On Tue, 2004-06-15 at 14:01 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > Hi, > > for being able to switch archs to noarch in a yum world, Arjan van de > Ven, kernel maintainer at redhat, renamed kernel-source to > kernel-sourcecode. > > I think having to change the name for changing the arch is wrong. The > above change will break a lot of documentation and build scripts. > > Isn't extactarch=0 what this would have fixed this? Why is exactarch > defaulting to 1? > > The only reason I could imagine is that foo-1.2.3-4.bestarch.rpm is to > be replaced by foo-1.2.3-5.notbestarch.rpm because > foo-1.2.3-5.bestarch.rpm is missing. I'd consider that a repo bug, and > would prefer the package to be updated to a inferior arch but a higher > EVR. > > This obviously is not true if the archs have different dependencies > like for x86_64 vs i386. But ix86/athlon/noarch and x86_64/norach for > instance should be freely interchangeable, or not? > > What am I missing? Is renaming the kernel-source rpm the only choice > Arjan has for changing the arch in yum context? If exactarch=0 is not > adequate could yum provide some other mechanism? exactarch was added and set as default around rhl9, iirc. If you installed glibc.i386 over top of glibc.i686 b/c your mirror wasn't in sync yet (which happened quite a bit) then you'd reboot and your system would stop functioning, totally. if you want to disable exactarch, you can, but expect for people to come back to you with horribly disabled systems. -sv
