> I really meant "unhold" (no typo).I do not think it is OK to still > have the normally proposed version of NetworkManager (well, normal for > those who enabled flidas-backports) "break the Internet" of many > users.
Sorry, I misunderstood you. It sounds you had already successfully "held" the old network manager version and were checking to see if a new update were available fixing the issue. > Either another update is necessary or, thinking only of rarely used > systems (that were not updated in the past week) and of new users, a > removal of version 1.10.6-2ubuntu1+8.0trisquel2 from the repository: Debian once accidentally pushed an unstable version of Lilypond (2.19.81) from their experimental repo into the main repo. They then reuploaded the stable version (2.18.2) with "2.19.81+really-" prepended to the version number, and have kept it that way since, so the current version is "2.19.81+really-2.18.2-13". This essentially tricks the package manager to into thinking that the downgrade is really an upgrade, so it will propose the old version. The same thing could be accomplished by uploading the old version of network-manager with the version "1.10.6-2ubuntu1+8.0trisquel2+really-1.2.6-0ubuntu0.16.04.3", except that I'm not sure how anyone with the current version of network-manager will be able to upgrade at all unless they check the forum and learn what to do.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
