On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Mike Chambers wrote: >Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 23:02:52 -0500 >From: Mike Chambers <mike@netlyncs.com> >To: psyche-list@redhat.com >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" >List-Id: Discussion of Red Hat Linux 8.0 (Psyche) <psyche-list.redhat.com> >Subject: Re: i386 package name > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "David" <djdave@bigpond.net.au> >To: "RedHat - Psyche" <psyche-list@redhat.com> >Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 10:36 PM >Subject: Re: i386 package name > > >> On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Mike Chambers wrote: >> > >> > Except for those packages that are built against multiple architectures, >why >> > do we even need the i386 in the name anyway? >> > >> > Things like kernel, glibc and such I understand. But if packages are >built >> > to run on just about every machine, then why not just leave it off? >> >> They use "noarch" instead. > >Yes I know that. What I meant was, in reality, most packages (except like >mentioned above) will run on just about any distro/system/architecture. So >why even have i386 in the name, when it almost doesn't matter (again except >things like kernel, glibc and such that architecture does matter)? > >Example.. > >Red Hat 8.0 contains sendmail, which is called sendmail-8.12.5-7.i386.rpm. >Why can't it just be called sendmail-8.12.5-7.rpm? It's built to run on >everything, so why the i386? Does your sendmail-8.12.5-7.rpm work on an Alpha CPU too? What about sparc/ppc/s390/x86_64/arm/mips/hppa? I think not. How do you tell what CPU it is for? The whole world isn't an x86 box. -- Mike A. Harris ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris OS Systems Engineer XFree86 maintainer Red Hat Inc. -- Psyche-list mailing list Psyche-list@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
