Is it possible that the patch broke it off for others?
Or the patch isn't in repositories yet?
This is what I get after the latest updates today:
NetworkManager: <info> Activation (wlan0/wireless): access point 'RTA1025W-C07C63' is unencrypted, no key needed.
NetworkManager: <WARN> nm_signal_handler(): Caught signal 11. Generating backtrace...
NetworkManager: ******************* START **********************************
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: Using host libthread_db library "/lib/libthread_db.so.1".
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
NetworkManager: [New Thread 0x7f7dd2e68780 (LWP 6683)]
NetworkManager: [New Thread 0x4117d950 (LWP 6687)]
NetworkManager: [New Thread 0x4097c950 (LWP 6684)]
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: 0x00007f7dd11dacc6 in poll () from /lib/libc.so.6
NetworkManager: ******************* END *************************
After which the NetworkManager takes 100% cpu.
Linux-2.6.24.12.13 on x86_64
NetworkManager-0.6.6-0ubuntu2
This happens every time the NetworkManager tries to connect to wireless.
Wired connecions work fine.
Is it possible that the patch broke it off for others? handler( ): Caught signal 11. Generating backtrace... ******* ******* ******* ****** _db.so. 1". ******* ******* ****
Or the patch isn't in repositories yet?
This is what I get after the latest updates today:
NetworkManager: <info> Activation (wlan0/wireless): access point 'RTA1025W-C07C63' is unencrypted, no key needed.
NetworkManager: <WARN> nm_signal_
NetworkManager: ******************* START *******
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: Using host libthread_db library "/lib/libthread
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
NetworkManager: [New Thread 0x7f7dd2e68780 (LWP 6683)]
NetworkManager: [New Thread 0x4117d950 (LWP 6687)]
NetworkManager: [New Thread 0x4097c950 (LWP 6684)]
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: (no debugging symbols found)
NetworkManager: 0x00007f7dd11dacc6 in poll () from /lib/libc.so.6
NetworkManager: ******************* END *******
After which the NetworkManager takes 100% cpu. 0.6.6-0ubuntu2
Linux-2.6.24.12.13 on x86_64
NetworkManager-
This happens every time the NetworkManager tries to connect to wireless.
Wired connecions work fine.
Or should I open a new bug-report?