Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.courno...@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi John, > > John Kehayias <john.kehay...@protonmail.com> writes: > >> Hi Guix, >> >> (cc'ing Maxim as author of last few network-manager version updates.) >> >> I noticed a recent up date to network-manager to 1.43.4 (previously >> 1.41.2 and 1.40.0) but can't find a record of that release. In their >> docs there is no mention of anything newer than the 1.42 release [0, >> 1] and they mention the even-numbered releases being the stable series >> [2]. Indeed, Arch only has 1.42.4 in their repos [3]. I only see "dev" >> tags for these 1.43 versions in their gitlab. >> >> Should we be on a 1.42.y version instead? > > The GNOME versioning scheme is a bit of a mess; they stopped using > stable/unstable oven/odd release cycles since GNOME 40 I think, but left > each of the components the luxury to keep using it, which NetworkManager > appears to be doing. > > 'guix refresh -u' picked 1.43 and I didn't give it much of an thought. > In general, I think it's OK to carry the "unstable" releases of GNOME > components, which in my experience are usually stable :-). > >> I noticed this because the update to 1.43.4 has an issue with my >> (wired) connection not resuming from sleep when previously it did. I >> have to restart the service. I had some logs I can dig up, but in >> discussing on IRC (no logs that day it seems) there was nothing out of >> the ordinary and the shepherd service seemed normal. >> >> I've since reconfigured to a commit before the most recent version >> change, namely 5174820753be045ba4fc7cc93da33f4e0b730bc3 and cannot >> reproduce the issue so seems due to newer versions of network-manager >> after 1.41.2 at least. >> >> Note that this may have been reported upstream [4], but I haven't >> tested with the current stable release. So this may be a separate >> (upstream) issue. > > So it seems that even if we used the "stable" 1.42.x release, we'd still > have this problem. It's been reported 4 days ago; I guess let's wait to > see if a hotfix will be made, as that seems a serious issue. > > Otherwise, if many Guix users are affected and no hotfix is on the > horizon, we could consider reverting back to our older version. > > Does that sound reasonable? This also affects two of my recently reconfigured/upgraded machines. My guess is there are probably many others affected.