Bug 228566
Summary: | KEY doesn't work in ifcfg-eth1 (wireless) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Joachim Stadel <stadel> |
Component: | system-config-network | Assignee: | Harald Hoyer <harald> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 6 | CC: | triage |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | bzcl34nup | ||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2008-05-06 19:13:25 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Joachim Stadel
2007-02-13 19:59:53 UTC
I can't reproduce this. Do you have a '1' file in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts? I found the source of the problem. Your comment made me suspicious of other files in this directory and there was one called keys-eth1 with the following content: KEY= If I remove this file then the problem goes away and I can use KEY=xxxx instead of KEY1=xxxx in ifcfg-eth1. What also works is to put the actual key in this file instead of in ifcfg-eth1 (probably the way if was intended to be used?). Anyway, the only remaining question is where this keys-eth1 file came from. Maybe it should be a blank file in the distro and not one with KEY= in it. (?) It's not shipped by default. Maybe a leftover of some config tool? Yup, it is created by the Network Configuration tool under menu:System/Admin/Network. I just tried changing the SSID to Auto (under the Wireless Tab) and it created the file with KEY=(blank), so maybe that is not quite the intended behaviour? My ifcfg-eth1 was also modified (of course) and the KEY=xxxx was removed from there (also not so good). Assigning to system-config-network, then. keys are not stored in ifcfg-<iface> , they are stored in keys-<iface> by system-config-network no, blank KEY= is not intended... Ok, but keys usually correspond to each SSID that one connects to. So shouldn't there be KEY,ESSID pairs stored somewhere and then be matched to the output of "iwlist eth1 scanning", or something similar? (Sorry about my ignorance of how wireless is supposed to work under Linux, but my experience is that a lot of playing around is required, so have patience with my comments please.) Because of the limited possibilities ifup/ifdown has, s-c-network only configures _one_ wireless network. For more dynamic behaviour and user interaction, please use NetworkManager. Fedora apologizes that these issues have not been resolved yet. We're sorry it's taken so long for your bug to be properly triaged and acted on. We appreciate the time you took to report this issue and want to make sure no important bugs slip through the cracks. If you're currently running a version of Fedora Core between 1 and 6, please note that Fedora no longer maintains these releases. We strongly encourage you to upgrade to a current Fedora release. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer maintained and closing them. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle/EOL If this bug is still open against Fedora Core 1 through 6, thirty days from now, it will be closed 'WONTFIX'. If you can reporduce this bug in the latest Fedora version, please change to the respective version. If you are unable to do this, please add a comment to this bug requesting the change. Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled these issues to this point. The process we are following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again. And if you'd like to join the bug triage team to help make things better, check out http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers This bug is open for a Fedora version that is no longer maintained and will not be fixed by Fedora. Therefore we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen thus bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. |