Pulled this off the Hardware Information in YaST on my Suse laptop.
Hope it helps because every time I've tried to do the ndiswrapper thing under Suse it has really messed up the setup. I'd really like to get it working on this IBM 600X.
Broadcom AirStation G54 54 Mbps CardBus WLI-CB-G54A
BCM4306
Device Identifier (Spec): 66340
Device Identifier: 82720
Model: Melco BCM4306 802.11b/g Wireless LAN Controller
SubVendor: Melco Inc
SubVendor Identifier: 69972
Vendor: Broadcom
Thanks! doc
Buffalo G54 Specs for Puppy Wireless pup
Buffalo G54 lspci
Is this what is needed?bladehunter wrote:can you run lspci
I really need the pci-id to make things happen
# lspci -n
0:0.0 8086:7190 (rev 03)
0:1.0 8086:7191 (rev 03)
0:2.0 104c:ac1b (rev 03)
0:2.1 104c:ac1b (rev 03)
0:3.0 11c1:0449 (rev 01)
0:6.0 1013:6003 (rev 01)
0:7.0 8086:7110 (rev 02)
0:7.1 8086:7111 (rev 01)
0:7.2 8086:7112 (rev 01)
0:7.3 8086:7113 (rev 03)
1:0.0 10c8:0006
- BlackAdder
- Posts: 385
- Joined: Sun 22 May 2005, 23:29
Perhaps the IBM is not seeing it for some reason?BlackAdder wrote:That's odd. The Buffalo adapter with that description (WLI-CB-G54A) is listed on the ndiswrapper site as having a Broadcom chipset and VID:PID of 14e4:4320, but it does not show on the list provided by edoc.
I will try again to get the IBM ThinkPad app runing that allows access to the BIOS better than the stock dumbed-down BIO interface and see if there is something I can tweak to get at the wireless.
I have used the pcmcia/pccard/cardbus port with a wired nic so I know that the port is working.
doc
Here is a new lspci -n I noticed that my prior post appeared to cut off the last line or two. Since I have no idea how to interpret the output I don't know what is meaningful and what is not.edoc wrote:docBlackAdder wrote:That's odd. The Buffalo adapter with that description (WLI-CB-G54A) is listed on the ndiswrapper site as having a Broadcom chipset and VID:PID of 14e4:4320, but it does not show on the list provided by edoc.
# lspci -n
0:0.0 8086:7190 (rev 03)
0:1.0 8086:7191 (rev 03)
0:2.0 104c:ac1b (rev 03)
0:2.1 104c:ac1b (rev 03)
0:3.0 11c1:0449 (rev 01)
0:6.0 1013:6003 (rev 01)
0:7.0 8086:7110 (rev 02)
0:7.1 8086:7111 (rev 01)
0:7.2 8086:7112 (rev 01)
0:7.3 8086:7113 (rev 03)
1:0.0 10c8:0006
2:0.0 14e4:4320 (rev 02)
#
doc
- BlackAdder
- Posts: 385
- Joined: Sun 22 May 2005, 23:29
Okay doc. The last line shows
Bladehunter is brewing another of his magic potions - in this case an updated wifi dot pup. Your adapter should be supported by that. If you can be patient for a few days he might let you peek under the covers.
Which Puppy version are you running?
which confirms the type of adapter and the chipset (engine) that it uses.2:0.0 14e4:4320 (rev 02)
Bladehunter is brewing another of his magic potions - in this case an updated wifi dot pup. Your adapter should be supported by that. If you can be patient for a few days he might let you peek under the covers.
Which Puppy version are you running?
The standard version 1.0.4 at the moment but as I am new I am not locked in. Should I run a different version so as to maximize the supported wireless devices?BlackAdder wrote:Okay doc. The last line showswhich confirms the type of adapter and the chipset (engine) that it uses.2:0.0 14e4:4320 (rev 02)
Bladehunter is brewing another of his magic potions - in this case an updated wifi dot pup. Your adapter should be supported by that. If you can be patient for a few days he might let you peek under the covers.
Which Puppy version are you running?
Is there anything lost if I go with something other than the standard version even as I gain wireless support?
Does the wireless support bloat the standard version and that is why it is not included?
Cannot the wireless support be a pupget or dotpup rather than a different version?
Sorry for all of the questions ... I am in learning-mode big time!
BTW: There is a need for something like Puppy to address the interest of Amateur Radio operatorsin Linux. Once I get a handle on things I think I will look into a bunch of Ham apps in dotpup format and develop a small Web site that explains it all. Many Hams use older hardware, like things that are simple and free, and are a curious lot. The commercial Linux apps are just to complicated and bulky to catch on with them.
Thanks! doc
- BlackAdder
- Posts: 385
- Joined: Sun 22 May 2005, 23:29
Your adapter should be supported by the wifi dot pup that bladehunter is cooking up. It is based on ndiswrapper, which wraps Linux code around the manufacturers' drivers. I don't think there is support for your adapter in the kernel or modules already included with Puppy. There was an earlier wifi dot pup in beta, but it related to Puppy version 1.0.3 or earlier.Is there anything lost if I go with something other than the standard version even as I gain wireless support?
Does the wireless support bloat the standard version and that is why it is not included?
The ndiswrapper dot pup should be less than 16MB including a number of drivers.
Yes, it will be a dot pup. The whole wifi support situation for Linux (not just Puppy) is complicated by the fact that there are a number of chipset makers, and not all of them are prepared to reveal technical data to Linux programmers There are also several different groups working on wifi, and their approaches differ. If Puppy tried to include support for a large spectum of adapter types there certainly would be "bloat".Cannot the wireless support be a pupget or dotpup rather than a different version?
There certainly has been mention of Ham Radio in the past. It may have been in the "old" forum.BTW: There is a need for something like Puppy to address the interest of Amateur Radio operatorsin Linux.
Hope that helps.