On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 15:25:33 -0700 T.C. Hollingsworth wrote: > which > requires multilib i686 bits Properly split up rpms wouldn't "require" multilib. The abomination that is multilib introduces utter confusion by allowing 32 and 64 bit versions of rpms to both be installed when both claim to include (for instance) /usr/bin/sillyprogram, yet by undocumented skullduggery only the 64 bit /usr/bin/sillyprogram executable is really installed. The whole multilib thing was a monstrous kludge because no one wanted to do the work to properly split rpms into noarch, library, and executable chunks. Packaging would be infinitely less mysterious and confusing if the proper split were made, and nothing would prevent 32 bit libs from being installed on 64 bit machines. -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
