You will need kernel headers to build the driver which aren't available from the repository. More importantly I do not see what is the need to compile a driver when the driver included with the kernel isn't sufficient.
TP Link TL-WN321G [Problem]
Follow these instructions
Download the latest driver from ASPj's WiFi Page: mdk3, rt73, rt2570 and other aircrack-ng experiments
As of 2009-04-16, the latest driver is 3.0.2
http://homepages.tu-darmstadt.de/~p_...-3.0.2.tar.bz2
Getting these resultsCode:ifconfig rausb0 down airdriver-ng remove 31 tar xvjf rt73-k2wrlz-3.0.2.tar.bz2 cd rt73*/Module make make install modprobe rt73 ifconfig rausb0 up
root@BT4PF:~/rt73-k2wrlz-3.0.2/Module# make
make: *** /lib/modules/2.6.30.9/build: No such file or directory. Stop.
rt73.ko failed to build!
make: *** [module] Error 1
Then if i try it after ive made the directories i get
root@BT4PF:~/rt73-k2wrlz-3.0.2/Module# make
make[1]: Entering directory `/lib/modules/2.6.30.9/build'
make[1]: Nothing to be done for `modules'.
make[1]: Leaving directory `/lib/modules/2.6.30.9/build'
rt73.ko failed to build!
make: *** [module] Error 1
You will need kernel headers to build the driver which aren't available from the repository. More importantly I do not see what is the need to compile a driver when the driver included with the kernel isn't sufficient.
So basically my Vmware Image is stuffed? Should i revert to a snapshot taken after i just installed Vmware Tools?
If you didn't do make install, your vmware image should still be ok. If you only issued make, it builds the drivers but doesn't install.
Well i have successfully gotten this device to work on the pre-built vmware image of BT4 PF i downloaded from offensive security. Im wondering howcome the vmware image i made is any different. It doesnt support rt73 strait out of the box like the vmware image does i downloaded.
I don't know from where you obtained the pre-built vmware image of bt4 pf. I checked remote-exploit website and only found pre-built vwmare image of bt4b.
If bt4b worked for you, it was based off older kernel version and it wouldn't be updated. Neither would the updates would actually bring bt4b to bt4pf stage easily.
--Please dont post un official links to backtrack
Its Definately BT4PF. Theres no actual link to it, just found it floating round these forums.
Posting Permissions