Backing down specific (set of) packages?

[Dan]

In particular, using the GUI, (either package kit, or yumex) I'd like to rollback Network Manager -- and if that doesn't fix the issue -- Firefox from the last series of updates.

I get a little nervous using Yumex for this, in that I've never found a way to have it only downgrade specific packages. It always wants to roll-back the whole flippin' shebang.

So ... am I missing something here? Is this possible (in GUI) in either yumex, or packagekit (Thusly having dependencies handled correctly)? And if so ... how?

[bob]

If you go into Yumex > History and select... say.... "firefox", you will get the option to "undo", which I think is what you're looking for. Personally, I'd just open a terminal and 'yum downgrade firefox' which will give you what's involved and an option to accept/reject.

Hmmm....well, maybe not so easy....

[root@localhost bob]# yum downgrade firefox
Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
* fedora: mirror.symnds.com
* livna: wftp.tu-chemnitz.de
* rpmfusion-free: mirror.web-ster.com
* rpmfusion-free-updates: mirror.web-ster.com
* rpmfusion-nonfree: mirror.web-ster.com
* rpmfusion-nonfree-updates: mirror.web-ster.com
* updates: mirror.symnds.com
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package firefox.x86_64 0:7.0.1-1.fc16 will be a downgrade
--> Processing Dependency: gecko-libs(x86-64) = 7.0.1 for package: firefox-7.0.1-1.fc16.x86_64
---> Package firefox.x86_64 0:12.0-1.fc16 will be erased
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
Error: Package: firefox-7.0.1-1.fc16.x86_64 (fedora)
Requires: gecko-libs(x86-64) = 7.0.1
Installed: xulrunner-12.0-1.fc16.x86_64 (@updates)
gecko-libs(x86-64) = 12.0
Available: xulrunner-7.0.1-1.fc16.x86_64 (fedora)
gecko-libs(x86-64) = 7.0.1-1
You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
[root@localhost bob]#

[AndrewSerk]

This works for firefox here on F17

[root@CrushedBits ~]# yum downgrade firefox yelp xulrunner yelp-libs
Loaded plugins: langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package firefox.i686 0:11.0-2.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package firefox.i686 0:12.0-1.fc17 will be erased
---> Package xulrunner.i686 0:11.0-3.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package xulrunner.i686 0:12.0-1.fc17 will be erased
---> Package yelp.i686 1:3.4.1-1.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package yelp.i686 1:3.4.1-2.fc17 will be erased
---> Package yelp-libs.i686 1:3.4.1-1.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package yelp-libs.i686 1:3.4.1-2.fc17 will be erased
--> Finished Dependency Resolution

Dependencies Resolved

================================================================================
 Package            Arch          Version                 Repository       Size
================================================================================
Downgrading:
 firefox            i686          11.0-2.fc17             fedora           20 M
 xulrunner          i686          11.0-3.fc17             fedora           11 M
 yelp               i686          1:3.4.1-1.fc17          fedora          409 k
 yelp-libs          i686          1:3.4.1-1.fc17          fedora          106 k

Transaction Summary
================================================================================
Downgrade  4 Packages

Total download size: 32 M
Is this ok [y/N]:

EDIT: OK, not a GUI but what is wrong with yum

[DBelton]

well, if you downgrade firefox, you will also need to downgrade xulrunner as well.

[root@tower20 ~]# yum downgrade firefox xulrunner
Loaded plugins: etckeeper, langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit, remove-with-
              : leaves, show-leaves
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package firefox.x86_64 0:11.0-2.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package firefox.x86_64 0:12.0-1.fc17 will be erased
---> Package xulrunner.x86_64 0:11.0-3.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package xulrunner.x86_64 0:12.0-1.fc17 will be erased
--> Finished Dependency Resolution

Dependencies Resolved

================================================================================
 Package            Arch            Version               Repository       Size
================================================================================
Downgrading:
 firefox            x86_64          11.0-2.fc17           fedora           20 M
 xulrunner          x86_64          11.0-3.fc17           fedora           11 M

Transaction Summary
================================================================================
Downgrade  2 Packages

Total download size: 31 M
Is this ok [y/N]:

And with NetworkManager, you would have to downgrade all of the NetworkManager packages...

