At what point did the Linux kernel start supporting wireless?

Hello from the Eighth Doctor
I've got an older laptop here. He's happily running Slackware 8.0 which happens to
use the 2.2.19 kernel. The last time I built a custom kernel for a machine running that
release I noted that it had the wireless networking device modules in its lists.

That being said I am wondering as to when the kernel started supporting wireless?
The later or newer if you prefer releases, of Slackware contain some special tools
for Wireless, I plan on backporting them to the release running on the laptop, I just
need some sense of direction here.
---
Gregg drwho8 atsign att dot net
"This signature is presently on vacation. It will reply to your e-mail sometime in the
23C."

In the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
<5Fgze.397972$(E-Mail Removed)>,
The Eighth Doctor wrote:

>I've got an older laptop here. He's happily running Slackware 8.0 which
>happens to use the 2.2.19 kernel. The last time I built a custom kernel
>for a machine running that release I noted that it had the wireless
>networking device modules in its lists.

I suppose you have your reasons for running a kernel that old. The "current"
2.2.x kernel is 2.2.26 (released 2/25/2004), and 2.2.27-rc2 was released
in January of this year.

>That being said I am wondering as to when the kernel started supporting
>wireless?

-rw-rw-r-- 1 gferg ldp 38891 Jul 31 2002 Wireless-HOWTO
-rw-rw-r-- 1 gferg ldp 38915 Jun 3 2004 Wireless-Link-sys-WPC11
-rw-rw-r-- 1 gferg ldp 8611 Aug 9 2004 Wireless-Sync-HOWTO

>The later or newer if you prefer releases, of Slackware contain some
>special tools for Wireless, I plan on backporting them to the release
>running on the laptop, I just need some sense of direction here.

ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/

Unfortunetly, there are few change logs as separate files for the 2.2.x
kernels. The ChangeLog-2.4.* files are available in the 2.4 directory.
For the 2.6.x kernel, only 2.6.1 did NOT mention wireless.

[compton ~]$ grep -il wireless kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.* | column
kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.13 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.21 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.26
kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.18 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.22 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.28
kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.19 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.23 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.30
kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.20 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.25
[compton ~]$ grep -il wireless kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.* | column
kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.0 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.2 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.6
kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.10 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.3 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.7
kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.11 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.4 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.8
kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.12 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.5 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.9
[compton ~]$

Old guy

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
>
>In the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
><5Fgze.397972$(E-Mail Removed)>,
>The Eighth Doctor wrote:
>
>>I've got an older laptop here. He's happily running Slackware 8.0 which
>>happens to use the 2.2.19 kernel. The last time I built a custom kernel
>>for a machine running that release I noted that it had the wireless
>>networking device modules in its lists.
>
>I suppose you have your reasons for running a kernel that old. The "current"
>2.2.x kernel is 2.2.26 (released 2/25/2004), and 2.2.27-rc2 was released
>in January of this year.
>
>>That being said I am wondering as to when the kernel started supporting
>>wireless?
>
>-rw-rw-r-- 1 gferg ldp 38891 Jul 31 2002 Wireless-HOWTO
>-rw-rw-r-- 1 gferg ldp 38915 Jun 3 2004 Wireless-Link-sys-WPC11
>-rw-rw-r-- 1 gferg ldp 8611 Aug 9 2004 Wireless-Sync-HOWTO
>
>>The later or newer if you prefer releases, of Slackware contain some
>>special tools for Wireless, I plan on backporting them to the release
>>running on the laptop, I just need some sense of direction here.
>
>ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/
>
>Unfortunetly, there are few change logs as separate files for the 2.2.x
>kernels. The ChangeLog-2.4.* files are available in the 2.4 directory.
>For the 2.6.x kernel, only 2.6.1 did NOT mention wireless.
>
>[compton ~]$ grep -il wireless kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.* | column
>kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.13 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.21 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.26
>kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.18 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.22 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.28
>kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.19 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.23 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.30
>kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.20 kernel/ChangeLog-2.4.25
>[compton ~]$ grep -il wireless kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.* | column
>kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.0 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.2 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.6
>kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.10 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.3 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.7
>kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.11 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.4 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.8
>kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.12 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.5 kernel/ChangeLog-2.6.9
>[compton ~]$
>
> Old guy
Hello from the Eighth Doctor
Actually yes. The laptop is old enough to vote, and currently resources, namely
money, are short, as they are this time of year. I think there is support for a newer
release of the PCMCICA-CS routines however, so I might be able to squeeze that
in. I have not tried anything from Slackware 9.1 or 10.0, or 10.1 on it as it happens.
--
Gregg drwho8 atsign att dot net

In the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
<7iUze.404147$(E-Mail Removed)>,
The Eighth Doctor wrote:

>Actually yes. The laptop is old enough to vote, and currently resources,
>namely money, are short, as they are this time of year.

This is unusual? ;-)

>I think there is support for a newer release of the PCMCICA-CS routines
>however, so I might be able to squeeze that in. I have not tried anything
>from Slackware 9.1 or 10.0, or 10.1 on it as it happens.

