On Wed, 2017-07-12 at 08:22 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 07/12/2017 05:12 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > The x86_64 and i686 build of a package are published at the same time. > > If you get a conflict like this, where the version of the two packages > > is not the same, you need to examine your installation and the repository > > contents to figure out why you don't get the very latest version for both > > the x86_64 and i686 packages. It could be due to broken dependencies > > somewhere or due to duplicate installed packages. > > IMO, we need to stop allowing arch to be specified in dnf by default. Users think > they need to add them and get into constant trouble by it. I've closed a handful of > bugs against Wine for this reason. A command argument could be added to dnf to allow > an arch to be specified. > > dnf --enablearchtagbecauseiknowwhatimdoing foo.i686 > > Yes, I'm being extreme, but it is a pain point for users and to put it bluntly their > ignorance gets them into trouble. You don't need to explicitly specify an arch for this kind of problem to occur. I've seen it more than once just on a system with mixed arch packages installed, which is perfectly common simply to use Flash or whatever. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ test mailing list -- test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to test-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
