> Am I correct in my understanding that exactarch exists so you can say > "yes, I see that a new version is available for i386, but I'd rather > wait for the i386 version"? If so, noarch is special because if a > package suddenly becomes noarch, there will probably _never_be_ a new > i386 version (or vice versa). It was mostly for kernels, openssl and glibc. I don't know if the above claim is accurate it seems to me that if a package becomes noarch from i386 (or the other way) that it could very well go back, or it could very well be possible that there will be both provided (depending on how many repositories you include) > I'm not suggesting that you change the behavior of noarch. I'm just > saying that it may not provide the desired behavior in all situations; > pecifically, when packages change arch. You're right. But I'm not sure if there is a way to implement 'go back and forth b/t noarch and any other compatible arch even when exactarch=1 is set' w/o making the code god-awful in that section. -sv
