On 11/14/2010 04:07 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 15:51:44 +0530, Sawrub wrote: > >>> Packages, which have not been rebuilt for F-14, may still contain an >>> older distribution tag (such as ".fc12") in their package release name. >> That was clear that searching for a packages under the repos may list a >> package that is not of the same OS version [if its not build for that >> version] > The dist tag in the package name isn't as important as you may think it is. > > The packages just haven't been _rebuilt_ for various reasons. First of all, > there hasn't been a mass-rebuild of _all_ packages for F-14, because no > compiler upgrade required/justified doing that. Second, the package's > build dependencies probably haven't changed either. Nowhere is written > that a package built _on_ F-12 would no longer work on F-13 or F-14. > Whether it requires a rebuild depends on several factors. Third, the > packaged software might not have seen an update by its authors either. > >> all i wanted was to know that why are they included in the >> results for a different version of OS. > Because [hopefully] they continue to work and [hopefully] the package > maintainer has verified that they still work without a rebuild. > Or may be the maintainer is no longer interested in re-building. >> Since as i have read that >> installing packages like this ['OS version xx' packages under 'OS >> version yy' ] should not be encouraged. > Where? > It was in my early days that i got to know this probably in some list when i was trying to learn using yum. >> And since YUM is there to make >> package installation easy, practices like this should not be there there. > Who says that? Do you get any errors when trying to install the packages? > Or when you run the software? > No, nothing like that. >>> With the x86_64 arch you can also install and run i686 for 32-bit >>> compatibility. Not all i686 packages are available in the Yum repository >>> for x86_64, though. Just a subset. >>> >> Yes that i know, all i wanted to say here is that is it a good practice >> to list a package of different arch when the one for the requested is >> not available under the default search. Packages of different arch >> [except noarch] should only be listed against a special YUM option [like >> --enable-different-arch] or be listed under a different head in the >> default listing [like --Different Architecture--]. > You can configure your Yum to exclude i686 packages, if you don't need > them for anything. Ok fine, will take a look more deeply into this. Thanks -- Saurabh Sharma Linux user number: 490644 http://sawrub-blog.blogspot.com/ Open your doors.......It's time to look beyond Windows -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
