Re: nm 0.7 doesn't connect to wired device

[Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com>]

On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 18:05 +0200, Khashayar Naderehvandi wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Björn Martensen
> <bjoern martensen gmail com> wrote:
>         On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 18:24 -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
>         > On Fri, 2008-03-28 at 21:21 +0100, Björn Martensen wrote:
>         
>         > > btw, when I run nm-tool, I get this segfault:
>         >
>         > Should be fixed now, I think.  At least I don't get this
>         with latest
>         > SVN.
>         >
>         > Dan
>         >
>         > >
>         > > > $ nm-tool
>         > > >
>         > > > NetworkManager Tool
>         > > >
>         > > > State: disconnected
>         > > >
>         > > >
>         > > > (process:8359): GLib-GObject-WARNING **: invalid
>         uninstantiatable type `(null)' in cast to `NMDevice'
>         > > >
>         > > > ** (process:8359): CRITICAL **: nm_device_get_state:
>         assertion `NM_IS_DEVICE (device)' failed
>         > > >
>         > > > ** (process:8359): CRITICAL **: nm_device_get_iface:
>         assertion `NM_IS_DEVICE (device)' failed
>         > > > - Device: (null)
>         ----------------------------------------------------------------
>         > > >
>         > > > ** (process:8359): CRITICAL **: nm_device_get_driver:
>         assertion `NM_IS_DEVICE (device)' failed
>         > > >   Driver:            (unknown)
>         > > >   Active:            no
>         > > >
>         > > > ** (process:8359): CRITICAL **:
>         nm_device_get_capabilities: assertion `NM_IS_DEVICE (device)'
>         failed
>         > > >
>         > > >   Capabilities:
>         > > >     Supported:       no
>         > > >
>         > > >
>         > > > Segmentation fault
>         
>         
>         I still get that error with svn 3514 here. maybe a bug due to
>         libtool
>         2.2?
>         
> 
> For what it's worth, I'm seeing the same issue here, updated from svn
> a few minutes ago. NM connects just fine to wireless networks, but
> wired connections time out:
> 
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) starting connection
> 'Automatiskt Ethernet'
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) Stage 1 of 5 (Device
> Prepare) scheduled...
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) Stage 1 of 5 (Device
> Prepare) started...
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) Stage 2 of 5 (Device
> Configure) scheduled...
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) Stage 1 of 5 (Device
> Prepare) complete.
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) Stage 2 of 5 (Device
> Configure) starting...
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) Stage 2 of 5 (Device
> Configure) successful.
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) Stage 3 of 5 (IP Configure
> Start) scheduled.
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) Stage 2 of 5 (Device
> Configure) complete.
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) Stage 3 of 5 (IP Configure
> Start) started...
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) Beginning DHCP transaction.
> Internet Systems Consortium DHCP Client V3.0.6
> Copyright 2004-2007 Internet Systems Consortium.
> All rights reserved.
> For info, please visit http://www.isc.org/sw/dhcp/
> 
> Listening on LPF/eth0/00:0b:5d:7f:17:89
> Sending on   LPF/eth0/00:0b:5d:7f:17:89
> Sending on   Socket/fallback
> NetworkManager: <info>  dhclient started with pid 6849
> NetworkManager: <info>  Activation (eth0) Stage 3 of 5 (IP Configure
> Start) complete.
> NetworkManager: <info>  DHCP: device eth0 state changed (null) ->
> preinit
> DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 7
> DHCPOFFER from 192.168.0.1
> DHCPREQUEST on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67
> DHCPNAK from 192.168.0.1
> DHCPREQUEST on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67
> DHCPNAK from 192.168.0.1
> DHCPDISCOVER on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 7
> DHCPOFFER from 192.168.0.1
> DHCPREQUEST on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67
> DHCPNAK from 192.168.0.1
> DHCPREQUEST on eth0 to 255.255.255.255 port 67
> DHCPNAK from 192.168.0.1

This is a dhclient issue, not an NM issue.  Does your DHCP service
require certain options to be sent to it?  If the server offered
192.168.0.1 to the client, and dhclient is now requesting that address,
the server shouldn't be NAK-ing the request that it just sent to the
client.

Dan