How to add ath9k driver from Busterpup to Xenial 32? (Solved)

[number77]

Hello
I have an AsusPC1015cx, Intel Atom N2600, 2gb ram with an Atheros 802.11n QualcommAR928s wifi card.
BusterPUP 8.0 has this driver and works well but I would like to add it to Xenial32 on this laptop. How could I do it.
Help appreciated.
Thanks
number77

[TC-21-32]

When I changed to Xenial 7.5 on my desk top I had to go looking for drivers also for my Atheros fired wifi card.
I found two .pets and they work good for me.

Xenialpup64 7.5 eufi iso on a CD. Cooler Master Elite model #? Old win7 machine. 4x AMD Phenom II x4 840 processor. 2 Gig RAM
Nvidia GeForce video. Azalia sound. ASUS M4A87TD legacy Motherboard.

[number77]

When I changed to Xenial 7.5 on my desk top I had to go looking for drivers also for my Atheros fired wifi card.
I found two .pets and they work good for me.

Xenialpup64 7.5 eufi iso on a CD. Cooler Master Elite model #? Old win7 machine. 4x AMD Phenom II x4 840 processor. 2 Gig RAM
Nvidia GeForce video. Azalia sound. ASUS M4A87TD legacy Motherboard.

Thanks alot TC-21-31
I will try these as soon as I can get Xenial32 running on it. I seem to have a UEFI problem as the Asus is not UEFI and Xenial is.

[number77]

When I changed to Xenial 7.5 on my desk top I had to go looking for drivers also for my Atheros fired wifi card.
I found two .pets and they work good for me.

Xenialpup64 7.5 eufi iso on a CD. Cooler Master Elite model #? Old win7 machine. 4x AMD Phenom II x4 840 processor. 2 Gig RAM
Nvidia GeForce video. Azalia sound. ASUS M4A87TD legacy Motherboard.

I did try both of these but neither worked. The pets did say they would show up in ulility but neither did show up anywhere.
Any ideas.

[TC-21-32]

Bummer. Those were the only tricks up my sleeve. I did some looking on the net and couldn't put my finger on anything.
I did find one more in my files, not sure what exactly it's for or if it didn't work for me. atheros_kernel_modules-4.4.95noPAE-xenial32.pet
Shoot, it's just a bit too large at 574 K to post. Sorry about that.

I'll ask for more experienced hands to help 77.

The only funny bit here is I'm running UEFI Xenial 7.5 on a Legacy board but it's a desktop..

[number77]

Solved the problem sort of. Tahr 6.0.5 has the ath9k driver as standard so I will use that.
Not used it for a while but better than Xenial on this old slow laptop.
Thanks for your help anyway.
number77

[bigpup]

If you have Xenialpup 7.5 using the 4.4.95 kernel.

Try installing this driver pet
https://archive.org/download/Puppy_Linu ... nial32.pet

Drivers are kernel specific and have to be in the kernel or compiled for the specific kernel.

[number77]

If you have Xenialpup 7.5 using the 4.4.95 kernel.

Try installing this driver pet
https://archive.org/download/Puppy_Linu ... nial32.pet

Drivers are kernel specific and have to be in the kernel or compiled for the specific kernel.

Thanks bigpup
It is on kernel 4.4.95 and it did work as soon as I rebooted.
Thanks again for your help.
number77

[mikewalsh]

@number77 :-

This is why I've long since come to the conclusion that it's only prudent to keep a selection of assorted kernels "on-hand".

If you use a particular kernel - it doesn't matter what the Puppy happens to be, as long as you know if it's 32-bit or 64-bit - and that kernel 'plays nice' with specific hardware on a given machine, why then it makes perfect sense to make a copy of it. Create a directory for kernels, somewhere safe; inside that create one for 32- and another for 64-bit, then inside those create a numbered directory as appropriate for each kernel release you wish to save. Then copy the vmlinuz and zdrv.sfs for that kernel inside.

It's a simple matter of renaming to suit if, as & when you DO perform a swap.

I run some of the newest Puppies on a 15-yr old Dell laptop. It makes no sense to use a bang-up-to-date kernel with 15-yr old hardware; with the best will in the world, and despite that the kernel team try to maintain hardware compatibility for as long as they can, even they realise that eventually drivers, etc, for really elderly hardware have to be dropped from the kernel. At some point, the kernel will simply become too large & unwieldy to be properly maintained.....and as older hardware gradually finds its way to the great landfill in the sky, at some stage there will BE no more examples of a particular piece of hardware left any longer. Thus, no point maintaining drivers for it.

As older, more 'durable' hardware disappears from use, to be replaced by increasingly flimsy equipment with built-in "planned obsolescence", this process will of course accelerate.

So; on those newer Puppies running on an older computer, I usually 'retrofit' an older kernel that I know will 'play nice' with that older hardware....

It's simply good housekeeping.....and saving yourself further messing-around in the future. I just wish more people practised it.

Make sense?

Mike.

[TC-21-32]

I don't like to bump this but I go thru these threads re-reading.
bigpup, how did you upload the same file I have? Doggone it.
Mike, you guys always make me think harder and I'd nearly forgotten about switching kernels.
Still glad you got it sorted 77.

[bigpup]

@TC-21-32

Well, I did not post the same driver you did.

I posted the drivers compiled for the specific kernel being used.

What you posted was for a different kernel.
The k2.6.25.15 in the name of the pet you posted is telling it is for kernel 2.6.25.15
You most likely really did not need the driver for your hardware.

You installed a firmware package.
I think you probably only needed firmware added is why it worked for you.
Firmware is not kernel specific.
So adding firmware will work in any Puppy version.

[TC-21-32]

bigpup, I was referring to the "atheros_kernel_modules-4.4.95noPAE-xenial32.pet" at 574K which happens to be the same size. I couldn't (too large), you could.
The verbiage is even the same.
The first one I posted for the K2.6.25.15 kernel is definitely old.
Not arguing. No harm, no foul. One of the .pets I was able to post here is working good yet.
Please forgive me if I totally misunderstand.

[geo_c]

This is why I've long since come to the conclusion that it's only prudent to keep a selection of assorted kernels "on-hand".

It's simply good housekeeping.....and saving yourself further messing-around in the future. I just wish more people practised it.

Mike.

So they are all more or less compatible as long as it's same 32bit/64bit architecture as the machine? That's news to me, and I'll be looking at which kernels in my OS's play well with specific machinery.

[mikewalsh]

@geo_c :-

Kernels are, by & large, interchangeable. Or so I've found.

On the HP desktop rig, I'm using from k4.1.30 (32-bit) to one of peebee's 64-bit 6-series kernels (I forget which one ATM). My daily driver, BK's old Quirky64 April 7.0.1, has been upgraded from its original 3-series up to Fossapup64's original k5.4.53, including firmware SFS. Which has added-in support for the built-in BlueTooth/wifi 'combo' chip this desktop is "blessed" with. (Still can't get my head round the concept of a desktop using a wireless connection, but.....there ya go!)

The "new" Dell Latitude runs three 64-bit Puppies; Tahrpup, Xenialpup, and Fosspup. These range from k3.14.79 to k5.4.53, and are completely interchangeable should I want to.

Just make sure they're the right architecture.....although it's perfectly possible to run a 64-bit kernel on a 32-bit Puppy. I don't think you can do it the other way round, mind you....

Mike.