USB WIFI adapters
by Robert McBroom
I've been searching for a USB WIFI adapter to allow my laptop to access
the 5GHz band. The market seems to be dominated by Realtek but Fedora 29
doesn't seem to have drivers for the various chips. Found an adapter
from BrosTrend that said it supported LINUX without noticing that the
support was for the slow cycle DEBIAN. With a clue from support found
the driver on github.
I was successful in getting the driver from
https://github.com/zebulon2/rtl8812au
to install on a Fedora 29 system with the 4.20 version of the kernel.
Had to get the newer version from
https://github.com/gordboy/rtl8812au
for installation on a second Fedora 29 system running the 5.2 kernel.
This version also installed on the newer 5.3 kernels.
2 years, 7 months
the bytmax98090 sound card
by mattias
are there a working driver for that card?
maybe in rawhide?
the card are in a chromebook acer r11 cb5132t
2 years, 7 months
Trouble connecting to a specific WiFi ssid (association timeout)
by cen
Hi
Up-to-date Fedora 30
Thinkpad x260, Intel wifi, wpa_supplicant v2.8
I got a brand new tp-link archer c6 and set up 2.4Ghz mixed ssid and
5Ghz ac/mixed ssid. I can connect to 5GHz just fine but 2.4GHz gives
association timeout (see dmesg below). It just keeps asking for password
every 20 seconds to infinity. This is the only 2.4 b/g/n ssid that I
have trouble connecting with, ever. My android phone and 2 windows
laptops can connect to this ssid just fine so there must be a very
specific problem with my laptop/Fedora combo.
I have yet to try with an unsecured ssid, that is next on the debug
list, currently it is set to WPA2 personal/AES.
Anything else I can try to solve this mystery?
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:32 2019] wlp4s0: authenticate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:32 2019] wlp4s0: send auth to 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try 1/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:32 2019] wlp4s0: authenticated
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:32 2019] wlp4s0: associate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try
1/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:32 2019] wlp4s0: associate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try
2/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:32 2019] wlp4s0: associate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try
3/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:32 2019] wlp4s0: association with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1
timed out
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:34 2019] wlp4s0: authenticate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:34 2019] wlp4s0: send auth to 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try 1/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:34 2019] wlp4s0: send auth to 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try 2/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:34 2019] wlp4s0: authenticated
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:34 2019] wlp4s0: associate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try
1/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:34 2019] wlp4s0: associate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try
2/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:34 2019] wlp4s0: associate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try
3/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:34 2019] wlp4s0: association with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1
timed out
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:35 2019] wlp4s0: authenticate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:35 2019] wlp4s0: send auth to 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try 1/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:36 2019] wlp4s0: send auth to 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try 2/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:36 2019] wlp4s0: authenticated
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:36 2019] wlp4s0: associate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try
1/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:36 2019] wlp4s0: associate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try
2/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:36 2019] wlp4s0: associate with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1 (try
3/3)
[Tue Oct 29 21:42:36 2019] wlp4s0: association with 98:da:c4:85:f5:f1
timed out
2 years, 7 months
NoScript extension for Firefox
by Antonio M
After upgrading to F31, I cannot change options in the list, i.e. from
Trusted to temporarily trusted. What I am missing??
Antonio Montagnani
Linux Fedora 31 Workstation
da/from Gmail
2 years, 7 months
F31RC1.9 install fails on Ryzen 7 3800X if file system encryption is enabled
by Eric Smith
I have a new Ryzen 7 3800X system, and since Fedora 30 won't install on
that, I tried Fedora 31 RC1.9 Workstation Live. That boots up fine, but
when I try to install to my "disk" (M.2 NVMe), if file system encryption is
enabled, it hangs at "Creating luks on /dev/nvme0n1p6". I let it sit there
for 20 minutes with no progress made.
If I install with file system encryption disabled, it installs fine.
Maybe this is more fallout from the RDRAND problem?
2 years, 7 months
Re: Please read over my upgrade notes
by ToddAndMargo
On 10/30/19 8:36 AM, Doug H. wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-10-29 at 22:37 -0700, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> This is my upgrade notes for upgrading from FC29 to FC30.
>> Has anything changed I need to update my notes?
>> Well, except for "--releasever=31".
>>
>>
>> FC 29 -->> FC 30:
>>
>> # rpm --rebuilddb
>> # rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
>> if anything is too new, do a
>> # dnf downgrade offender(s)
>>
>> # dnf --enablerepo=* update --refresh
>> # dnf install python3-dnf-plugin-system-upgrade
>> # dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=30 --
>> allowerasing
>> --best
>> # dnf clean packages <-- optional
>> # dnf system-upgrade reboot
>
>
> Or maybe just a note to always check:
>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/
>
> Note that it only suggests the rpm rebuild *after* the upgrade. But I
> guess it does not hurt to run it before hand to avoid issues.
I check that first. It is not always inclusive of things that
can go wrong, such as the rpm -Va thing.
