On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 11:41 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, Braden McDaniel wrote: > > > On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 23:26 +0900, Mamoru Tasaka wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > >> rel-eng team is now working on this: > >> https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/2008 > > > > Er... So why did a missing update result in pulling down i586 packages > > rather than a dependency check failure? > > > > if I had to guess it worked like this: > > the dep was provided by two pkgs - the i586 one and the x86_64 one. > > but the dep itself was not arch-specific. > > So yum said: I can only find an i586 pkg providing this, so I'll install > that. > > Normally yum would say: I have an i586 and an x86_64 pkg - x86_64 is > better if: (the requiring package is also x86_64 or if the system is an > x86_64) > > but in this case it could not and it satisfied the dep however it could. Is the problem that the gecko-libs dependency is not arch-specific? How do we fix that? -- Braden McDaniel <braden@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
