Bug 590789 - hostapd-0.6.10 is available
hostapd-0.6.10 is available
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: hostapd (Show other bugs)
All Linux
low Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: John W. Linville
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
: FutureFeature
Depends On: 590607
Blocks: 596861
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2010-05-10 13:46 EDT by John W. Linville
Modified: 2010-05-27 13:59 EDT (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version: hostapd-0.6.10-1.fc13
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: 590607
Last Closed: 2010-05-26 17:47:17 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description John W. Linville 2010-05-10 13:46:19 EDT
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #590607 +++

Latest upstream release: 0.6.10
Current version in Fedora Rawhide: 0.6.9
URL: http://w1.fi/hostapd/

Please consult the package update guidelines before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_update_guidelines

More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:

--- Additional comment from xose.vazquez@gmail.com on 2010-05-10 06:40:02 EDT ---

changelog: 2010-01-12 - v0.6.10

	* fixed SHA-256 based key derivation function to match with the
	  standard when using CCMP (for IEEE 802.11r and IEEE 802.11w)
	  (note: this breaks interoperability with previous version) [Bug 307]
	* fixed WPS selected registrar expiration for internal PIN registrar
	* disable PMTU discovery for RADIUS packets
	* fixed WPS UPnP SSDP on 32-bit targets
	* fixed WPS AP reconfiguration with drivers that do not use hostapd
	* fixed RSN parameter setting for multi-BSS case
	* added WPS workarounds for known interoperability issues with broken,
	  deployed implementation
	* update IEEE 802.11w implementation to match with the published
	* fixed OpCode when proxying WSC_ACK or WSC_NACK from WPS ER
	* fixed proxying of WSC_NACK to WPS ER
	* fixed compilation with newer GnuTLS versions
	* added support for defining timeout for WPS PINs
	* fixed WPS Probe Request processing to handle missing required
	* fixed PKCS#12 use with OpenSSL 1.0.0
Comment 1 Fedora Update System 2010-05-10 13:55:19 EDT
hostapd-0.6.10-1.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13.
Comment 2 acount closed by user 2010-05-10 14:04:18 EDT
Did you notice?

 * fixed compilation with newer GnuTLS versions
Comment 3 John W. Linville 2010-05-10 14:10:04 EDT
I saw it -- is there something I should do about that?
Comment 4 acount closed by user 2010-05-10 14:34:58 EDT
(In reply to comment #3)

> I saw it -- is there something I should do about that?    

I thought you preferred gnutls to openssl:

* Wed Dec 16 2009 John W. Linville <linville@redhat.com> - 0.6.9-5
- Use openssl instead of gnutls (broken)
Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2010-05-10 17:51:39 EDT
hostapd-0.6.10-1.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update hostapd'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/hostapd-0.6.10-1.fc13
Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2010-05-26 17:47:12 EDT
hostapd-0.6.10-1.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Comment 7 Shawn Wilsher 2010-05-26 22:49:46 EDT
Apparently hostapd 0.6.10 doesn't work so well with ath9k drivers according to Jouni Malinen here:

I could not find a bug about this issue in their tracker, however.  Downgrading back to hostapd.x86_64 0:0.6.9-8.fc13 gets me a working hostapd again.

If I should file a new bug for this, please let me know.
Comment 8 John W. Linville 2010-05-27 08:46:26 EDT
Yes, please open a separate bug.
Comment 9 Shawn Wilsher 2010-05-27 12:38:19 EDT
(In reply to comment #8)
> Yes, please open a separate bug.    
I filed bug 596861 about it (I have insufficient privileges to set the dependency, however).

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.