Comment 11 for bug 1156138

On 12/07/13 13:06, Bernardo Reino wrote:
> AFAIK the only solution is by (illegally) modifying the bcmwl license to
> be GPL, which Ubuntu will never do (but you could, privately).

That is very interesting. Thank you very much for your helpful comments.

> For some reason some kernel functions can only be used with GPL-licensed
> modules, which bcmwl isn't.

But I wonder why a) the same kernel functions compile OK against the
generic headers, and also b) compile OK against custom low-latency
kernel headers.

> I currently don't know if a "technical" workaround exists, other than not
> using the low-latency kernel.

It sounds to me as if something is different in the low-latency header
files that is erroneously checking for GPL compliancy, even for a source
file that is using logic that ought not to be protected.

I won't be able to do much for a week or so, but if no-one else has
anything to say in the meantime, I will look into the discrepancy
carefully to see what is happening. Based on your thoughts, I can hack
the source around until I see the cause more clearly.

Brian

> On Fri, 12 Jul 2013, Brian Burch wrote:
>
>> I was disappointed to find there was no activity on this problem for a
>> week. It is hard to believe no-one knows of a circumvention.
>>
>> I've not been able to use the wireless adapter ever since I "upgraded"
>> my laptop to 13.04, and will need to use it tomorrow but will not have
>> access to an ethernet link...
>>
>> Fortunately, I am using ubuntu studio. It uses the low-latency kernel,
>> but I had forgotten the distro also installs and maintains the generic
>> kernel. I rebooted with 3.8.0-26-generic and was very happy to discover
>> the dkms source compiled cleanly. The machine is running fine on wifi
>> with the generic kernel.
>>
>> So what is it about the low-latency kernel headers that is different to
>> generic, and also breaks the compile of bcmwl-kernel-source? Surely it
>> isn't necessary?