seth vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Umm, you have it backward. When I was originally writing in the multilib > support I asked how it should be done and was told, at the time, by > Jeremy that it should install both of them b/c that's what users would > want/expect. At least, that's what I vaguely recall. This has been about > 3 years, now. Well, I think it was like that 3 years ago. Now it seems users want x86_64 only, they don't want i386-devel, they maybe want i386 Firefox (can the Flash be used with some 32->64 wrapper?) and a couple of other things (32-bit gcc code generation, if the respective optional 32-bit libs are installed). Yes, some users need all i386 they can have (such as devel). I fully agree it would be great if we had _no_ i386 packages in x86_64, and if the right way to get 32-bit packages was just pointing yum etc. to the 32-bit repository. > Wrong. It's about the policy. Ok, then the policy should be fixed. -- Krzysztof Halasa -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
