chat with int_ua

"Unfortunately at this point most recent kernels do not work correctly with WPA
Ad-Hoc mode, so the default to WEP is currently correct. Future kernel fixes
should allow this to work better, and we'll be implementing mini AP mode for
those drivers that support it."

seems to point to a problem with recent kernels

isnt entirely sure what your problem is, hence why he lurked

int_ua

1:20 PM

not detailed enough to find out how to track the progress :)

Lord of Time

This bug was a relevant Ubuntu bug that was fixed, specifically dealing with "Open" vs. "WPA2" on Ad-Hoc. But since the kernel doesnt support WPA2 Ad-Hoc in all likelihood...

(was mentioned earlier)

if i might ask, out of my curiousity since i'm slightly out of the loop, could you point me to your specific issue/question (sounds like you came here from a questoin, that both you and pl1nk are aware of)

would go to find it but has 50 tabs open already

int_ua

1

Q: Why is WPA-encrypted hotspot disabled?

Or, alternatively, how can I check that some WiFi chip supports WPA-encrypted hotspot creation? Is it hardware-dependent? Is anyone able to create WPA-encrypted hotspot?

pl1nk

1:32 PM

@intua Update if you find anything relevant regarding the bug.

int_ua

do you mean posting it here or in the question?

Lord of Time

i'm going to stand by the GNOME people, i think its a kernel problem

or at least that has partly to do with this

pl1nk

@intua Better, to your question

int_ua

ok :)

pl1nk

You could possibly get better answers.

Lord of Time

1:37 PM

out of pure curiosity

did you file a bug or something about this?

sounds like a kernel problem not necessarily a chipset problem

uses an Intel wifi card, so can't reproduce your issues

int_ua

I've seen WPA encryption on previous releases so I was sure there must be some bug report

Intel card with proprietary drivers?

Lord of Time

Intel card with iwlagn (works out of the box)

but i have an older dell, dell no longer offers the card that uses that :P

(unless you pay $75 more)

int_ua

Is it known in this bug that Intel works?

Lord of Time

but i dont normally run an ad-hoc network.

its irrelevant

int_ua

I'm on comment 46 and haven't seen intel info

Lord of Time

1:41 PM

i've tested last in Natty

i cant test here

(wifi jamming here at work)

int_ua

ok

Lord of Time

but in fairness to Natty

that was running on a significantly older kernel

since the bug seems to be somewhat related to newer kernels...

int_ua

looks like Launchpad needs new status: "Workaround released"

Lord of Time

absolutely not

is on Bug Squad and Bug Control and would not support that at all

workarounds can be posted in comments :P

int_ua

well, it was irony :) But why not?

Lord of Time

1:45 PM

because 75% of the bugs I see have workarounds

except crashes of course

but if 75% of the bugs have workarounds, that already exist, there's no need to mark that a workaround exists, you can just read the workaround as listed in the comments on that bug

if we had a "Workaround Released" type status, it'd be bug-control only likely

so it'd be basically useless

int_ua

I mean the cases when the problem can't be fixed and the workaround is added to the project code and released to upstream until the problem is truly fixed like in this case

Lord of Time

then its not a workaround

its a "Fix Committed"

and upstream projectsa re smarter than that, they'll only commit fixes

not workarounds.

int_ua

ok, looks like we understand "fix" differently :) Anyway, English isn't my native language

Can you check the "Joseph Salisbury (jsalisbury) on 2012-03-22" change?

there are no additional comments, right?

Lord of Time

@intua check on...?

int_ua