Minor problem - Slack 8.0 was the last version to use the 2.2.x kernel,
and the glibc-2.2 libraries. Slack 9.0 switched to glibc-2.3.1

Assuming the lap top has enough horses (NO distribution has ever retained
the same footprint - they ALL bloat up), it would probably be easier to
switch to a more modern distribution. See DistroWatch.com who has GPL
distributions - last I noticed Slack 10.1 GPL was under US$8, and at least
five others were under US$2.

Old guy

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
>
>In the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
><7iUze.404147$(E-Mail Removed)>,
>The Eighth Doctor wrote:
>
>>Actually yes. The laptop is old enough to vote, and currently resources,
>>namely money, are short, as they are this time of year.
>
>This is unusual? ;-)
>
>>I think there is support for a newer release of the PCMCICA-CS routines
>>however, so I might be able to squeeze that in. I have not tried anything
>>from Slackware 9.1 or 10.0, or 10.1 on it as it happens.
>
>Minor problem - Slack 8.0 was the last version to use the 2.2.x kernel,
>and the glibc-2.2 libraries. Slack 9.0 switched to glibc-2.3.1
>
>Assuming the lap top has enough horses (NO distribution has ever retained
>the same footprint - they ALL bloat up), it would probably be easier to
>switch to a more modern distribution. See DistroWatch.com who has GPL
>distributions - last I noticed Slack 10.1 GPL was under US$8, and at least
>five others were under US$2.
>
> Old guy
Hello from the Eighth Doctor
It also happens that there are some problems insisting upon my continued use of the
8.0 version of the distribution. I have decided to port the wireless tools that started
to arrive with 8.1 back to my laptop's targeted distribution. On the laptop as it
happens.
--
Gregg drwho8 atsign att dot net

Moe Trin wrote:
> In the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
> <7iUze.404147$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> The Eighth Doctor wrote:
>
>
>>Actually yes. The laptop is old enough to vote, and currently resources,
>>namely money, are short, as they are this time of year.
>
>
> This is unusual? ;-)
>
>
>>I think there is support for a newer release of the PCMCICA-CS routines
>>however, so I might be able to squeeze that in. I have not tried anything
>
>>from Slackware 9.1 or 10.0, or 10.1 on it as it happens.
>
> Minor problem - Slack 8.0 was the last version to use the 2.2.x kernel,
> and the glibc-2.2 libraries. Slack 9.0 switched to glibc-2.3.1
>
> Assuming the lap top has enough horses (NO distribution has ever retained
> the same footprint - they ALL bloat up), it would probably be easier to
> switch to a more modern distribution. See DistroWatch.com who has GPL
> distributions - last I noticed Slack 10.1 GPL was under US$8, and at least
> five others were under US$2.

Good source. I also run a very old Slack on a laptop, mainly because
it's the most recent thing for which someone else took the trouble to
make a floppy distribution. No CD, no CD port, no CD support in BIOS,
modern kernels don't fit on floppy, etc, etc, etc.

If I had a better reason that "just to prove I can" to do an install, I
would, probably a very bare FC4, and NFS mount the rest of the software.
There's the problem of suspend/resume as well, the 2.6 kernel supports
suspend, but I have never found any machine I owned which would resume.
All of the laptops resume just fine with a 2.4 kernel and APM.

--
bill davidsen
SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com

In the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in article
<URpKe.1115$(E-Mail Removed)> , Bill Davidsen wrote:

>Moe Trin wrote:
>> See DistroWatch.com who has GPL distributions - last I noticed Slack
>> 10.1 GPL was under US$8, and at least five others were under US$2.
>
>Good source. I also run a very old Slack on a laptop, mainly because
>it's the most recent thing for which someone else took the trouble to
>make a floppy distribution. No CD, no CD port, no CD support in BIOS,
>modern kernels don't fit on floppy, etc, etc, etc.

Ethernet? Or at least some form of network connection?

>If I had a better reason that "just to prove I can" to do an install, I
>would, probably a very bare FC4, and NFS mount the rest of the software.

Paraphrased from the RELEASE-NOTES file from Fedora Core 4:

--------------
CPU 200 MHz Pentium for text, 400 MHz P-II for GUI
RAM x86 64 Mb for text-mode, 192 Mb for GUI, 256MB Recommended for GUI
x86_64 128 Mb for text-mode, 256 Mb for GUI, 512 MB Recommended for GUI
HD x86 Min 620MB, Server, 1.1GB, "Personal Desktop" 2.3GB, Workstation
3.0 GB, everything 6.9GB. (90 to 175 MB ADDITIONAL needed during install)
x86_64 Min 900MB, Server, 1.5GB, "Personal Desktop" 2.7GB, Workstation
3.4 GB, everything 7.5GB. (90 to 175 MB ADDITIONAL needed during install)
--------------

I've seen it done - our base install package starts with a floppy based
system somewhat similar to TomsRtBt, but which knows about ext3, a huge
script, and a network cable. Probably took several weeks in development,
but they just boot the floppy, configured a couple of variables like IP
address and hostname, and start the script. Half an hour later, you have
our customised install, ready for delivery to the user.

I've still got one 386 lap doggy at home with a whomping 8 Megs of RAM (no
X), and a 520 Meg drive. I don't want to even think what I'm going to do
with it when I need to update. Right now, it's mainly used as a terminal
and network troubleshooting box. There's another with a 213 Meg drive being
used as the firewall.

Old guy