Bill Nottingham wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones (rjones@xxxxxxxxxx) said:The files which begin with #!/usr/bin/ocamlrun are bytecode files. Even though it's called "bytecode" it isn't portable between architectures. It's not like Java bytecode. So consider these to be like binaries too.The ocamlrun scripts also look like binary (arch dependent?) stuff so it is a logical that there is conflict. It certainly requires something to be done at the rpm level, but I am far from being an expert on those issues.rpm only handles resolving conflicts between 32 and 64-bit ELF files - anything else is displayed to the user as a conflict. These bytecode files would fall into that category.
Aha. Is there any flag or setting to change this?Also it still seems to report conflicts with the ELF binaries. If you want to take a look at some they are in the links below. They look like perfectly ordinary ELF binaries to my untrained eye ...
http://annexia.org/tmp/camlp4oof.opt.i386 http://annexia.org/tmp/camlp4oof.opt.x86-64 $ file */usr/bin/camlp4oof.opti386/usr/bin/camlp4oof.opt: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.9, stripped x86_64/usr/bin/camlp4oof.opt: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.9, stripped
Rich. -- Emerging Technologies, Red Hat - http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/ Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
