a joke: The new development model implies that EVERY kernel release is a mini-development kernel which can be stabilized in ~2 months. In other words, make progress slowly, gradually, instead of big development releases which are a pain to manage and stabilize, because there're thousand of new things instead of just a couple: It's much easier to find bugs when there're few important changes. Also the new kernel development model forces people to test things and develop production-ready code after testing it in the -mm tree, in a typical development model people tends to care less about making things stable until the "stabilization period" starts. Call me stupid, but I like this model.
...something friendly and easy to browse when shopping for hardware. Why distro vendors are not collaborating on maintaining an HCL site is a mystery to me, as it would be a powerful tool in persuading HW vendors to offer support.
/rewarding/ manufacturers that don't support Linux.
There is one at Linuxdevices.org, but its just a glorified messaging board and mostly out of date anyway.
I also find it unsettling that Linux users keep buying peripherals without checking compatability first, and end up
The real weak spots in Linux drivers are for dialup modems and Wifi cards. And Bluetooth adapters. Oh and Intel video is still broken.
Soundcard support is pretty decent, until you realize the OS often implicitly locks-out multiple apps from outputting audio... so uses involving alerts and alarms (timers, calendars, IMs, softphones, etc.) cannot be relied upon. Obviously this is also an obsctruction for musicians and DJs. But ya gotta maintain compatability with 1991 apps so the brokenness stays.
No one below the GTK+/Qt layer is paying attention to desktop use-cases, and those GUI developers are left helpless on many issues because of it. Otherwise I would not have to write the above paragraph about audio. Also, there would be stable ABIs for drivers and applications (which only removes the freedom to change the architechture BETWEEN major OS releases).
As for NDISwrapper... Thank you Microsoft, for providing a stable ABI that allows me to use my USB Wifi card on Linux!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It seems to me that there is confusion about *source* compatibility and *binary* compatibility.
Source compatibility of Linux has been pretty good, with changes only occurring when Linus waves his hand on an even numbered release (for the most part.)
Binary compatibility with Linux is *horrible*. Structures change all the time. Pretty much you need to recompile your drivers even when a *patch* to the kernel is made. Yech!
Open Source developers usually don't care, and Linus has made some pretty vocal arguments against having anything *but* Open Source in the kernel.
Now folks complain when certain hardware developers don't release *open source* drivers. Well, let me tell you, a lot of times there is a lot of proprietary information in those drivers, and the vendors have a vested interest in keeping the drivers closed. In the specific case of WLAN mentioned here, they might even be legally obligated to stick with binary drivers (e.g. due to FCC regulations about software radios.)
Well, the answer to getting better hardware support is quite simple, but it requires the Linux people to change their way of thinking. That is that you need to support a robust kernel API, that provides support for binary compatibility. Its not hard to do -- Solaris has had it for many years. I can have a single source, single binary, that works across a decade or so of Solaris releases without any problem at all, as long as I stick to the documented DDI. Sun has even provided compliance tests to prove this (DDICT).
How you get to binary compatibility involves declaring certain structures off limit for direct access (use accessor routines), stabilizing at least parts of others, and possibly adding versioning interfaces in key places.
Easy to do? Yes, not trivial, but not exactly hard either. Will it happen? Not likely, as long as the GPL fanboys/fangirls insist that binary device drivers are evil.
Now for WLAN stuff, you have another problem, which is supporting userland tools. There are a variety of userland tools for WLAN configuration on Linux, and frankly they were all horrible the last time I checked. Any company that wants to support "Linux" (as opposed to "RedHat 5.2" or somesuch) is going to have to either test a wide range of tools, or supply their own. In this case, choice really has amounted to duplication of effort, and it would be far better to have a single, robust, friendly toolset than the half-dozen odd pieces of junk we have today.
Well, I'm glad somebody finally came out and said it. That's been my experience also.
I have a HP Workstation with what I thought was a Linux-compatible WL PCI card in it, of course when I got the card home and out of the box, I read the small print -- this was the "new and improved" version 3, and only versions 1 and 2 were compatible with native Linux drivers.
So I'm stuck using ndiswrapper. Which does work, just not very well or conveniently. Changing from one network to another is a 10-minute process involving multiple "coffee breaks" (click on something, wait several minutes) and a full reboot. That's right, a complete reboot -- on a system which otherwise never, ever gets rebooted. I'm just glad it's not a laptop, at least as a desktop this setup is usable, since the network's SSID never changes.
To say that Linux wireless is a little "rough around the edges" (this seems to be the party line on a lot of forums) is a bit of an understatement, in my opinion. It's terrible, and while I do blame the manufacturers for producing undocumented products, its the users who end up holding the bag and Linux that ends up looking bad.
Here's my thought for a 'solution,' or at least a stopgap: the problem isn't that Linux-compatible WL cards don't exist, it's that they're very hard to find and poorly marked. (Witness my "v3" problem.) What somebody with a lot of money needs to do, either an enterprising individual or an organization, is find a manufacturer that makes a well-supported WL card (one that uses a Prism chipset, probably) and contract to buy a production run of them in OEM packaging. Call them whatever you want, toss them in a white box with a driver CD, and sell them for $20 more than they cost.
The community doesn't need support for every brand and flavor and revision and chipset of WL card out there. What we need is one card that's available for more than six months that's easy to get ahold of and actually works. The Linux hardware review sites do part of this, but they don't really let you actually buy the part -- you're stuck trying to find a source for the correct version/revision card yourself, and SOL if you can't find it (as is the case with many of the older "known good" Prism cards).
As I've said in other posts, look at the other major non-Windows platform and the reputation it has for wireless connectivity -- the Mac. Macs only have ONE TYPE of wireless card. They avoid the manufacturer issue altogether by just OEMing one or two chipsets, selling it at a ridiculous premium, and building the driver support into the OS. And it works beautifully; I've yet to find a Mac user who doesn't think that their Airport card wasn't worth the $90 they spent on it. (Okay except for some hackers who want the ability to grab raw frames...)
We can blame the manufacturers all we want, but it's obvious that as a group they're going to ignore the Linux platform. However, there's a demand for Linux wireless cards that actually work without hassle or confusion, and they do exist, they're just hard to find. Somebody with the right amount of capital and connections needs to match the two up.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."