On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, Troy Dawson wrote:

> Hello,
> After some intense investigation, I believe our best plan for NetworkManager 
> on SL 50, 51, and 52 is to downgrade their NetworkManager to the original 
> version that came with the respective releases.
> In order to downgrade in a nice manner, the rpm names are going to have to be 
> a little long, and there are going to be two of them.
> 0.7.0-4.sl5_0.0.6.4 - for SL50 and 51 - really version 0.6.4
> 0.7.0-4.sl5_2.0.6.4 - for SL52 - really version 0.6.4 that came with SL52
> If anyone has a better naming scheme that works, or has any better ideas on 
> how to fix all the problems the update caused, please let me know.
>
> To test
>
> SL50, SL51, SL52
> -------
>     yum --enablerepo=sl-testing update NetworkManager\*
>     (Note: This will install the version for SL52)
>
> or you can download rpm's by hand at
>
> http: //ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/5rolling/testing/i386/NetworkManager/
> http: //ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/5rolling/testing/x86_64/NetworkManager/
>
> SL50 and 51
> NetworkManager-0.7.0-4.sl5_0.0.6.4.i386.rpm
> NetworkManager-0.7.0-4.sl5_0.0.6.4.x86_64.rpm
>
> SL52
> NetworkManager-0.7.0-4.sl5_2.0.6.4.i386.rpm
> NetworkManager-0.7.0-4.sl5_2.0.6.4.x86_64.rpm

If those count as newer than:

   NetworkManager-0.7.0-4.el5_3.i386.rpm
   NetworkManager-0.7.0-4.el5_3.x86_64.rpm

then you will probably also need to release a version for sl53 (with 
'sl5_3' as the dist tag) or anyone attempting to upgrade from sl52 to 53 
won't get the expected (new) version of NetworkManager.  Or am I missing 
some cunning trick?

I've recently been going round removing NetworkManager from quite a few 
machines where it had been pulled in by accident... (oops)

  -- Jon