[root@tower20 ~]# yum downgrade NetworkManager*
Loaded plugins: etckeeper, langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit, remove-with-
              : leaves, show-leaves
No Match for available package: NetworkManager-openswan-0.9.3.995-1.git20120302.fc17.x86_64
No Match for available package: 1:NetworkManager-wimax-0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17.x86_64
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package NetworkManager.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package NetworkManager.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-7.git20120403.fc17 will be erased
---> Package NetworkManager-devel.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package NetworkManager-devel.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-7.git20120403.fc17 will be erased
---> Package NetworkManager-glib.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package NetworkManager-glib.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-7.git20120403.fc17 will be erased
---> Package NetworkManager-glib-devel.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package NetworkManager-glib-devel.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-7.git20120403.fc17 will be erased
---> Package NetworkManager-gnome.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package NetworkManager-gnome.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-7.git20120403.fc17 will be erased
---> Package NetworkManager-gtk.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package NetworkManager-gtk.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-7.git20120403.fc17 will be erased
---> Package NetworkManager-gtk-devel.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17 will be a downgrade
---> Package NetworkManager-gtk-devel.x86_64 1:0.9.4.0-7.git20120403.fc17 will be erased
--> Finished Dependency Resolution

Dependencies Resolved

================================================================================
 Package                    Arch    Version                       Repository
                                                                           Size
================================================================================
Downgrading:
 NetworkManager             x86_64  1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17  fedora  1.3 M
 NetworkManager-devel       x86_64  1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17  fedora  317 k
 NetworkManager-glib        x86_64  1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17  fedora  286 k
 NetworkManager-glib-devel  x86_64  1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17  fedora  430 k
 NetworkManager-gnome       x86_64  1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17  fedora  406 k
 NetworkManager-gtk         x86_64  1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17  fedora  133 k
 NetworkManager-gtk-devel   x86_64  1:0.9.4.0-1.git20120328.fc17  fedora   81 k

Transaction Summary
================================================================================
Downgrade  7 Packages

Total download size: 3.0 M
Is this ok [y/N]:

As far as using the GUI (yumex or PackageKit) I'm not certain how you would do it.

[Dan]

That's the first thing I did (downgrade in a terminal) right up until I hit the same error Bob did.

And, thinking on this a bit, it can still be caused by any one (or more) of three things. There was a kernel update, with the attendant drivers updates. (the NIC(s)), NetworkManager, which has been a bit of a dastardly dog in the past, so if it's returning to its unsavory roots, I'm not surprised. Or it could be Firefox/xulrunner et al.

On top of all that, add in the fact that its inherently random and intermittent. <....>

I may just not futz with it until tomorrow night when I've got more time to devote to properly breaking this install. <....>

[AndrewSerk]

You could do a "yum history undo #" then install the packages from that update one at a time testing functions after each install to find the problem package.

[Dan]

Yeah. But that's kinda what I was hoping not to have to do. <....>

You'd think as long as fedora et al has been drifting into the GUI experience, somebody would have developed a GUI tool which would and could provide that kind of fine-grained control. Or ... maybe not. Come to think of it, a fella could inadvertently do a whole lot of mayhem in short order to his installs that way! <....>

[AndrewSerk]

Yup, I have had my fair share of battles with those frontend GUI packages. Enough to make me GUI shy. I will stick to the backend packages were I know what to expect and how to deal with them.

[bob]

Actually, you have the option in Yumex (post 2). It's still going to end up the same place as CLI.

[AndrewSerk]

The frontend packages remind of giving instructions to a person and expecting that person to give the instruction exactly to the next person, and so on, till it reaches the backend package, where you hope the instructions have not changes along the way.
I am sure my attitude is not the norm nowadays and I am afraid I have become part of the"You kids get off my lawn" crowd

[Gareth Jones]

The problem with trying to make a graphical program as complete, precise and flexible as an equivalent command-line program is that you end up either with incomprehensible clutter, or just reinventing the command-line... For many tasks graphical interfaces are inherently better, but for many other tasks it's better to just keep the graphical user interfaces simple and cover the most common operations, as long as the back-end is available for direct use when needed. I generally feel Linux gets this right compared to other operating systems (and why I mostly like GNOME)...

Not that that solves Dan's problem even at the terminal...