Comment 74 for bug 375148

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 11:42:16AM -0000, Rolf Leggewie wrote:
> Ahmed, what's that nonsense now? AFAIK, according to your statements
> here, you never successfully reproduced this issue or did you? How can
> you be sure now this issue is fixed? In any case, don't you think you
> should at least give the people affected a chance to confirm that the
> problem is indeed gone?
>
> FWIW, a very quick test showed that of course this is not fixed (please
> explain why you think it was). To make a long story short, *NOTHING*
> has changed since I originally reported this approaching two years now.
> I have nothing to add, no progress to report to any of my earlier
> statements, they are still true with the latest package.

1. Regarding the no /dev/ttySL0 issue, there is more than one comment on
   this very bug that when the patch that installs
   /etc/modprobe.d/sl-modem.conf is applied, the modem worked
   successfully.
2. Regarding the "NO CARRIER" issue with linux kernels (>= 2.6.31), an
   Karmic user (Yair Elharrar) sent a patch to upstream which fixes it [1].
3. Three days ago I was able to get my hands on an old laptop that got a
   Smartlink modem and Karmic installed on it (ie. a 2.6.31 kernel). So
   I tested the package (with both cases: ALSA & slamr drivers) and it
   worked: dialed out, and successfully connected to internet. The only
   case that I did not test though is FAXing.

> Ahmed, I urge you to really shape up your bug work now. Don't just
> claim it works when you cannot know (and in fact it doesn't). Don't
> constantly churn out untested packages that don't even compile or
> install in the hope that somehow one of them magically fixes everything.

It was tested by myself (as stated above) & by upstream.

[1] http://archives.linmodems.org/36128

--
 ‎أحمد المحمودي (Ahmed El-Mahmoudy)
  Digital design engineer
 GPG KeyID: 0xEDDDA1B7
 GPG Fingerprint: 8206 A196 2084 7E6D 0DF8 B176 BC19 6A94 EDDD A1B7