Talk:NDISwrapper

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Linux Low‑importance

	Linux portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linux, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linux on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinuxWikipedia:WikiProject LinuxTemplate:WikiProject LinuxLinux articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contributers might consider to clarify:

whether ndiswrapper allows one to use native Windows drivers, or something else?

something about the architecture, e.g., what Windows files are typically present, and how they are wrapped.

Installation from source

I'd just like to say that contrary to what is stated in the article, I found ndiswrapper very easy to install from source. There is a makefile in the source tarball which automated the build and installation. Once i'd done that, it was simply a case of reading the INSTALL and README files and Installing my wi-fi card's Windows driver from the CD-rom. I use Suse Linux 10.1 and the ndiswrapper RPM package which comes as part of the distro didnt work (doh!...) Only downloading the source enabled me to get the card running at all.82.41.244.139 20:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed – installation from source is not as difficult as the article claims, when I first installed it a couple years ago (it was either 0.3 or 0.8 if I recall correctly, don't remember which) it was as simple as make && make install. That was before I was even building custom kernels or anything. Although then again, these days I'm building an entire Linux distro – as if I didn't blab about it enough... – and I've got an automated build script to do all the work for me ;-)

multima 18:52, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

does anybody know if using ndiswrapper uses a lot of resources - cpu, mem? security?

I too installed this from source and found it to be very easy. And it's rather insignificant as far as resources go. Man I love/hate this program! --Lewk_of_S e rthic _contrib ^talk 21:25, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name

Shouldn't the name be NDISwrapper?

I was thinking the same thing. The name is clearly NDISwrapper. This should definitely be fixed. --Eloi 01:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

too complicated opening paragraph

the opening paragraph tries to explain too much, too quickly. It should be simpler. What very basically is NDISwrapper? When i first consulted this article i was still unclear, and then read some more web articles and realized that the problem was with this article.

"Linus Denounces NDISWrapper, Denies It GPL Status"

Linus Denounces NDISWrapper, Denies It GPL Status HoCkEy PUCK (talk) 22:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That article is completely misleading as pointed out in the discussion part of it. It really isn't about licensing of NDISwrapper but the tainted flag of a kernel running it. 85.77.130.153 (talk) 07:57, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"many vendors choose to only make 64-bit drivers for Windows Vista"

This sounds like non-sense. I've just checked the major wi-fi makers websites and all have both 32 and 64bit versions for Vista. Can anyone name a manufacture that has 64-bit versions only? I am fairly sure that the "Certified for Windows Vista" logo requires that 32 and 64bit drivers must be available, which most manufactures stick to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.47.0.158 (talk) 17:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wolf Mountain Group NDISwrapper doesn't exist

There was once one copy on NDISwrapper on Wolf Mountain Group Web site, no new version, never.

This "group" has no right to use the name NDISwrapper, it could perfectly have forked and use another one.

The web site is since many months unavailable.

The spelling of NDISwrapper is inconsistent with the other parts or the article.

Nobody never use or mention this "Wolf Mountain Group NDISwrapper".

This group is in fact composed with one person, so it's misleading to use this name.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by JPLeRouzic (talk • contribs) 07:14, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on 32bits/64bits and NDIS 5/NDIS 6

Hi, 66.68.39.4 modified my text which was about the difficulty to find drivers that are for 64 bit Windows AND NDIS5. While true his new text miss this point and introduce another making the whole sentence difficult to understand. Please 66.68.39.4 would you consider rewriting your text? Thanks! JPLeRouzic (talk) 20:09, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

17 October. I restored the sentence meaning by removing the point about robotics sticks drivers. If someone wants to talk of a problem about this driver she/he would consider (1) making it in a separate sentence in another section (this one is about NDIS5/6 and 32/64 bits) (2) weither discussing about an obscure driver has any place in an encyclopedia. JPLeRouzic (talk) 12:17, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't work with WDF, yet not many know that

It's of no use with recent drivers. Nearly 90% of drivers now use WDF with NDIS, and it will be not possible to fix it. Sad. Unknown symbol with WDF is there in the error reports. --Pretty les♀♥, Dark Mistress, talk, 02:25, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the "limitations" part of the current article. WDF is not recent, it is there since 2006, and there are other important issues with NDISwrapper (x86 only, no NDIS6, no 64 bits) , the main issue being that the original motivation "that there are missing drivers on Linux" has completely vanished with 2.6 and subsequent kernels.JPLeRouzic (talk) 09:14, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]