On Tue, 2004-05-04 at 09:53 -0700, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: > Hi, Seth - > > I wanted you to know that I've finally had a chance to test the > multiarch capabilities of the 20040416 snapshot on some AMD64 boxes > running FC1. As far as I can tell, everything works well, and it's a > huge relief not to have to handle 32-bit and 64-bit RPMs differently. > Thanks for doing the work. welcome. glad it's working correctly for you. > The one problem that is left is not with yum itself, but it could be > worked around usefully by adding a new feature to yum. Several of the > 32-bit packages in FC1 will not install cleanly on a 64-bit system, > sometimes with fatal consequences. > > For example, if I try to install the 32-bit e2fsprogs, rpmlib detects no > conflicts, but it chooses to overwrite the 64-bit e2fsprogs binaries in > /sbin. The result is that small things like e2fsck suddenly fail to > work, which is a bit of a calamity. > > Other packages have silly problems such as docs not being tagged with > %doc, so false conflicts show up unnecessarily. This means that yum > can't install those packages. > > The way I work around these problems at the moment is by installing the > offending RPMs with rpm itself using the --excludepath option, like > this: > > rpm -iv --excludepath /sbin /long/path/to/e2fsprogs-[0-9]*.i386.rpm This sounds more like a problem to be solved by packaging than by the pkg mgmt tool. And --excludepath is kinda horky in general. Take up this issue with the package maintainer(s) and see what they say. Specifically bring this up on fedora-devel as a 'what should be done here' question. I'd like to hear what the opinions all around are. thanks, -sv
