On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 12:31 -0700, Wichmann, Mats D wrote: > > Now, on the X86_64 system, one will usually find both the i386 and > > x86_64 libs installed. This is not a flaw or mistake, it is a multilib > > feature developed. This way, programs that have 64 bit > > implementations can be used, but 32 bit programs that need the > > audit-libs functionality can find it. The dynamic linker for > > libraries looks in /usr/lib64 first, then /usr/lib. > > yes, but the way this appears in rpm in Red Hat's implementation > is horribly nonintuitive. You have to go grokking for special > arguments to give rpm to figure out which package is which, > should you have a reason to operate on only one of them. > Most other distros have chosen to tag the package names in a > way that they can be identified visually; this is not "better" > in a technical sense but sure is easier to use. > Which is a good reason to list your installed pkgs using any of the package managers that operate above rpm. yum list installed will output like this, for example: yum.noarch 3.2.7-1 installed yum-metadata-parser.i386 1.1.2-1.fc8 installed So there's no doubt about which arch you have installed. -sv _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
