>>53425887
Linux update drivers better than windows does. It's basically a single command.

However, when the kernel is updated things get a bit complicated as drivers are part of the kernel. But don't worry there is dynamic kernel module support which automatically recompiles everything when a new kernel is installed.

So basically yeah, it's just running a single line of command.

>>53425961
how does one enable drivers in linux for wireless

>>53425887
>wanna put linux on laptop dunno
You don't have to install a linux distro to try it out.

Look up LiveCD/LiveUSB or setup a VM.

That way you don't have to depend on the opinions of folks.

>drivers
The only time I have needed to worry about drivers on a linux box was when:
1) The hardware was really old.
2) The distro I was using had a certain philosophy about software and didn't include the drivers I needed by default.

If your hardware is modern (5 years or newer) and not made by some oddball chinese company then you probably aren't going to have any driver issues. Especially if you use an 'easy' distro.

>>53425992
I think you should go to somewhere appropriate for this discussion.

Regardless, it should be enabled by default if it's not blacklisted (it's not blacklisted by default).

lspci -v

should give you which kernel module is being used for which device using pci and on a laptop your wireless card is probably on pci bus.

I'm guessing you are having trouble with Broadcom drivers, check out kernel.org about them, the latest kernels ship with b43 drivers so they should work for you.

But again this is not appropriate place for this discussion and you are terrible at asking questions, you gave literally no information. Give information and ask about it on a website or thread dedicated for these stuff.

>>53426016
>If your hardware is modern (5 years or newer) and not made by some oddball chinese company then you probably aren't going to have any driver issues. Especially if you use an 'easy' distro.
This is not true though. It is the ultimate objective but not true right now.

The simplest example I can come up with is Broadcom drivers. They do have a reverse engineered open source b43 driver but it usually comes with no firmware so it's not out of the box again.

Anyway the point I'm trying to make is that claiming drivers work out of the box is wrong, I think we should criticize it even harsher and not defend the point we're at.

>>53426033
English as a 2nd language detected. Sup H1-bro

>>53425992
>how does one enable drivers in linux for wireless
You didn't provide any info.

But when I was setting up Debian on my pc I needed to spend some time getting my wifi setup (the usb device on my machine as well as the general networking stuff).

Here is the link I used to get my networking setup, it is for Debian:

https://wiki.debian.org/WiFi

If you aren't using debian then it won't be an exact match for you.

>>53426065
Impressed. How can you tell? Specifics please?

>>53426060
>This is not true though.
I wasn't aware the folks were having issues with broadcom devices. Is device support still woefully lacking despite the release of brcm80211 and wl?

>brcm80211
Kernel driver open-source version

>b43
Kernel driver reverse-engineered version

>broadcom-wl
Broadcom driver restricted-license

I still *feel* like driver support for linux is good. Although based on your post it is still lacking wrt broadcom drivers.

>>53425961
>drivers are part of the kernel

literally why

>>53426131
It's not out of the box is what I'm saying. You still have to mingle with drivers. It's worse on laptops, I mean optimus still gets broken regularly.

>>53426159
Because linux is a monolithic kernel and you start a flame war if you discuss it.

What are drivers and why are wintards always so worried about them?
I've been a GNU user my entire adult life and have never encountered any problems or issues forcing me to learn what these things do or even are.

>>53425887

pacman - Syu

Just fuck my shit up

>>53426234
>meme commands

apt-get upgrade 4 lyfe

>>53426234

pacman -Syuinanotherlife

>>53426237
>debian
>not the original meme distro

dnf upgrade

>>53426159
that's the way it should be honestly, i don't like the concept of drivers as userspace applications à la windows

>>53426289
Oh, it's fine, it's probably because you don't know a thing about kernels.

>>53425887
No, it updates them better than Windows does.

>>53425992
Google your distro + wireless
Maybe google your distro + your wifi chipset

>>53426185
Not really a flamework, Linus himself admitted that micro-kernel is better.

>>53426649
Source?

>>53426662
http://www.oreilly.com/openbook/opensources/book/appa.html

Read Linus's first response.

>>53426676
Linus is the clear loser of this discussion and a sore loser at that.

>>53426871
Yeah, his responses are autistic. But he ended up being right though, as Linux is successful.

>>53426898
He didn't end up being right that's the issue. A lot of problems we are having is because linux is monolithic. Why would any for-profit company want to write part of your kernel? Or why would they bother changing their drivers everytime you mess up?

Linux is successful because it's the first thing developed by the community, not because of its architecture. And definitely not because Linus was right.

>>53426929
Right now, driver issue is solved by modules, as technically, they are not part of the kernel.

>>53426092
Not him, but
>check out kernel.org about them
>Give information and ask about it on a website or thread dedicated for these stuff

t. English is my 3rd language

>>53426953
They're part of it though, you still need to compile them with the kernel and again with every kernel update. Just because you can deactivate them does not mean they're the same as microkernel drivers. (Not completely true for dkms though)

Also the fact that this was the direction kernels were going was apparent even in 92, so are we claiming victory for saying "suck it Tanenbaum" and then doing exactly what he said?

>>53427015
No, we just can't change anything. Kernels and OSs themselves are quite hard to replace. Once they get famous, you can't really change anything. Of course you can write a new kernel or contribute to GNU Hurd but that's years and years of work.

>>53427032
The same argument kept xorg going for billion years. But you are right, a lot is invested in linux kernel. Unfortunate thing is that something of similar scale is not going to come by anytime soon.

>>53425887
>dunno
then don't

>>53427100
Yeah, I don't think it's too bad though. user space applications can still run on a new kernel. Drivers are the real issue.

>>53427455
forgot to mention to run lspci -k in a working live environment where genkernel or whatever detected the needed drivers

>>53427455
>>53427467
Does that always work or do the faggots sometimes name the module in such a way that the config name doesn't match it in the search?

>>53427491
maybe underscores and dashes might be problematic but just search for the first or last part and try to find it in the list

I have any issues I can remember with my normal needed drivers. If the live environment where you run lspci -k works, then it should as far as I know list all the drivers it is using to run that way.

stuff like wacom tablet drivers and so on are relatively easy to find in the kernel config afterwards

I do not really know how much other distributions require configuring the kernel