On 05/05/2010 04:32 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Ralf Corsepius (rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > >>> Some languages are distributed for x86_64 with both variant >>> e.g. tcl, because some libraries doesn't work with x86_64 >>> interpreter. We didn't ship perl-5.8.8 for both archs and I don't >>> know about any reason why it changed. >>> > We certainly did ship earlier perl for both arches; check the F7-F12 > releases. (Have't checked earlier, but it's been there forever.) > I checked F11 through rawhide. They all ship perl-*.i?86.rpm. >>> I file a ticket for rel-eng: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/3695 >>> >> OK, I realize this ticked was closed immediately. >> > It stems from the attached. It may not make sense now that libperl is > separate; at the time, it wasn't. > F11 through rawhide all ship a separate perl-libs. OK, shipping libperl.so makes some limited sense. One use case would be indirect dependency of other (non-perl) i?86-libraries, Nevertheless, I am having difficulties to image how shipping perl-*.i?86.rpm (the base package) makes sense and or how these may even be used on x86_64. May-be the reason is the perl-libs package "Requires" perl because of the /usr/lib/perl5/<version>/i386-linux-thread-multi directory's ownership (Provided by the "perl")? The appropriate fix to this would be to let perl-libs own this directory. Ralf -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl perl-devel mailing list perl-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/perl-devel
