After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 563450 - NetworkManager does not remember bluetooth/wlan deactivation
NetworkManager does not remember bluetooth/wlan deactivation
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 560143
Product: NetworkManager
Classification: Platform
Component: general
0.7.x
Other All
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Dan Williams
Dan Williams
: 563451 563452 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2008-12-06 14:22 UTC by paull
Modified: 2009-03-04 18:27 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description paull 2008-12-06 14:22:32 UTC
Please describe the problem:
In the last Ubuntu version prior to Intrepid Ibex my laptop (Thinkpad T40p) would always remember wether its internal bluetooth/wlan cards had been activated or not when I last used the computer. 

Since upgrading to intrepid ibex the bluetooth/wlan is ALWAYS turned on after starting the computer. Doesn't matter if I deactivate them (right-click on the network manager top-right of the screen) - next time when I reboot, the two of them are turned on again.


Steps to reproduce:
1. Deactivate Wireless network (rightclick network manager)
2. Restart
3. Check activation status of Wireless network

For Bluetoot:
1. Deactivate by toogling function-keys (for me: Fn-F5)
2. Restart
3. Check activation status of Bluetoot network


Actual results:
Step 3: Wireless/Bluetooth is ON

Expected results:
Step 3: Wireless/Bluetooth should be OFF

Does this happen every time?
yes

Other information:
Besides being annoying: I think this could also be a security issue (risking automatic unwanted wlan-connectivity with foreign networks?)
Comment 1 paull 2008-12-06 14:33:16 UTC
*** Bug 563451 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 2 paull 2008-12-06 14:33:51 UTC
*** Bug 563452 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 3 paull 2008-12-20 19:56:33 UTC
Have I filed this bug in the wrong place?
Comment 4 Dan Williams 2009-03-04 18:27:13 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 560143 ***