Comment 10 for bug 469881

Revision history for this message
jkohler2 (jkohler2) wrote : Re: [Bug 469881] Re: gnome-ppp fails under 9.10, works under 9.04

Thanks for your comments. They are a little difficult for me to understand.
I'll have to re-read them. Is there an effort to re-write gnome-ppp or
dgc_1.11......deb?
John

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Steffen H. <email address hidden> wrote:

> I've posted quite a number of tips that might help with this over
> at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/modemmanager/+bug/482971.
> I've managed to get pppd going (and confirmed operation via ping via
> both DNS and direct IP addresses) ... but for me, I'm still watching my
> pppd fight with my ISP over what should be a static IP address. My set
> up only works with Ubuntu 9.10 via a dynamic (pppd negotiated) IP
> address (... and that won't do for me). To recap:
>
> 1. modem-manager package must be completely removed (and system
> rebooted). Modem manager squats on devices that it fails to recognize on
> ADSL modems (e.g. regular USB Modems).
> 2. Neither GNOME-PPP nor wvdial will work (but 'pon' and 'poff' and
> direct 'pppd' invocations *do* work). With gnome-ppp and/or wvdial, I get
> errors about 'Serial Link is not 8 bit clean' (see
> http://ppp.samba.org/ppp/FAQ.html).
> 3. /usr/sbin/pppd is group 'dip' ... so be sure to make your user
> account a member of group 'dip'
> 4. Make sure that neither gnome-ppp/wvdial nor network manager have
> put something like auto ppp0 into /etc/network/interfaces file. If so,
> comment that out (by hand).
> 5. Make /etc/ppp/pap-secrets and /etc/ppp/chap-secrets at least
> readable by group 'dip'
> 6. If using the excellent 'wvdialconf' command, grab the local
> .wvdial.conf file and hand integrated it into /etc/wvdial.conf. For the
> most part, one can just overwrite the /etc/wvdial.conf file that comes with
> Ubuntu 9.10 (by default).
>
> Good luck, Steffen.
>
> --
> gnome-ppp fails under 9.10, works under 9.04
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/469881
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>