On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 04:02:13PM -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
> Charles Curley wrote:
> Have you tried creating a new user and giving NM a shot there?
No. Are there user configuration files for NM? That's the only thing I
can think of that would make this test useful. Anyway, I tried it, and
got nowhere useful, except I got this:
[root@dragon ~]# ifconfig
dev23266 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:10:C6:C0:AA:26
UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:0 (0.0 b) TX bytes:0 (0.0 b)
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:CE:70:53:C8
inet addr:192.168.1.4 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:264 errors:33 dropped:33 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:183 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:7486111 (7.1 MiB) TX bytes:1492356 (1.4 MiB)
Interrupt:11 Base address:0x4000 Memory:c0204000-c0204fff
lo Link encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:997 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:997 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
RX bytes:154664 (151.0 KiB) TX bytes:154664 (151.0 KiB)
OK, where are the mutant device names coming from? I had created the
new user, logged out as my usual user, then logged in as the new
user. I fired up NM as root, of course. Eths 0 and 1 were there before
and no mutant device names. Oh, and the effort failed.
> What's in /var/log/messages? Obviously, NM puts a lot of logging
> info there, but perhaps if you scan through it you'll find some
> obvious problem that's just not making it back to you via the GUI.
I don't see anything obvious. Here's a wierd one:
Deactivating device dev3514.
I see other more reasonable device names like eth0 and eth1, but
that's another mutant device name.
I see quite a few of these:
Activation (eth0/wireless): association took too long (>20s), failing activation.
Since the keys haven't changed and I can log in with "service network
start", I suspect a bug in NM. But then again, I get similar messages
using a kernel and version of NM that used to work. Ideas?
The "activation" lines are interlaced with a slew of WPA supplicant
lines. Since WPA is not an issue on this network, I wonder if WPA
Supplicant and NM are tripping over each other. However, I looked at
some old logs that show sucessful activations. They show similar
interlacing, so I don't think that's the issue.
--
Charles Curley /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign
Looking for fine software \ / Respect for open standards
and/or writing? X No HTML/RTF in email
http://www.charlescurley.com / \ No M$ Word docs in email
Key fingerprint = CE5C 6645 A45A 64E4 94C0 809C FFF6 4C48 4ECD DFDB
Attachment:
pgpVO9yLRu65G.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
