On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 11:41 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Thursday 10 August 2006 11:33, Matthew Miller wrote: > > Stymied, or required to do a bit of extra typing? 'Cause I'm pretty sure > > the case where you want to install both archs *should* be the one where > > extra typing is required. So, "yum install foo.*" (shades of DOS). Or, if > > it needs to be "yum install foo.x86_64 foo.i386" (or "foo foo.i386"), is > > that really so bad? > > it is when we want to provide a multilib environment when folks shouldn't have > to think about it. Our users should have to jump through hoops when they > want to run some 32bit app. It should Just Work. That's IMHO a big reason > why we are installing both arches by default. The folks that really CARE > about being pure lib are the ones that would have the ability to fiddle with > some bits in a yumconf file. So why aren't we doing "everything" installs by default because somebody might have a piece of software that doesn't "just work" otherwise? I just don't buy that argument. Yum is perfectly capable of pulling in just the 32bit version of a library if you install a 32bit package. If we're talking about tarballs with binaries within.. all bets are off anyway, although it wouldn't be hard to write a script to resolve and install the needed libs of binaries in /opt/somesoftware path. No, I don't like the behavior of installing both arches by default. :) - Panu - -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
