Edwin Huffstutler wrote on Tue, Jul 03 2007 at 06:16 (-0700): > > >From my searching, most of these have been discussed before (several times) > or have had various bugzillas I think, but I was just wondering if someone > could sum up any overall action to clean up the situation. > > > 1. "yum install foo" installs both foo.i386 and foo.x86_64. I know this > has been hashed out before and declared "not a bug", but does anyone > actually like the way this is working? Yes, there is a good reason for > it but the common case on x86_64 seems to be a misfeature. I agree with you. You can avoid this by specifying the architecture: yum install foo.x86_64 > > 2. If yum updates some package that has a *new* dependency that the old > version did not have, yum will install both arch versions of the > depended-upon package (see above). When that happens with just one lib, > it can by chain-reaction drag in about half of a whole i386 package > set. Whee. neato. This does not happen to me when I specify the architecture like in yum update rdesktop.x86_64 instead of yum update rdesktop But maybe I was just lucky. > > 3. If you have 2 arches of a package installed, and you "rpm -e" the i386 > version, any shared files (docs, etc) get removed. Makes it hard to > clean up from either of the above 2. It does not help you, but the two packages should not have shared some files in the first place (or even better: put non-executable files into a noarch rpm). Especially kde packages seem to not care about this (kdelibs, kdebase, ...). Looking at my notes, I think yum should have a real 'exactarch' option, that only installs packages that are of this architecture. Andreas. -- http://www.lysium.de/blog
Attachment:
pgpIZVsEfofxh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
