On Sunday 09 November 2003 22:05, Dave Jones wrote: > > (Eg none of the ones I tried had Bluetooth properly installed.) > > To the best of my knowledge, the bluetooth stuff we've shipped hasn't > deviated that much (if at all) from mainline. Having taken over the RHL9 > kernel 'after the fact' however, I could be mistaken. Fedora should be > pretty close to stock (unless there's dramatic changes in the -ac patch > its based on, which I don't recall seeing). Apologies for being a little rude, and thanks for your considerate reply. The kernel that came with RedHat-9.0 did not work with the bluez RPMs. However, I'm not complaining as it is perfectly possible that the standard 2.4.21 kernel did not work either. I only tried it after applying the Holtmann patches. I believe these were incorporated into later kernels. > If you're still having problems with the current Fedora kernel, please > bugzilla it, and I'll look into it. (Though the lack of bluetooth hardware > means I'll not be able to dig into too much -- read as: if it turns out > we're shipping stock code in regard to bluetooth the answer will likely > be "talk to upstream maintainer".) I haven't installed Fedora on my Bluetooth enabled laptop (Vaio Picturebook C1VFK) as this is rather a delicate device, having neither floppy nor CD. I've been waiting to see if anyone with one of these machines reports progress with Fedora. Actually I've read 3 or 4 postings from people with machines in this class who have had no problems with Fedora, so I guess I'll upgrade tomorrow. Incidentally, despite warnings I had no trouble upgrading from Fedora 0.94 (Test Release 2) to Fedora 1.0 on my desktop, and it seems to be running perfectly as far as I can see. Thanks for all your work. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail (<80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