This is what I have so far:
FC 30 -->> FC 31:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/
# rpm --rebuilddb
# rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
if anything is too new, do a
# dnf downgrade offender(s)
# dnf --enablerepo=* update --refresh
# dnf install python3-dnf-plugin-system-upgrade
# dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=31 --allowerasing
--best
# rpm --import /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora-31-primary
# dnf clean packages <-- optional
# dnf system-upgrade reboot
2 years, 7 months
Please read over my upgrade notes
by ToddAndMargo
Hi All,
This is my upgrade notes for upgrading from FC29 to FC30.
Has anything changed I need to update my notes?
Well, except for "--releasever=31".
FC 29 -->> FC 30:
# rpm --rebuilddb
# rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
if anything is too new, do a
# dnf downgrade offender(s)
# dnf --enablerepo=* update --refresh
# dnf install python3-dnf-plugin-system-upgrade
# dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=30 --allowerasing
--best
# dnf clean packages <-- optional
# dnf system-upgrade reboot
Many thanks,
-T
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Computers are like air conditioners.
They malfunction when you open windows
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2 years, 7 months
WiFi now disabled by radio killswitch
by Paolo Galtieri
Folks,
several months ago I was getting the following error:
WiFi now disabled by radio killswitch
forcing a reboot to get my wifi back. Then the problem went away, but
now it's back. Every time I close the lid of my laptop and then reopen
it several minutes later the wifi is dead and requires a reboot to fix.
The problem has happened while running. This is really annoying.
Is this a hardware issue or software?
Any idea what I can do to get around this issue?
I'm running f29.
2 years, 7 months
How to protect 2 kernels from upgrades?
by Tony Nelson
When DNF upgrades the kernel packages, it removes kernels so that
there are not more than installonly_limit installed. It won't
remove the running kernel.
How do I protect more than the running kernel from DNF during
a kernel upgrade? I have two that I would like to keep. Neither
excludepkgs nor protected_packages have any effect on DNF's
autoremove, though they do prevent normal operations.
2 years, 7 months
Re: Removing old kernels attempts to remove more than kernels...
by George R Goffe
Stan,
Thank you for your response... it's DEFINITELY appreciated.
A little misunderstanding here though. I could have been more explicit in the description of my problem. I have seen this situation before (and written bug reports on it). This situation looks like a packaging(?) problem. I once tried this kind of thing and dnf came back with > 800 (maybe 1400) packages to remove... including rpm and dnf et. al.... NOT GOOD. It's good that dnf asks if it's ok to proceed. Whew. Bullet dodged.
So... I'm not trying to back out to fc31... all my kernels are f32. You DO bring out an interesting possibility though. If the newer f32 kernels depend on different "things" than the older f32 kernel I want to keep... there would be a big problem. Sigh. I haven't seen anything like that though. Yay!
The "real" situation is that I have frozen this system's kernel at an older version because of problems with the newer kernels going crazy... reporting apparent stalling on cpus (excessive disablement maybe). I thought I had a broken cpu but went back to the oldest kernel and the messages went away. I haven't written a bug on this mainly because I haven't had much luck with reporting kernel bugs. This current effort was the beginning of an effort to get the most current kernel and see if the problem persists... and then report the bug... if that's what it is. Just talking with you has given me an idea though. I could change the # of kernels to retain, install the latest kernel, test for messages, write a bug if the problem still appears... AND I'd still have my latest kernel. I'll give that a try.
So... THANKS for your help It was GOOD "talking" with you,
George...
On Thursday, October 24, 2019, 12:24:20 PM PDT, stan <xrnu(a)q.com> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 18:12:22 +0000 (UTC)
George R Goffe via users <users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am attempting to remove old kernels from my system but "dnf erase
> <kernel-package>" wants to remove much more than just that kernel
> package. I wrote a bug at bugzilla.redhat.com but have gotten
> nowhere. This is the bug URL: 1761024 – removing old kernels wants to
> remove more than kernel packages
This is really a question for the test list, since you are using
rawhide. That alone makes diagnosing the problem difficult, since
there can be incompatibilities because of new version and process
introduction in rawhide. The rule for running rawhide is, 'if it
breaks, you get to keep the pieces', though it is rare that developers
don't fix things to avoid that drastic an outcome. And they do need
people like you running it and reporting problems so they can be fixed
before rawhide becomes a release candidate. That said, early in the
rawhide cycle, like now, when F31 hasn't even been released, things can
be a little chaotic.
>
> 1761024 – removing old kernels wants to remove more than kernel
> packages
>
>
>
> I want to keep the oldest kernel and remove the "newer" kernels.
At a guess, I think this is the source of your problem. You are trying
to remove f32 kernels, and return to an f31 kernel. There is probably
some link between packages compiled under the new regime (newer gcc?,
newer glibc?) than in f31, so it has to remove all those packages in
order to be compatible.
You could try letting the removals complete, keeping track of the
packages removed, and then installing them after f32 is purged, from
the f31 repositories. Alternatively, you could force a return to f31 by
manually installing the fedora-release\* and fedora-repo packages for
f31 and running a
dnf distrosync
to remove / replace anything newer than f31.
2 years, 7 months
