Bug 162237 - Reports name "none" for WPA2-network with hidden ESSID
Summary: Reports name "none" for WPA2-network with hidden ESSID
Status: RESOLVED NOT A BUG
Alias: None
Product: knetworkmanager
Classification: Miscellaneous
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: 0.2
Platform: Fedora RPMs Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Will Stephenson
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-05-17 23:21 UTC by Stefan Neufeind
Modified: 2008-06-16 22:38 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Stefan Neufeind 2008-05-17 23:21:48 UTC
Version:           0.2-0.7.fc8.x86_64 (using KDE 4.0.3)
Installed from:    Fedora RPMs
OS:                Linux

Got a WPA2-network with hidden ESSID configured. knetworkmanager has a saved
connection for that network and detects it fine. It fetches the password and
connects. In the popup in the bottom right corner of the screen it claims to be
connected to "none". However, the network is connected fine. And clicking on the
icon in the list of networks it shows up with the correct name as well.

(PS: Although the packagename says "fc8" this is the latest version Fedora 9 ships with ...)
Comment 1 Stefan Neufeind 2008-05-17 23:23:22 UTC
This bug here is referenced from Fedora as well:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447089
Comment 2 Stefan Neufeind 2008-05-18 00:00:49 UTC
Hmm, just noticed this knetworkmanager isn't shipped with Fedora 9. Actually there is no kde-frontend for it shipped because they seem to be waiting for the new release with Solid-backend. Strange ...

So this knetworkmanager is from before my upgrade Fedora 8 -> 9. And for that it works fine :-)
Comment 3 Will Stephenson 2008-06-15 12:20:05 UTC
They are waiting for any release with NM 0.7 support.  We have just put KNM 0.7 into openSUSE 11.0 and I am sure Fedora will package it soon.  Running KNM 0.2 with NM 0.7 won't work as you see.
Comment 4 Stefan Neufeind 2008-06-16 22:38:06 UTC
NM 0.7 and KNM 0.2 seems to work "fine" here in general so far. Guess the dbus-protocol hasn't changed in its major parts?