On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 10:12:50 +0200 Simon Kitching <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I have read the wpa_supplicant code, added some extra logging, and: > > * when no "-D" option is specified, then the first _and only the first_ > available driver (backend) is used. > > So when wpa_supplicant has multiple drivers compiled in, the "-D" option > is *mandatory* - unless you are really lucky, and the correct driver > happens to be the first one. > > This raises the question: why is wireless functioning at all for Hazel > given that the standard wpa_supplicant.service file for systemd does not > specify -D? > > Hazel, are you using systemd-networkd, or NetworkManager, or something > else? (wild guess: maybe NetworkManager sets the driver-type via a dbus > message..) I have systemd-networkd running. I don't have NetworkManager installed and don't intend to install it. > Hazel (or anyone else with functioning wireless, ideally via > systemd-networkd): could you please: > > * run "/sbin/wpa_supplicant --help" and post the "drivers:" section of > the output? It says: drivers: n180211 = Linux n180211/cfg80211 wext = Linux wireless extensions (generic) wired = Wired Ethernet driver > * run "ps -ax | grep wpa_supp" and post that output too? > 168 ? Ss 0:00 /sbin/wpa_supplicant=c /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant-wlan0.conf -iwlan0 See? No driver specified. > Thanks! > > Regards, > Simon > -- > http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- If any members of GCHQ are reading this, shame on you! I fought for your right to belong to a trade union and now you are taking away my right to privacy? H Russman -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
