Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#11568 - netcfg 2.1.0-1 wireless with static IP doesn't work

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Roman Dobosz (gryf) - Tuesday, 23 September 2008, 16:53 GMT
Last edited by James Rayner (iphitus) - Wednesday, 12 November 2008, 23:02 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Core
Status Closed
Assigned To James Rayner (iphitus)
Architecture i686
Severity High
Priority Normal
Reported Version None
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Description:

After upgrade to netcfg 2.1.0-1 wireless network with assigned static IP addres has startup failure. Manual try with netcfg-menu also doesn't work. Static IP with ethernet working just fine. I've not checked it against wireless with DHCP. Temporary solution: downgrade to netcfg-2.0.6-1.

Additional info:
* package version(s)
2.1.0-1

* config and/or log files etc.
as follows

Steps to reproduce:

1. Create /etc/network.d/wireless:

CONNECTION="wireless"
INTERFACE=ath0
SCAN="yes"
SECURITY="wpa"
ESSID="zzz"
KEY="xxxx"
IP="static"
IFOPTS="192.168.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 192.168.0.255"
GATEWAY="192.168.1.1"
DNS1=194.204.152.34
DNS2=194.204.159.1
TIMEOUT=20

Ofcourse there have to be an AP apropriate configured neraby.

2. Start with netcfg-menu and choose wireless (or add it in rc.conf, and start with /etc/rc.d/net-profiles start)
This task depends upon

Closed by  James Rayner (iphitus)
Wednesday, 12 November 2008, 23:02 GMT
Reason for closing:  Works for me
Additional comments about closing:  need info
Comment by James Rayner (iphitus) - Sunday, 28 September 2008, 11:30 GMT
Try 2.1.1 in [testing] or [core] depending on how fast/slow your mirror is (I'm moving it now)
Comment by Tj (Tj) - Thursday, 02 October 2008, 13:30 GMT
hmm i dont know whats wrong, i currently have 2.1.1 and static IP wireless works for me. Try removing the broadcast address, and check that your gateways and DNS's are correct.
Comment by James Rayner (iphitus) - Saturday, 04 October 2008, 00:03 GMT
netcfg v2.1.2 should work [testing]
Comment by Andrew S. Grigorev (eigrad) - Sunday, 05 October 2008, 06:32 GMT
netcfg v2.1.1 works for me

# cat /etc/network.d/wireless
CONNECTION="wireless"
INTERFACE=ath0
ESSID="public_net_without_encription"
IP="dhcp"
TIMEOUT=20

could you make `netcfg --version` runnable by non-root user?
Comment by Roman Dobosz (gryf) - Monday, 06 October 2008, 16:50 GMT
2.1.1-1 still doesn't work. The problem is with _static_ IP (not DHCP) on wireless connection.

It's also doesn't work with broadcast removed. Gateway and DNS are correct. As I said in report: IT IS WORKING WITH 2.0.6-1.
Comment by Dan Griffiths (Ghost1227) - Tuesday, 07 October 2008, 02:12 GMT
I'm currently using 2.1.1-1 with static IP and it's working fine. Could it be a problem with wpa rather than netcfg?

CONNECTION="wireless"
INTERFACE=ath0
SCAN="yes"
SECURITY="wep"
ESSID="xxx"
KEY="xxx"
IP="static"
IFOPTS="192.168.1.46 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 255.255.255.255"
GATEWAY="192.168.1.1"
DNS1=192.168.1.1
TIMEOUT=20
Comment by James Rayner (iphitus) - Tuesday, 07 October 2008, 05:13 GMT
<quote>2.1.1-1 still doesn't work. The problem is with _static_ IP (not DHCP) on wireless connection.</quote>

I'm well aware your problem was with static IP, I can read, and there were changes within 2.1.1 which may have affected your setup.

In the meantime: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Network_profiles#It_still_doesn.27t_work.2C_what_do_I_do_.3F

I NEED ALL netcfg output and the outputs listed there. "it doesnt work, that release did" means nothing.

Also fyi, you don't need to use rc.d/net-profiles or netcfg-menu to start/stop a profile. You can simply do netcfg <profile name> to start and netcfg -d <profile name> to stop.

Ghost, Andrew: Thanks for your input, I myself sucessfully use such a setup too, but there are certainly other variables in play so we can't guarantee such a setup will work for all.

James

Loading...