Michael Buesch wrote:

On Thursday 31 August 2006 02:57, Larry Finger wrote:

quoted

+#if WIRELESS_EXT > 20
+#define IW_ESSID_FIX	0
+#else
+#define IW_ESSID_FIX	1
+#endif

Eh, was this useless #if in the original patch I signed-off, too?
Because I want to revert my sign-off. :)
This #if is useless, because we always deal with only one single
WE version in the kernel. #if WIRELESS_EXT will always be true.
So remove this and also remove the other #if below.

Yes, it was. I saw this, but left it in because I cannot control the inclusion of the other patch
that brings the NET components up to WE-21, and it seemed that the behavior could be wrong if the
kernel were at WE-20. I'm quite certain that the patch will _NOT_ be included in 2.6.18 as it is
clearly not a bug fix. Once I see WE-21 in the kernel, I'll remove these #ifdef's and eliminate
IW_ESSID_FIX.

If I missed something, please let me know, and I'll resubmit the patch now.

John, have you merged, or do you plan to merge, "[PATCH 2.6.18] WE-21 support (core API)" into
wireless-2.6?

Larry