Comment 178 for bug 414560

On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 6:20 AM, Kunal Gangakhedkar
<email address hidden> wrote:
> On Monday 11 Jan 2010 9:56:47 pm Michael B. Trausch wrote:
>> I have installed on Karmic, and my problems with this issue
>> have gone away.  Would it be of any use to try to bisect the kernel to
>> provide a patch here for Karmic, or is someone already working on such a
>> thing?  (I ask because it is pretty important that I get back to the
>> Karmic kernel, because VirtualBox in Karmic does not work with,
>> and I use it a good amount.)
> Slightly off-topic, but you could simply do "sudo service vboxdrv setup"
> or "sudo invoke-rc.d vboxdrv setup" to recompile the VBox drivers
> after updating the kernel.
> This works unless the kernel API is changed drastically.
> I use it all the time.

Right, I am aware of how to do that. DKMS is in Ubuntu to make this
simpler (thanks, Dell!), since DKMS manages the module builds. The
problem is similar to the NVIDIA module problem back with 2.6.28,
where the kernel API changed in some way that was never guaranteed to
be stable in the first place.

I wound up simply updating VBox, but still the core issue here is this:

If I bisect the kernel to attempt to isolate a patch that fixes ath9k
in Karmic's kernel, will an Ubuntu Kernel Team member take that patch
and get it into Ubuntu? If that's not a guaranteed "Yes", I am not
going to try, because I have my system working pretty well for me and
I am kind of tired of submitting debdiffs and them getting ignored
half the time. I don't figure that this will be an easy task, but I
am willing to do it *if* I know for sure that it will be of benefit to

   --- Mike