On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Christopher Hawker <cwhawker1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I could not see any issues with it. As you probably know i386 packages will work on an x86_64 install, and there are some packages written for i386 that you can't get for x86_64. You could disable it, but my system runs perfect with it.
Yes I do know that i386 will run fine on x86_64. The intentions is to only install and run what I really need. I'm already only installing the base and @core packages during a kickstart, so I might as well try and keep it all clean from the get-go, but noticed that some packages do creep in that are not needed seeing there is an x86_64 equivalent. =)
The packages that are only available via i386 are the ones I'll have to keep indeed. So the approach I took in excluding those packages would immediately break on a yum update where their dependencies also need upgrading. I came across this moving from 5.6->5.7.
If there are any best practices approach someone has or some tips and tricks. I'd much appreciate the advice. Given security concerns all around, the slimmer my installs are the less I need to worry about some i386 binary that I don't need or nor run. I treat my services the same. If you don't need it, don't run it. =)
--
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me on +61 478 241 896.
Regards,
Christopher HawkerOn Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 12:52 AM, James Nguyen <james@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Can anybody give me a reason why this would be a bad idea. So the premise for this question is that I setup an exclude=*.i368,*.i686 in my yum.conf. While doing a yum update I come across missing package dependencies for instance mkinitrd for the i386 package. I noticed there is already one for x86_64. I realized during the kickstart install that some of these *.i386 got installed before I could enable the exclude in the yum.conf.
_______________________________________________So the questions I pose is... why are some of these *.i386 packages getting installed on a 64bit distro? is there any harm is removing them all?I guess I could spin up a virtual and try, but wanted to see what the census already knows about this matter as well.
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
james h nguyen | lead systems architect | www.callfire.com | 1.949.625.4263
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
